skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"benchmarks always tell you if there's a problem and exactly where it is, and squash any unneeded discussion." Unfortunately, always is too strong of a word. Cache eviction in one parts can cause memory stalls on another part, indirection in the caller can prevent speculation. Type erasure can prevent inlining resulting in the called function being blamed for problem in the caller.

Your problem might not even be CPU, if it's contention related, or timing related, overloaded queues, not pushing back at the right places, io bound, the bottleneck is work which is queued and executed elsewhere...
Causal profiling is a technique which is relevant specifically because profiling can miss the forest for the trees: https://github.com/plasma-umass/coz

It's really easy to write a benchmark which measures a different scenario from what your application is doing. A classic example might be benchmarking a hashmap in a loop when that hashmap is usually used when cold.

I definitely agree about directing efforts to where you can make an impact and guiding that through measurement, but benchmarks can miss that there's a problem and blame the wrong part of the application.

If the difference is large enough, ms vs hours, you'd have to really screw up methodology to get the wrong result (I've done it almost that badly before).
You didn't answer the question really.

> Worse, the positive impact of the platform or social networks was/is never discussed.

Sounds like a good balance to Facebook's PR department.
I violently agree with you on the topics of intended use.

>You seem to be mistaking the argument as saying the FDA has authority to regulate the practice of medicine. No one is saying that.

The majority opinion believed this ban crossed over. If I understood your statements correctly, you also objected to FDA jurisdiction over off-label prescription of Viagra, or off-label use of hammers. apologies if not.

>Paraphrasing from the FDA's ban: Off-label use of a different type of ESD device is fine, but on-label use of this type is not

This is perhaps the only point where we disagree. The ban seems to cross into the practice of medicine by my reading. Particularly the part that mandates a physician-directed transition plan within 180 days of publication. It also applies to devices already in commercial distribution and devices already sold to the ultimate (end) user. As the court majority points out: "seizing existing devices both “limits” and “interferes” with a physician’s ability to prescribe or administer them."

I disagree with the majority opinion to the extent it groups ESDs together as a legally marketed products. However, I sympathize with the majority misunderstanding because ESDs for SIB and AB were classified as substantially equivalent to other 510(k) predicate ESDs for behavior modification purposes per CFR 882.5235 and not subject to pre-market approval.

Furthermore, matters are even more complicated in that many of the ESDs subject to ban are not even 510(k) registered! The FDA previously ruled them exempt from 510(k) registration per CFR 807.65(d). 807.65(d) exempts physicians who manufacture or otherwise alter devices solely for use in their practice from 510(k) registration or pre-market approval. [1] CFR 807.65(d) comes straight from the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (see section 21 USC 360(g) [2]

[1] https://ecfr.federalregister.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/...
[2] https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=%22solely+for+use+in...
Update: reread the article, customer has the 50kWh rear wheel drive car. That means he’s been offered a battery at 320 bucks per kWh - at that price, of course tesla are profiting from the sale. If you have the 75 kWh car the bill is presumably then north of $20k…

We can speculate pretty easily on how profitable that $16k pack is.

Let’s assume the customer has the largest pack Tesla fit to a model 3 (~75kwh). He has just been offered a new one at approx 213 dollars per kWh.

While only Tesla know for certain, it’s widly assumed in 2021 this costs Tesla around 140 dollars a kWh.

Aside from a couple of hoses, high and low voltage connectors, the battery is held to the bottom of the car by just 12 bolts if memory serves. If you have an appropriate workshop (like Tesla!) the labour costs will be minimal.

I’d have to disagree and suggest Tesla are likely making a typical car industry margin on the replacement battery.
Personally, I feel like I can do written communication without being passive aggressive.
op just need to add some cache servers in front of it and it'll be fine, impressive
China Breaks the Global Model of VC Investing
You can buy a zero tailpipe emission car right now. You can even ride a bus, carpool, or bike. Or take an offer for a remote working job in preference over an in office one. An individual can’t change the fuel mix of their grid. Airline usage is a luxury. Natural gas power plants are already displacing coal fired one.
LinkedIn InMail has worked for me in the past with e.g. DHL.

A package they claimed was on a slow boat back to the US to be returned to the sender mysteriously turned up in a depot 5 minutes away when a Senior VP's assistant asked for updates on behalf of said SVP and Cc'd in the SVP and me.

Emails went out Friday evening. Package was in my office Monday morning.

A lot of these channels work as long as few people use them. You surprise people who are not used to be confronted by their users unreasonably painful experiences.
The CEO's job is basically to talk to people. So if you can not find the proper person to contact, you should contact the CEO.
Post Office Horizon Scandal [video]
If you watch the video [1] Chad (former Tesla repair technician) clearly states it's the issue is due to cost effectiveness not whether the car is under lease.

