skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The solution to the housing affordability problem is relatively simple. All we have to do is ...

stop building houses, and start building hospitals instead.

I’m certain that all sides of the political spectrum have had a passing thought about this. It is actually just a simple supply and demand problem. As it is now, the ratio of housing supply to demand is quite heavily skewed in favour of the housing demand side.

So what’s to be done about it?

There is one way in which we could achieve this.

Build many more hospitals and simply not need them.

It would be amazing if this can actually work.

A few things to consider:

Almost all of our current hospital spending goes towards tertiary care. Most primary care (general practice) and secondary care (ambulance, emergency etc) spending is on hospitals. We already pay about $5 in Medicare, so $5 of your hospital spend is already locked in.

We already spend about $9 billion on private hospitals for elective surgery, and around $2 billion on private hospital for elective imaging. There is virtually no need for these in terms of frequency or outcomes.
When you have a period of high prosperity, you get used to it, making adjustments to your lifestyle. When that period is over, it's hard to accept it.

In the 50s, you could have a modest job, provide for your entire household with one salary, buy a nice house, a car, send your kids to college.

The government made massive investments on infrastructure, defense, science, space, etc. How was all of that paid?

From 1945 to 1971, the economic reality was: "It costs only a few cents for the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to produce a $100 bill, but other countries had to pony up $100 of actual goods in order to obtain one."

That system was known as the Bretton Woods system. Since its end in 1971, America has been struggling to adapt with its new economic reality. It is much harder to make a living in the US, buy a house, a car, raise kids and send them to college. Or even retire.
He'd likely consider it A forth instead of THE forth as Forth INC and some others wanted to be.

Keep in mind that Forth as Chuck envisioned is amazing, but entirely impractical for most of us. He had the luxury of being a genius AND working on projects where he could design an entire solution from hardware through software. I'm not aware of many of us that are in that same situation. Most of us will be on Windows, Mac, or Linux and have to work with common file formats like JSON, .CSV, .XML, common databases...etc. Moore never had to do any of those tasks, so his extreme minimalism has to be understood in context. My boss isn't going to give me 5 years to first design my own chips to run the software for a problem we have now. I'm sure the final result could be 4x-10x less code, but I could have also just finished the code in a few weeks by itself and then moved on to 20 different projects in that same time. Slapping components together like modern software engineering teaches isn't romantic or as lightweight as what Chuck does (MB vs kB), but it is likely the most efficient from a business perspective. If anyone brings up technical debt, I'd rather try to figure out how to port an old pascal program written for DOS than something Chuck wrote on completely custom hardware in his own custom built language for the problem. That doesn't mean I don't respect, am not awestruck, or can't see the sheer elegance of what he's done. I just don't think it's for those of us towards the center of the bell curve.

Alan Kay (of Smalltalk fame) also has a good talk on software bloat/complexity where he shows that Microsoft office has like 10x the lines of code than the entire smalltalk OS on the computers his group designed. Their approach was very different than Moore's, but had some common themes.

I could never get into Factor (despite trying a bunch), but have found using 8th to be pleasant enough. Sure it wouldn't work for Moore, but it plays very nice in the enterprise and hobby spaces. It is concatenative like all Forths and uses the stack for everything. I like the fact that there are built-in words for pretty much everything I need without any kind of class bloat. It is not even remotely an ANS forth I don't think.
Actually, I think that the rapid blossoming of firewalls everywhere in the late 90s was the first big step toward security theatre that I noticed in my career, and illustrate how we have a cultural problem. Blocking access according to port number is no substitute for lack of control and visibility over what services are spawned where.
If you think about the projects you work on as a consultant, is there a software/SaaS you wish you could be selling to your client to solve one of their problems with paying for?
Smart tech is not making us stupid, instead is cognitively beneficial
OpenSnitch[1] is mentioned[2] in the reddit thread and was most recently featured on HN last year[3].

[1] https://github.com/evilsocket/opensnitch

[2] https://old.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/od3h8b/audacity_may_...

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22206116
50 * 0.0019% = 0.00095
1000 * 0.0019% = 1.9%
I'm pro-roads personally. Most of this article seems fairly unsubstantiated to me. Where are the citations?
For something to exist, it must be able to interact with surroundings. It also must be independent. As it interacts the surroundings see the same thing, even if it's very small or for a brief moment. Why? If the surroundings interact, and without delay something changes, there's no independence. It's just the surroundings. Very few things interact with a black hole. With relativity and the photoelectric effect, black hole internals are an unticked watch. Or a film strip with one opened frame. There's not enough in the surroundings that can make it move. All interactions resist. That black hole is on that one tick or that one frame. It has yet to occur, and there's not enough in everything that exists to make it occur!

No ability for interaction is the same as two interactions canceling each other out. One of those two interacts with a black hole. It looks like the black hole is emitting and interacting with the surroundings.

