skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You don't have to buy their products the same way the government doesn't have to provide for your health care. While technically true, in practice it can easily mean the difference between a comfortable life and destitution.
Seems to me goods from Canada would be more expensive that getting them from the country 80 miles away.
What did you replace your tab homepage with? Anything in particular to call out?
I think we're beginning to see the true endgame to Tesla's strategy. Elon initially said first you build the prototype to raise the capital to finance the expensive car which you build to fund the mid-priced car which you scale to build the cheap car. In reality, we're still at step two which is the expensive car and the R&D to build the real thing.

As a model Y owner, I'm quite skeptical about this generation of vehicles being able to truly hit the mark on FSD.
I think they were referring to pd-1 inhibitors. I’m not an oncologist but that generally fits with what I’ve seen as a hospitalist. FWIW I personally know someone who has survived > 5 years who received it right when it cane out.

Here’s a paper supporting:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7019511/
Android Weekly Offer
> I don't think federal funding of research is that much older in the US, only really starting in the 50s apart from military research.

US government support for university research dates back to patent holder Abraham Lincoln who even in the middle of a war got legislation passed to support land grant (mostly ag) colleges and universities (and of which MIT was one of the very early beneficiaries). However it was small and you are right that in WWII the model of the US modern research university was explicitly created by James Conant, with MIT again being the largest beneficiary (note that all tuition and student expenses are about 14% of MIT's revenue and 16% of expenditures, and the number of staff is greater than that of the student body -- it's a huge government research lab with a small school attached).

The problem with this model is that unless you are MIT (/Stanford/Harvard/Cornell/CMU et al -- maybe 25 institutions, if that) licensing revenue matters, and affects who gets tenure, departmental budgets etc.

> How exactly were the early QM researchers funded anyway? (apart from Einstein's famous day job at the patent office). I know at least a few of them had fellowships at universities, meaning rich benefactors.

In Europe, in the 20th century funding came primarily from governments (and benefactors, more early in the century), under varying institutions (the big research institutions in Imperial and post-WWI Germany, "Institutes" in France, Oxbridge in the UK, etc). In The USA it was the institutions themselves, some benefactors and, as I said, some government funding (like Fermi and Lawrence).
Considering that a 3rd party was able to repair it, I'm not sure why this is classified as "right to repair".

That said, while 16k is outrageous (and the part is not well designed), no dealer/manufacturer would repair a car by cutting off a broken part, adding threads both ends and joining them together.
“Beyond the way they speak, there is only one (no two!) features of American life which I find really tiresome. The impossibility of getting a bath in the ordinary sense and their ideas on room temperature” — Alan Turing (1936)

I'm familiar with the difference in 'room temperature' between here and the UK, but not what the idea of 'getting a bath in the ordinary sense' is. Anyone know?
This contains some generally good advice. I find this is underutilized by most people:

“ A really key one is listening. Sometimes what you’re proposing really isn’t possible with the resources a department/team/company has. Sometimes what you’re proposing isn’t workable for reasons you’ve never even thought of. Sometimes what you’re proposing is just dumb in the real world. And sometimes the arguments an organisation will present against doing something won’t make sense. The key thing is you’ve listened, and you can go away and figure what to challenge, and how.”
https is complicated and resource heavy (relative to plain http 1x).
Chemotherapy, like cancer, is not one thing. Some of it is a matter of poisoning the body in ways that disrupt rapidly-dividing cells. This is why chemo patients frequently lose their hair (and other things you don't hear as much about, like gametes, fingernails, mucous membranes/digestive lining). You can call this "cave man medicine". Although that's more dismissive than is warranted, there's no denying that it's a blunt instrument.

Other chemotherapy treatments are "holy shit, we live in the future." They're targeted and have almost no side effects.