It's also not constrained the nose that was damaged here - whenever a part of the battery pack is damaged (could be a single cell) Tesla will replace the whole battery pack but not the part.

I believe Chad calls it "assembly replacement". It's not cost effective to train staff, have facilities and parts, and do the (dis-)assembly. Which is exactly why we need right to repair.

[1] https://youtu.be/vVSw3KSevEc?t=1415
As a fairly seasoned burner, I really had to shake my head at this article.

I found it really odd that the only mention of Burning Man is how the online version attempts last year didn't work so well. No mention of how Burning Man fits into this "death spiral" idea - or how Burning Man fails to fall into that spiral.

In particular, it makes this one comment stood out...

> A true festival is not a tame affair. It is a suspension of normal rules, mores, structures, and social distinctions. Girard explains:

OK yes, that sounds like Burning Man. But then it follows up with this part of Girard's explanation...

> As one might expect, this destruction of differences is often accompanied by violence and strife. Subordinates hurl insults at their superiors; various social factions exchange gibes and abuse. Disputes rage in the midst of disorder.

Violence and strife? Raging disputes? Hurled insults? (OK well there are those megaphone people.) Seriously, the author has never been to Burning Man. Or if they did go, it was a hugely different experience than what I and a lot of other people ever had.

Maybe Burning Man just isn't a festival. Or maybe burners just festival differently. Or maybe the author is talking about something else.
Today I found about Organic Maps[0], and it seems like a viable alternative to Google Maps, albeit with some annoying quirks.

It is offline - meaning you download the areas you are interested in first, after which all the data is available fully offline (including stuff like directions, metro maps etc). The interface takes a bit to get used to, but the biggest let down is the fact that you can't edit a route in the route planner - you need to start all over again (selecting start/destination, no way to modify either).

[0] - https://f-droid.org/en/packages/app.organicmaps/ (also available on Play Store)
This is really cool, but these days I prefer to host on virtualized Casios so I can scale up if I need Casio FX perf or down if I need Casio Databank perf.
None of the genius is transmissible, but perhaps some of the joy is.
Unlike the slice, a Cow made from that slice can be Owned. Unlike reference counting the underlying Vector, the Cow won't duplicate the slice until you modify it.

This forces you to confront the reality you'd been dodging. Either you actually mutate this list in your program, and the "magic" of linked lists dissolves when it consumes all your memory, or as seems far more likely you get good performance from the better underlying data structure anyway and the "magic" of linked lists dissolves that way.

You only get good performance from linked lists today on the rare occasion when their lack of data locality is outweighed by some other factor. Sprinkling the Lisp idiom over things doesn't change that.

Here's an example where it's worth it: In highly concurrent systems you can't afford to use any sort of locking to protect data structures, the contention for the locks hurts too much, and you can't afford to reference count everything in those structures because even the contention on the reference counts also costs too much (everything looking at an item is storing to the reference count). So you use Hazard Pointers to avoid prematurely dropping anything. But any type of locking for your Hazard Pointers structure would have too much contention also, so you store the Hazard Pointers in a linked list, new ones can be slotted into place at the start of the list with an atomic compare-exchange. Each CPU core is writing to the Hazard Pointers it "owns" a lot, but they're deliberately too big to share with another CPU's cache, and any CPU cores that need to check the Hazard Pointers read from them all but never write so modern caches cope admirably.
My gym is in a converted warehouse. Probably 30' ceiling at least, so it's mostly open air. Lots of fans and HVAC so the air is constantly moving. It was closed from March - June of 2020. Reopened in late June with masking and social distancing as per local rules. There was an exception to the masking rule "while exercising" so basically nobody wore a mask in the gym. I returned to my every other day habit, my workout takes about 90 minutes and then I sit in the sauna for 20 minutes and then shower.

I'm not aware of any local cases linked specifically to gyms, so it seemed to work out fine.
That's not true.

First, the vast majority of pedestrian deaths are adults. In 2018, a total of 206 age 15 or younger were killed by cars. Compare that to 5,965 killed who were age 16 or older.[1] Both in absolute numbers and relative to population, children are far less likely to be run over and killed than adults.

Second, while light trucks (vans, SUVs, & pickups) are 1.45x more deadly to pedestrians than cars, buses are far more dangerous than either. Motorcycles (which have excellent visibility) are particularly deadly to child pedestrians. From United States pedestrian fatality rates by vehicle type[2]:

> Compared with cars, the RR of killing a pedestrian per vehicle mile was 7.97 (95% CI 6.33 to 10.04) for buses; 1.93 (95% CI 1.30 to 2.86) for motorcycles; 1.45 (95% CI 1.37 to 1.55) for light trucks, and 0.96 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.18) for heavy trucks. Compared with cars, buses were 11.85 times (95% CI 6.07 to 23.12) and motorcycles were 3.77 times (95% CI 1.40 to 10.20) more likely per mile to kill children 0–14 years old. Buses were 16.70 times (95% CI 7.30 to 38.19) more likely to kill adults age 85 or older than were cars. The risk of killing a pedestrian per vehicle mile traveled in an urban area was 1.57 times (95% CI 1.47 to 1.67) the risk in a rural area.