Surroundings interact with the internals. It's permissible to model internals far more complex than what surroundings see. Humans see space and can visualize brightness as heat transfer across different clockspeeds. Nature has no mind, and does what is asked without question. Nature does things like:

- See the inverse of an electron moving backwards in time as the same as an electric current.

- See the inside of a proton, the counterbalance to electromagnetism or interaction via internal state, as three poled electricity, positive, negative and something else along with neutral, at least to a very accurate degree.

- Transfer mass while leaving temperature and ionized bonds alone, as in nuclear decay and radiation

If it's easier, nature will do it. Surroundings see something much more simple than the complex internals on which interactions occur. The idea that black holes are two dimensional consisting of just the surface brought forward this principle. Something enters the black hole, it doesn't go into a volume. The surface area is the amount of surroundings it's interacting with, and they all say send heat there by changing internal clock.
Ask HN: How to Improve Consistency with X?
Hey y’all, for as long as I can remember I’ve struggled with being consistent in doing pretty much anything.

Whenever a topic interests me I dive in head first for a few days or weeks, rarely months. After the initial jolt of excitement is gone, I’m done with it. I then come back to it years later and kick myself that I didn’t keep it up.

Even being cognizant of this going into something hasn’t helped. I try to set goals but slowly and surely talk myself out of these consistency goals.

I think a lot of it is impatience, but I don’t know how to improve.

How do you stay consistent?
Relevant: https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/ (disclaimer: I don't agree with the authors of this site that Bitcoin is the solution (: )
He’s saying entrenched developers like the restrictions because they can navigate them better than newcomers. With a lot of red tape it’s easier to make the most money if you’re good at dealing with red tape instead of being the best developer.
Speculation, but they could be gearing up to ruin the software by converting it to a subscription service based model.
You can still download the source code and build it. Is there something that phones home in there?
Maybe the rest of the country should stop people moving out of that city/state.
Rust have the same issue (for other reason) and the solution here is using arenas. Maybe adding an arena in the std library is enough to placate the need for end-users?
Woah! I didn't know about the `command` trick. From the article -

function echo { echo "$@"; }

Oops don't do that, it will recurse until the process is killed. But if you do successfully redefine a builtin command, you can call the original with command. So this is fine:

function echo { command echo "$@"; }

Unless you also redefine the command command, then you're really screwed.
> our traditional pattern of development, one based on creating neighborhoods of value, scaled to actual people.

Aren't they just talking about density here? Denser neighborhoods pay more to the city in taxes and charges than big-lot single family suburbia I would imagine.
After a decade+ of use, I somehow haven't installed Audacity on my newest laptop yet, because I've found sox surprisingly fitting for all my work. It's obviously not a full replacement (cli rather than gui) but if you just want to merge tracks, slow things down, truncate files, etc, you may find that you don't need Audacity either.
In the universe where we can still expect to life a good life in thirty to forty years.
Uber will never know the severity of this bug until several user accounts got compromised by someone
I have a wild theory here. Some Taliban guy recorded an MP3 message tagged with authorship by Audacity, and someone in the State Dept said "what do you mean we can't get his IP address?"
MuseScore has been in the same situation for a while I think.

They are now owned by the same company that makes Ultimate Guitar.
And then those adults will either leave SF or climb the ladder and afford to buy a place, then many won’t advocate to devalue what they just worked so hard for.
We have no idea how the artificial womb should look like.

It's basically the idea that we want to bake a cake, we have the recipe but don't know the kind of oven we need, nor the temperature, and only have a vague idea of how the result should look like.

We may get a cake by trial and error, but it's not guaranteed.
It's a shame to see such a great application dying like this.
A nitrogen laser can ionize a channel in the air, which lowers its conductivity. You can build a laser such as this yourself.

http://www.repairfaq.org/sam/lasercn2.htm
>From 1945 to 1971, the economic reality was: "It costs only a few cents for the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to produce a $100 bill, but other countries had to pony up $100 of actual goods in order to obtain one."

Is this not true after 1971? I would be surprised if it costs even $1 to produce a $100 bill today. Why would the cost of physical currency even be relevant when the government can digitally increase money supply?
Previous commenter said if the loss accelerates. Larger and larger changes each year would be more than worrisome.
Dynamic Linking Best Practices
> And it's sacreligious, especially here, to even talk about people having less kids.

Population growth is declining in rich countries already, and in many middle-income ones.

We don't have to convince people to have less kids as they already do if they're wealthy, educated and their kids don't die.
This post doesn't really say anything and hand waves over a lot of the complexities of real world deployment and operations that isn't a simple stateless hello world web application.
I tried this with a more technical prompt... and what can I say? I'm stunned at the incredible command of jargon here. It's even mostly correct with the actual technical details at a glance, especially that description of how radar works! I can't wait for those research paper generators to use stuff like this to make high caliber fakes.