You specifically reference mustard gas. I had lymphoma, and one of my treatments was bendamustine, which is directly related to that class of chemicals, and the subsequent research. It's broadly toxic. The other treatment was rituximab, which is a monoclonal antibody that targets the CD20 protein that manifests on B cells, which are just one of many cells involved in the lymphatic system.

I have to say the whole thing was a walk in the park. Bendamustine isn't fun, but I never vomited once, never lost my hair, and outwardly didn't look any different at all. I felt pretty shitty for about three days once a month after treatment. Kinda like a mild flu, but honestly I'd take the bendamustine over the flu any day. I usually took three days off work for it, primarily because I had to be at the chemo infusion center for a few hours to get the drugs. I could have worked through it (not that I should ever have had to, but I could have). The rituximab was a walk in the park. I took that once a month for a year, then every two months for two more years. Aside from an allergic reaction the first time (solved with Benadryl subsequently), I barely noticed it at all. It was, at its worst, nowhere near as bad as a hangover.

I know I'm fortunate in that these treatments existed for my cancer, and that my cancer has a high survival rate (I've been clear for over a decade). Many people are far worse off, even if they survive. I like to take these opportunities to dispel some of the misconceptions that are out there.
Perhaps vertically scaling this on a Casio FX-CG50PRIZM is an option?
Right, so what happens when one says wall, and one says clear air? You brake? That is what happens now with phantom braking. Approaching a bridge? camera sees air, radar sees wall, slam on brakes.

You want the best sensor type over a high-fidelity sensor and a lower fidelity sensor. The Tesla system has 8 cameras (3 forward), so they def have overlap between what they are considering better cameras.

Time will prove which approach wins.
In this case, the guy leasing the car was required to have comprehensive coverage on the car and didn't. Tesla failed to verify this fact when they turned the car over to him. Ultimately it's the guy's responsibility to insure the car properly and he didn't so he was on the hook for the cost of the repair regardless of what it cost.
I haven't had a chance to try it yet, but I'm skeptical of the time savings claim of copilot in its current form. At least working on a large code base, the things that take time are:

1) Understanding the data model and logic of the code that interacts with the component I'm working on

2) Refactoring existing code to accommodate my change gracefully

3) Writing and fixing tests

4) Working through the code review process

For a major new piece of functionality, add

5) Put together a design document and review it with relevant stakeholders

The part that is fast is actually writing the code, as once I've done steps 1 and 2 (and sometimes 5) writing the new code itself is near trivial. I don't see how copilot could possibly help me in a meaningful way on these kinds of tasks.

The work that seems most amenable to copilot help is things like utility functions for transforming data/calculating things from it, as in the "Easter" example from the article. But here I would rather use a well-tested library, or if one doesn't exist (or I can't use it), write well documented code that I understand thoroughly.

Put another way, the work that copilot seems most adept at is "junior developer" work performed by people operating at a junior level. But if they delegate "figuring things out" to copilot, they're just going to spend way more time in code review. Or worse, they're not going to spend that time, and will learn nothing/stagnate in their professional progression.

Ever since the advent of satellite nav I've become terrible at learning my way around cities. I'm okay with the loss, since I can generally rely on having nav when I need it, and navigating cities isn't one of my core responsibilities. Copilot is not reliable (it won't answer your question every time), and it automates something that is your actual job. A junior dev might be better served by spending the extra 20 minutes muddling through and building their skillset.
That actually scares me a bit. I liked Dynalist but stopped using it because of random UI issues on mobile, it just didn't feel worth it.

Hope they do better with Obsidian.
A Repair Would Cost $16,000 at Tesla: The Electrified Garage Did It for $700
What are the qualifications of the people selected to participate in the Beta? Do they have any particular experience or receive special training that would set them apart from the general public?
Disagree, Tesla approach is the right approach. You want to test the technology as early as possible in real situation as much as possible.
That depends massively on the kind of problems you’re trying to solve. I’ve written some software where channels were the right tool, and others where mutexes were the correct choice.
Any human driver driving like that would have his driver's licence revoked, might risk prison for endangerment of society and perhaps be subject to a psychological evaluation (not joking, this stuff happens in Germany).
Why are there no consequences for neither Tesla nor the lawmakers who are looking away?