All else equal, being hit by a larger vehicle does increase the risk of severe injury or death, but all else isn't equal. Larger vehicles tend to be more visible, louder, and slower than their smaller counterparts. Different types of vehicles are driven in different environments with different propensities for mingling with pedestrians. If vehicle mass and blind spots were the main factors in pedestrian deaths, we should have seen deaths skyrocket over the past 40 years (as cars got bigger and bulkier for greater passenger safety). Instead we saw pedestrian deaths decrease.

1. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vRqGqodKkWkS...

2. https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/11/4/232
As long as all the people in traffic with this experiment signed this agreement as well, all is good.
I suspect it's exactly because GMail supports it. Their data indicates that it's not a user friendly feature for the majority of users (ie: why labels can be nested since 2011) but it's grandfathered into GMail. GMail as I see it began with pure tags, spent a lot of effort trying to get people to use them and then ended up with quasi-folders.
Consider this the beginning of the demand, then: I'm not going to use this service unless I can self-host it.
It's not a redefinition- it's an acknowledgment of the actual definition of the word.
Looks like it's time to upgrade to a Casio server!
Students will always cheat tbh. I doubt this will radically change anything with regards to that.
I was gonna put this comment deep down the chain but Ill just leave it top level for everyone who is worked up about me using the normal phrase "car accident" to describe an incident where I would have been 100% at fault for using my phone.

I agree that I as the driver would have been at fault in an accident. Car accident is a really common thing to call it even when the person naming the incident is 100% at fault and knows it. I would have been 100% at fault and I know that.

Still, it's hard not to get frustrated when previously safe activities become unsafe because of a UI update that was ostensibly made to increase safety.
Well, that was specifically about blending two different sensors with different characteristics. For you walking, it would be like blending your eyes with your nose. If your eyes tells you the floor is safe, and your nose smells something bad, do you stop? Anytime you have two different sensors with different characteristics, you want "the best". Your body uses your eyes to see where to walk, and your nose to test if pizza is rotten. Blending multiple sensor types is tricky.

So back to LIDAR.. same difference. Camera and LIDAR have different profiles. I think it's fine to use either, but I think trying to blend the two is a sub-optimal solution to the problem.

Again, this is my guess from what I know. I could be wrong, and the winning technology could use 12 different sensors (vision + radar + lidar + smell + microphones), and blend them all to drive. Cool if someone pulls it off! But if I had to do it myself or place a bet, I would put it on a single sensor type.
ok, _multiple_ tribes, that -- unlike us westernized/modernized/uncivilized people -- eat _un_processed sugars, _un_processed foods, etc.

i'm all for looking at populations of folks and then looking at the effects of their new diets -- whether they moved to the food, or the food moved to them -- but i don't even see the beginnings of an apples-to-apples comparison here.

to me, a layman, i don't see Nutrasweet and sugar and honey and cookies and apples to be all the same in terms of the effects of their 'sugars' on the body.

i must be missing something.
If you have redundant AOA sensors on a plane and they disagree what do you do? Alert the pilot. You have to do the same on a self-driving car as well. You can't just ignore a serious malfunction, or pretend to not see it just because you don't know to handle it!

To be truly redundant you have to use different technologies, such as camera and lidar.
Hey I'm all aboard that. It's under the umbrella of "psychological".
That gain-of-function research is a thing makes that not terribly obvious.
> It's not cost effective to train staff, have facilities and parts

Surely its more cost effective for the customer that requires this repair?
I actually searched for that exact question before I turned on the sprinkler. Search for "does watering plants in sunlight burn them" and there's tons of results claiming it's not true. Sources ranged from The Guardian to StackExchange. I was desperate and those search results were good enough for me at the time, so never bothered to look for any kind of studies around the matter. If you can find evidence of watering in sunlight burning plants, I'd like to read it.

EDIT: Here's an interesting experiment on it: https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1469-...

> At the start of this paper, we quoted the oft-stated advice that plants must not be watered in the midday sunshine in order to avoid tissue damage as a result of intense sunlight focused by water drops on leaves (Table S1). We have shown that this widely held belief is only correct for hairy leaves. Based on the computed light-collecting efficiency of water drops (Figs 4–7), we have also determined that the risk of sunburn of smooth, hairless leaves is theoretically the highest at a solar elevation of θ ≈ 23°, corresponding to early morning or late afternoon. In practice, however, the light intensity from such an oblique position of the sun is too weak to be a factor, as was confirmed by Expt 2.
Yikes, that is scary. Perhaps Go was more of a clear improvement than dealing with this "shitshow", and C++ has become more usable for concurrent/parallel code in the years since.