Prompt:

> Synthetic aperture radar imaging is an effective method for

Results:

> Synthetic aperture radar imaging is an effective method for detecting the presence and/or quantification of target objects, including: detection and tracking of moving targets, which are known to be difficult with visible imaging and/or laser radar; monitoring the occupancy of an enclosed space, such as a room, by the presence of occupants therein; and detection of moving objects, including animals and pedestrians, as well as people. A radar device is composed of an antenna, a receiver, and a transmitter. The antenna radiates a beam of energy (e.g., electromagnetic radiation in the radiofrequency range) that is received by the receiver. The transmitter then transmits an interrogating signal to the target(s). The time delay between transmission and reception at the target(s) is used to measure the range of the target(s) from the radar device. All targets in the field of view of the radar device contribute to the signal received by the receiver. The transmitter amplitude and/or phase modulates the signal transmitted to the target(s) with the information to be encoded, typically at a much higher modulation rate than that used

Another prompt:

> Fringe fields in microstrip patch antennas

Results (shortened by me for brevity):

> Fringe fields in microstrip patch antennas and their RF performance

> 1. The microstrip patch antenna is a conventional patch antenna that is created by a thin layer of insulating material placed on top of a conductive substrate. The antenna is excited by a current in the conductive layer in the vicinity of the antenna.

Now I have a question. How does this GPT-J know what a patch antenna is? It's able to give an almost correct description of this rather technical device. It made the mistake of flipping conductive material and insulating substrate, but it's very close. Does this neural network have the "knowledge" of a patch antenna in the weights? How does that even work? It seems kind of incredible.
>we aren't there yet.

Those are your words, not mine. I think "almost certainly not" is by far the best appraisal of the situation. Unless you have domain expertise, then your confident statement of "we aren't there yet" or "we have a long way to go" is just hot air, and dramatically overstates the probability of this ever coming to pass.
The answer to "wtf happened in 1971" is the Nixon Shock, which marks the end of the Bretton Woods system.
Counter evidence: https://youtu.be/cuZYROM4Vrs

In fact, much of the JerryRigEverything YouTube channel is counter evidence for this claim, as Zack shows taking two electric bikes and welding them together for a seriously good and relatively inexpensive first pass at an “off road wheelchair”, and then ups the ante with his custom-designed “notawheelchair” a.k.a. “Rig”, and plenty of other videos with his lovely now-wife Cambry.

Now, if someone is dependent on staying in their electric wheelchair and they need a van with a lift or a ramp, then the current fleet of EVs aren’t very suitable for that. But I’m sure that situation will change. But claiming that there is absolutely no future in electric vehicles for disabled people is quite … disingenuous … at best.
Long Waves: Visualizing the History of Innovation Cycles
Ideally, in the article’s example, the program generating heat and causing the throttle would have the throttled time counted against it (as a separate metric).

That’s hard to do without hardware support, but I wonder how hard it would be to get a decent metric with currently available performance counters.
The downside if you don't rebase your branch is you end up with a merge commit with two parents with independent commits on both sides which makes bisecting more of a challenge then if you had a linear rebased history.
I hope you're not suggestion that we go back to a gold standard? I wouldn't mind certain capital controls though, specifically limits on credit money issued for purchase of land.
Show HN: Instantly Search for NPM Packages
It's powered by a search engine that we are building from scratch
From the article, she found out she was dead when she tried to get a passport.
Be careful of copyright claims from Pantone on their CapSure device.

You will want to put a lot of distance between whatever you are developing and their device.
I think that's a charm of HN that people are continuously discovering the niche languages of Forth, Haskell, APL, Common Lisp, Scheme, Prolog, Smalltalk...etc.

I went through a phase where I thought each one of those would be a solution to my problems and give me a competitive edge. That never came to light as I never felt that they gave me much more power than what I already had available with modern scripting languages. So in a way, it was a waste of time, and in another way it allows me to see the breadth of the options out there. It also makes me sympathetic to those also taking the journey and excitedly posting related articles.

When a 16 year old getting into cars posts about a 69 mustang on an automotive forum, I wouldn't expect the older crowd to role their eyes and say "ughh...this again". In the same way, digging into Forth is a rite of passage for many.
The Secret Life of Passwords (2014)
Lisp for the Web – 5
I remember news stories in India of cows dying because of ingesting too much plastic.

https://wewantrefill.com/cows-india-die-consuming-plastic-wa...
It's time to fork it
This looks familiar.

The Laser Developed Atmospheric Lens (LDAL): BAE Systems futurist Professor Nick Colosimo explains
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlBX3lDIlvw

BAE Systems future technologies: The Laser Developed Atmospheric Lens
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhWBAFAGwzE
> Most of people who contribute to open source software are not motivated by copyright.