Sure, test autonomous driving off the roads or on dedicated test environments, but do not permit this on public roads, i do not wanna be part of any beta test.
I don't get why that part isn't shielded for one.. but for second, non-OEM parts are fine for use in repairs.
The first half is strictly true though - comprehensive doesn’t cover road debris; you have to file under collision and unlike comprehensive the premiums are more expensive and claims are solely your fault for the damage, increasing them further.

Leases still near universally require collision coverage though, because they want damage fixed.
Ask HN: Golden Handcuffs – Smart to leave a startup with an eminent IPO?
I'm an early engineer at a startup that that is likely to IPO within the next 18 months.

A majority of my equity has vested (~85%) and at this point and stage of the company I'm not having the impact that I've come to enjoy. R&D has stagnated as we turn the corner e.g. focusing on efforts that impact margins rather than new product development or transformative work. Ideally, I'd like to leave and join an earlier stage company.

For those who have gone through IPO - what would your advise be here? A couple specific questions I have -

1) The company has extended my post employment expiration window to 1 year, what would happen if my shares expired during the lock-up period? Woudl I lose the ability to exercise them?

2) I have been offered 3x over the option price on the secondary market. Should I sell some of my vested equity to cover more options and exit or just sit and wait until after the IPO?

Bascially I'm getting restless, I'm satified with the job but I don't want to lose the potential gain from the equity I have.
Hack fix are subjective. That same logic can be applied to any car makes. Repairs are not a black box. They’re not using duck tape. A fix is a fix
Is this a data gathering scam?
Hi, I think I can answer (I am Kyle). tl;dr: It barely worked for many years, but I have since been able to find more & larger grants for my art, and get better paying consulting work on the side. Full story—first, income. Some examples from my books around 2011: $10k for a 3-month residency in Japan, $4k for 2 weeks of 14 hour days implementing computer vision and generative graphics as part of a team developing an interactive installation, $3k for 3 weeks of generative sound design work, $500 traveling overseas to give an hour-long talk, $500 traveling overseas to lead a full-day 3d scanning workshop for artists, $50 for an art+tech blog post. Regarding expenses: At the time I was living in a one-floor, 4bd apartment with three other people, $1815 divided 4 ways, about $450. I spent a similar amount each month on food, transportation, and utilities combined. I did not have healthcare. My artwork was digital so it did not require regular material costs, and I had no studio space. Total was closer to $20-25k/year due to additional costs and because I had $170k of college loans and no financial support. All together, I was barely in the black: I had between 8-12 jobs totaling $20-40k each year, from 2010-2014. My bank account hovered between $1-4k until 2015 when I started pitching larger projects that saw more income and also allowed me to start paying others. Hope that answers your questions, happy to share more.
So truely the Apple of cars then.
I'm not following, there is only one CPU: It has to run your application and 'operating system' (usb stack, Wifi if used).

Usually those MCUs don't have much memory protection, so when your app crashes down goes the whole thing. Writing UART is usually just writing data to a single register, fire and forget. This will still work if everything else is burning. (unless you screwed with the clocks)

Now USB on the other hand is a complex best, you have to keep state and do two way communication.
If you corrupted your memory, you won't be able to get a debug message out over USB.
It's the same for most semi-to-fully-mandatory interactions. I don't get anything from the DMV. I pay to give information.

But you're not arguing for/against my main point: That it's not a biz-vs-gov problem, it's a mandatory-vs-optional problem.
>Sure, except Tesla has a history of performing just as janky repairs on their cars themselves. Its even stated in the article.[0]

Drilling and tapping a broken off plastic barb for a brass (or steel, or plastic, or whatever) barb is a very, very, very, standard procedure in any trade where you repair things.