I still find data races (sometimes crashes) in the wild on a regular basis. For example, RSS Guard accesses shared data unsynchronized when syncing settings from a server, so performing two types of syncs at once on 2 different threads will crash when they reallocate the same vector. Qt Creator intermittently crashes (or at least used to) in some tricky CMake handling code with multithreaded copy-on-write string lists. And I see apps now and then that perform unsynchronized writes to memory concurrently read in another thread, and it usually doesn't misbehave.
That is a lie. We're "mad" about Castro seizing power and nationalizing everything under his oppressive regime.

Human rights violations: https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2020/country-chapters/cuba

Cuba sanctions: https://www.state.gov/cuba-sanctions/

Are you suggesting JFK had an ulterior motive?
That makes this even more surprising if so, because a policy on that car without collision should’ve raised a gigantic red flag with his carrier.
...I think you failed to identity the issue, because uh, your solution in the "if I could do it again" is, well, flawed. It's like you discovered an edge case that leads to catastrophic failure, and went "I'm going to rerun the test in a way that doesn't crash, and ship that shit, marriage.exe is ready for production.
Does Tesla then have a separate workflow that re-uses the components of the "broken" 16K battery pack? Seems like that is necessary in order for spending an extra 15K in parts to be worth more than training some more people to repair them...

but then in that case, the sticker price of the repair also doesn't seem like it should be 16k, since Tesla's taking the old battery and capturing that side of the value too.
I think you are missing parts. Have you watched this video from someone actually working in the field?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOL_rCK59ZI&t=28286s
> Using just a torch or a lamp from below, the paintings and engravings stay hidden. But lit fireplaces on the ledge illuminate the whole gallery so that anyone on the cave floor can see it. That suggests the artists may have wanted to keep their work hidden, the researchers say.

I dunno. To me, this suggests that the artists may have used the cave art in theatrical productions, with the audience on the gallery floor, and stage crew working lights up on the ledge. Combined with the difficult trek into the cave to build suspense, some good storytelling and potent entheogens, I can imagine this being quite an attraction outlasting the original painter(s) and benefiting their descendants for generations.
I'd be surprised if this was true. It certainly doesn't match my experience, and it also doesn't really make sense. The difference between machine code, assembly, and programming languages like C is first-week CS 101 stuff. What are you basing this on?
Heavy metal (at least at that time in his life) I'm afraid. I don't know what he is up to know - age about 50 something.
From Tesla's webpage:

> Full Self-Driving Capability

>

> All new Tesla cars have the hardware needed in the future for full self-driving in almost all circumstances. The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat.
> A lot of these channels work as long as few people use them. You surprise people who are not used to be confronted by their users unreasonably painful experiences.

Yeah, wasn't jeff@amazon.com basically a direct line to Jeff Bezos for awhile, but then morphed into just another email box monitored by just another customer service team?
The whole article is an ostentatiously wordy mess, and that's coming from a guy who just tried to use the word "ostentatiously."
Defender was head and shoulders above every other arcade game when it was released. It consumed quite a bit of my pocket money.
Those never-ending payments are covering depreciation. Unless you keep your car for 10+ years and it’s one of the rare models that holds value after that, you’re not much better off 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.

Except that they charge you for all of the depreciation plus a rental fee. The dealer/manufacturer ends up with an asset that is more valuable than the price they paid for it less the money they've received for it through the terms of the lease.
None; it’s just ice. The −150℃ temperature would cause you some problems though.
> However, some archaeologists still have doubts that Neanderthals created symbolic art on their own.

TFA quotes a researcher speculating that Neanderthals learned to make art from humans.

We can't know whether this was the case until conclusive evidence is found, which may be never. Until then, we don't see things as they are (inconclusive), we see them as we are (human centric).
I want a personal search engine that considers images, docs, and websites I've been to. "Shit, I was reading something about write ahead logs; where was that..." or "there was a funny picture of a guy with a bar of soap I saw 6mo ago that I want to share now."
I feel bad for the author, but I am perfectly fine with a few false positives if it means more scams are blocked. I'd even be okay if the number of false positives is higher than the actual scams blocked if it meant very very few scams make it through the filters.

I think Google should be liable for scams on its network. They should either:
1. Figure out a way to better automate scam filtering,
2. Hire a massive number of people to review each ad, or
3. Downsize their business until they can manage it responsibly.

Google is not entitled to their scale. If they cannot responsibly run a business at its current size, they should be forced to downsize until they can.
Funny how no one mentioned how hard it is when one adds a 2 year old child to the equation. My partner didn't get wfh and I was left to look after our little one on my own, when the childcare was prohibited due to lockdown. Really hard to get anything done if you can't focus for more than 10 minutes.