I disagree. License choice is deliberate, and many open source licenses are chosen for the strict stipulations they put on users and developers, like mandatory attribution and terms of distribution or reproduction.

I release some software under the GPL and AGPL. I don't want anyone to use my software that doesn't intend to abide by the terms it was released under.

If I wanted to release software with less stipulations, then I would, and I have.
For linux, check out firejail for isolating it.
I don't interpret "substantial" here as affecting the 'de minimis' requirement for infringement, as that would require other language.

I'm pretty sure every court will instead interpret the word "substantial" in the MIT license as referring to the concept of "substantial similarity", which must be demonstrated in any copyright infringement case - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantial_similarity

I distribute software under the MIT. "Basically no strings" != "no strings". I expect attribution for any derived program which has substantial similarity to my software.

I regard the presence of the word 'substantial' to indicate that the license applies to even modified forms of the software. As that Wikipedia link points out:

> Under the doctrine of substantial similarity, a work can be found to infringe copyright even if the wording of text has been changed or visual or audible elements are altered
Crystal Made Exclusively of Electrons – Wigner Crystals Observed for First Time
It doesn’t sound like you’ve been to western Norway.
A dollar per gallon of gasoline would more than pay to recapture the atmospheric carbon burning the gasoline would release.

Math: 1 gallon of gasoline releases 20lbs of CO2

1 ton is 2000 pounds, so a gallon releases 1/100th of a ton.

Atmospheric carbon capture technologies are projected to cost $17-70 per ton, or $0.17-0.70 per gallon of gasoline.
Akamai’s edge performance is still first-class but I do think QUIC/http 2/http 3 have significantly reduced the benefit over more centralized CDN offerings.
am i missing something? this is right in the FAQ:

```
Should we be concerned that the atmospheric oxygen supply is declining?

This point was addressed in an article by Broecker (Science, Vol. 168, 1537-1538, 1970). Although written many years ago, the basic point made by the article remains valid. The maximum potential loss of O2 from fuel burning, when fossil fuel reserves (mostly coal) are exhausted is only a few percent of the atmospheric burden. Since even this loss will take many centuries to materialize, it's hard to see this as high on the list of possible environmental concerns.
```
The premise was that each dollar was backed by a fixed amount of gold. The only problem was: there was no way to audit how much gold the US had.

So when it became clear that the US was spending too much, France announced they wanted to cash out their gold and the US responded by suspending convertibility of dollars into gold (the Nixon shock).

Since then the US has a floating value instead of a fixed precious metal-based exchange rate.
Sounds like the old makedepend program.
Audacity is great for minor tweaks and such, but I can't imagine in a million years paying a subscription for it
Sorry, but disavowing your daughter to not pay child support, or trying to recoup someones shares because they have cancer isn't a personality quirk.
In a way Audacity now really deserves its name. I would have never expected they would go that far.
Also of note is rtl_433's -A flag, which does a very good job of detecting how a particular device encodes its data on the radio, often making it only necessary to determine its frequency and what each bit means: https://github.com/merbanan/rtl_433/wiki/digitech_xc0324.REA...
Elixir is gaining momentum, though.

It just made it into top 50 TIOBE index. Projects like Nerves for IoT, Nx, etc are giving it life in new applications and industries.

It's never going to be a top 5 language, but it's on its way to become a well-known language with a strong community.
'Have it now, pay for it later' has been writ large all over the past half-century. Call it 'Ponzi' or what you will, some people raked in a lot of money when it was worth a lot more.

That brand-new publicly-funded infrastructure did yeoman service for that approach.
I asked it nonsensical questions about historical figures and got output that was nearly sane sounding, fairly coherent, and sometimes close to brilliant. I can't speak to the technical aspects. Although it didn't seem to "get" that people that die can't do things after they die. For sheer entertainment though, it's fantastic.
> Those are your words

Yes, sorry, your exact words:

> does not yet exist.

I don't know why that's semantically important, but there you are, for posterity.

> when your confident statement

Yeah I'm literally quoting you. So if you're saying that it will "almost certainly not" happen "some day", so be it, but you followed that up with "yet" and "non trivial" as opposed to "never" and "impossible".
I am of the opinion that mathematics is very much a human endeavor. Writing a proof is to convince other mathematicians that it’s true. While formalized mathematics is one such technique, I don’t believe it will replace how mathematics is generally done. Writing a program is something different entirely.

One thing I would be interested in is an objective look of how the limitations of computation affect formalized mathematics. I think there’s a lot of sticky computational and philosophical problems there that I don’t see mentioned a lot.
I like that OpenAI forces people to use theirs ethically. There's obvious benefits to a competitor, but I'm wary it might be a Pandora's Box.