I wouldn't call this hack. Appealing to authority is fashionable. People will poo-poo anything if they think they can get a few cheap virtue points for appealing to authority. Heck people will poo-poo the aftermarket versions of OEM stuff that's designed to fix specific issues with the OEM stuff on the basis of if the OEM wanted it that way they would have done it that way.

>Another question to consider is why the repair is 16k

Because the service writer couldn't get that part separately so they chose to quote for the whole assembly rather than ask the tech who did the diagnosis if there's any other options. They are not accustomed to having to think for themselves and do a quick fix. The environment of a service center is set up for a part replacing workflow. When all you have is a hammer everything is a nail. Whatever, shit happens. Rookie mistake.
1) Having to work with in-office people. In the pandemic, this has translated to teams of people who still have an "in-office" way of communicating and organizing despite us all being remote.
So I think we can all agree there is a big difference between the generic/basic patents we’ve seen trolls use over and over again (stuff like “an input device causes and output device to do something”) and an instruction set/CPU architecture. Also I’d bet money ARM has multiple in-house processors for testing/R&D. That’s a far cry from the patent trolls who do nothing but “own” a patent they do nothing with and didn’t come up with in the first place most of the time.

All that said: so what? My ideal world wouldn’t have patents at all. They cause way more harm than good. And we’ve seen time and time again that the big companies will just straight up copy or buy up any competition, the system is broken.
I've done some work with contrastive learning, and I see pros and cons. You are somehow trading off direct supervision for some other assumptions about invariances in the data. This often works very well. I have also seen cases where contrastive learning fails to latch on to the features you want it to. And you end up effectively trying to do some feature engineering / preprocessing to highlight what you want the model to notice.

So bottom line, I think CL is a specific instance of finding a simple rule or pattern that we can use to label select features that work for many tasks, but that's pretty much all it is. I think it's good progress to be able to find some of these simple core rules about what ML models are really noticing.
Since most mainstream songs these days have a distinct beat, does that even matter? You just count how many beats you hear in a minute.
>I think the issue is that the MVP from a customer perspective is, effectively, being able to take a nap in the driver's seat.

Maybe that is a requirement for some users, but it isn't a universal one. Plenty of people see a benefit in assistive technology that isn't complete such as adaptive cruise control or boilerplate/scaffolding dev tools.

It also raises the ethical question of whether these creators are responsible for the misuse of their products. Is it enough for them to say "This is how this product should be used. You are on your own if you use it outside these settings."? Holding developers responsible for the misuse of their software could create an actual slippery slope. Where is the line drawn? Do we start punishing people who create encryption algorithms because someone used the encryption to hide evidence of a crime?
Same reason HN goes against Apple when it comes to battery repairs. App Store is optional extended functionality. A battery impacts your ability to use your phone or car for its fundamental purpose.
You'd probably offload PWM onto the in-chip PWM peripheral, rather than doing it in software. There isn't a lot of info about it in the datasheet[1], and based on my quick skim, the ESP-IDF docs[2] don't say anything about complementary pairs.

1. https://www.espressif.com/sites/default/files/documentation/...
2. https://docs.espressif.com/projects/esp-idf/en/latest/esp32/...
You've nicely articulated what was bothering me about the jittery dashboard visualizations. Why on earth is everything flickering in and out of existence, and why is the car's own planned trajectory also flickering with discontinuities?? It seems like they aren't modeling the dimension of time, thus throwing away crucial information about speed and needlessly re-fitting the model to static snapshots of dynamic scenes.

It's like the ML system needs its inferences constrained by rules like "objects don't teleport" or "acceleration is never infinite."
I always wondered why could you not add a note to someone else’s email in gmail to make it searchable. Would allow you to make gmail UI even simpler and in vein with article's claims too.
Roving Bridge
Yeah, as previously mentioned, I fully agree that nullable pointers kind of suck and exhaustive pattern matching on enums is strictly better. I'm taking issue narrowly with abusing the "billion dollar mistake" quote to exaggerate the severity of the problem.
OpenSearch 1.0 is now GA
Hi @gus_massa the videos are all available on youtube. We have curated them under categories in one place conveniently for the NCF community.
Creating an account is free and gives you access to our curated resources
In response, review this area of my comment above:

Accurately & skillfully communicating research and results does not completely overlap the Venn diagram skill set of "excellent researcher". Research skills do not equate to communication skills.

Postdocs are no more likely to have their Venn diagrams overlap significantly.
If you watch the video, the connector is behind a plastic panel (albeit not very rigid).
Yeah in the parent post, how many miles did that guy drive before flipping his truck? In all of these videos, we are seeing it disengage multiple times within a couple of miles. Nobody is that bad of a driver that they crash every time they go out and drive.
Kudos for taking the time to write up a nice, clean, and concise readme. I don't know about everyone, but this makes all the difference in the world to me.
The owner failed to get full coverage and Tesla failed to verify that he had full coverage and turned the car over to him.
Am I the only one who finds Go concurrency model to be extremely bug prone and difficult to work with? Writing an efficient pipeline of goroutines connected with channels that doesn't deadlock is a verbose and subtle mess with a whole bunch of code duplication.

For a lot of the things that I want to achieve, functional abstractions like parallel map and reduce would be much more understandable, and easier to use.

That whole talk about philosophy distracts from the actual tools that Go gives you to manage concurrency which in my opinion can be improved a lot.
Embargo bad doesn't make Cuban government good and the Cuban people can rally against both.

The embargo is not responsible for Cuba's repression of the press, their repression of political dissent, their single party political system, the unchanging leaders from 1959 to 2018, or of Cuba's government own mismanagement of things.

No one is talking about blaming the Cubans for their woes. We're talking about the right and capacity of the Cuban people to rally against their own government if they wish.
Not exactly. Apple is renowned for the build quality of their hardware.
This isn't about the westernized version of Feng Shui. It's about a method of divination more akin to the I Ching:

In its original form, the geomantic figure was created by making lines of random numbers of dots in the sand, hence the name. - the beginning of the "Geomancy Step-By-Step" link
It seems like vertical and hydroponics are great for leafy green cash crops and spices, but don't work well to produce cereals, soy, or pulses, which are materially where all of the calories come from.
When I rent a car I am not responsible for repairs. If I am on the hook for the repair bill I should get a choice in how the car is repaired. I can buy whatever tires I want for a leased car. If Tesla wants to make these kinds of demands then the repair should be part of the warranty and priced in to the car.

> I would read this as a cautionary tale against renting your cars. If you can’t buy it, don’t! This holds true for any depreciating asset.

If the asset depreciates what's the benefit in buying it? The fact that cars depreciate seems like the best reason to "rent" them. The manufacturer ends up dealing with the now less valuable asset.
I agree that Electrek is biased, but they usually provide substantive materials in terms of source and quotes to backup their claim.

Also, it is a 2017 article, and things have improved since then. For example, Tesla has released their parts catalog for all models.

Things are still far from prefect though, as you still can not buy those parts. Hopefully with this new Right to Repair Executive order - this situation will improve.
1. There's more to determining if an effect is in the statistical noise than just sample size. Effect size, for example, also comes into play.

2. Not every study will, or even should, try to be the final word on some matter. If you come up with some novel hypothesis in social science, you're not going to jump into a 2,000 person study.
Your brain helps you with all kinds of things, but fundamental geometry is not magic. Reconstructing scene geometry from high quality binocular video is an extremely well developed field and has been for decades. The problem seems to be that Tesla overrelies on ML-based instantaneous pixel classification when you don't actually need to know what a large thing moving toward you is in order to not run into it.
I turned my iPad Pro into my main computer