skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Good physics education is the best.

Because it gives you widest world perspective possible (if you paid attention to all disciplines like philosophy and math, not just learning single narrow field).

It also gives you a great skill of learning what you don’t know yet, and solving problems you don’t really know how to solve yet.

And path forward is clear - learn something in the area, build some portfolio, find some interns programs, finish good bootcamp, apply for jobs.
I find it very similar to primary education language classes. Unless you use it as an adult after school, you’re not going to retain the knowledge for very long. And most people aren’t going to be using either set of skills in their adult lives after school.

I took several years of Latin in both high school and college but outside of those academic environments I never had cause to use it and while I remember a lot of aspects of it structurally, my Latin vocabulary is almost all gone. I have at times pulled out my old textbooks just to try and see what I can do, and I can certainly work through that material a lot faster than the first time around, but I’m still needing to start at a rudimentary level to get anywhere.
Currently, Caddy will automatically fail over to ZeroSSL if it can't get a cert from Let's Encrypt. (You can even configure other sources in addition to, or instead of, LE and ZeroSSL. For example, you could have it fall back to a self-signed cert as a last resort.)

There's really no good reason for a site to go down due to PKI. Caddy has proven this.
This is one of my main observations growing up with math: it's the moments of beauty and elegance that are the most exciting, but the grinding gears thing is also a necessity. They complement each other. For instance when you're just learning the basics there's a lot of these "wow what an insight" but over time you figure out that people have distilled it into a mechanical procedure, which also has some attraction to it. Something like quadratic equation turns the search for a pair of numbers that add up some one thing and multiply to another into a simple formula. You then use that mechanism to build ever more elaborate ones.
> It seems accepted as an inevitable progress.

I see a pendulum in motion. When Sherlock Holmes was written, we had a very different view on drug use. Back then, it was a capitalist/libertarian utopia, where folks could generally cook up, sell, and use, pretty much anything they could manage. In the early 20th century, abstinence movements got popular, and everything including alcohol was criminalized. Today, we've got (depending where you live) legal alcohol, legal weed, open sales of hallucinogens, and safe injection sites for opiates.

Meth, weird to me, doesn't appear to be a big priority and it's huge in organized crime. Opiates are the villain of today, and the result of that may lead to a sharper distinction between "hard" and "soft" drugs.

There's a big conversation underway about UBI -- opponents see it as encouraging "laziness," which, any honest stoner will admit, cannabis encourages. That could end up swinging the pendulum back the other way. I don't really see any of this as permanent or inevitable
Richard Cory had everything a man could want, power, grace and style.
DNS is totally unauthenticated. It's the NSPs/ISPs you have to worry about, and they are already in bed with the covert spying apparatus of the state.

See also: QUANTUMINSERT
Exactly. It's one thing to, say, do a study that arrives at wrong conclusions because of insufficient controls or subtle mistakes in statistics. Quite another to simply invent patients or make up numbers.
I do not expect that even if there was truth to the matter that war would be a direct consequence. I agree that citing historical false pretexts for war reduces the surface for debate of the validity of allegations of state-sponsored cybercrime. I should not have contributed in this manner. My apologies.
> correct. Hes in jail because hes a flight risk, whilst he is await the outcome of extradition. This extradition is _different_ to the one he was originally hiding from.

Yes, and this has no relevance to the claim you first replied to, and no relevance to the correction I made.

> knowingly publishing government secrets is certainly going to be a specific crime under the heaps of crap thats in the official secrets act.

That would be relevant if the US made allegations to that effect, but they can't because merely publishing government secrets is not a crime in the US. See e.g. the Pentagon Papers publication. So figuring out whether it meets the standard in the UK is irrelevant.

This is not how dual criminality works - you can't say "this is illegal in the US, and this other bit over here is illegal in the UK". The same alleged action must be illegal both places.
Adding snapshot.

Google Search Console Snapshot: https://ik.imagekit.io/nhprvzwvp3t/constant/Screenshot_2021-...

Ahrefs data Snapshot : https://ik.imagekit.io/nhprvzwvp3t/constant/Screenshot_2021-...
A paper with interesting problems for children: http://toomandre.com/travel/sweden05/WP-SWEDEN-NEW.pdf
What two things do they use it to mean? There's literally only one thing it refers to in the original comment: The nth Fibonacci number. Show me the second.

All additional uses of n in that comment are references to that same thing, the nth Fibonacci number.
Update: Did not read and made a low-effort attempt at flippancy. Regret. ... Agree 100% about important design choices in shades and finishes.
Yes!

This one surprised me the most, but people are just tired. Like fried.

Many put a brave face on it, but could use a break. If the chat advanced to where one could really relax and just talk, being tired always came up. And many did not express sadness, just fatigue, sometimes frustration.

"Does it all have to be this hard?"

In my past, I do not recall that expressed as much and from more diverse socioeconomic positions. This sentiment may be majority held now. Just a gut take on arguably small and unscientific samples.

"The Reset" The idea of it all not being sustainable. If it went here, people would roll through examples that concerned them. Some would make connections, but the general feeling of impending doom was far more common than I expected. I am sure more people than we know do not believe things will work out.

And one last disturbing one is along the lines of trading safety for liberty. Tons of people could give two shits about the increased surveillance. More people than I expected harbor and will express basic fear when comfortable enough to share it.
You're a psychopath or paranoid if you don't blindly trust data - without putting some effort into seeing what the quality of the data is and how much evidence supports it???
For people not in on the drama: Anish Kapoor somehow has exclusive rights to Vanta Black, the blackest black paint, so in return, the pinkest pink and now the blackest acrylic paint are banning Anish Kapoor, who for some reason was petty enough to break the ban. I mean, if you want other people to respect your exclusive rights to vanta black, you should at least respect other color exclusivity clauses.

https://www.dezeen.com/2016/12/30/anish-kapoor-uses-stuart-s...
ZeroSSL is limited to three certs per account if you don't pay for ZeroSSL.
It's basically just that the Israeli ministry of defence has to approve their sales because the software is classified as a weapon.

You can't conflate that with the company being an extension of the state though, as the GP did.

They're separate entities with separate objectives. A reasonable comparison would be to Lockheed Martin or Raytheon in the US.
He's tried to clean his image internationally to some extent, but it's obvious in India -- and to anyone who looks into the "riots" -- that he was behind a lot of it. Committing genocide is a big reason for why he was supported and got elected.
I like the end of the article, he says "its concerning, but unless you happen to be a major critic of a government, you probably won't be a target of the spyware tool"

Yeah, okay.
> So, there was a time where a broad statement like that was pretty solid.

That time is approaching 20 years old at this point, too. Native threads haven't been "expensive" for a very, very long time now.

Maybe if you're in the camp of disabling overcommit it matters, but otherwise the application of green threads is definitely a specialized niche, not generally useful.

> In the broad set of use cases though, switching from a thread-based concurrency model to something else isn't going to be the big win people think it will be.

I'd go even further and say it'll be a net-loss in most cases, especially with modern complications like heterogeneous compute. If you're use case is specifically spinning up thousands of threads for IO (aka, you're a server & nothing else), then sure. But if you aren't there's no win here, just complications (like times when you need native thread isolation for FFI reasons, like using OpenGL)
How actively did you try to teach them to do that?
tweet sent https://twitter.com/sltyhkr/status/1417213194540625925
> There's nothing about FOSS that makes something secure, and building secure software is so hard and expensive that my guess is that you needs the sponsorship of a government of major corporation to do so. Some FOSS does have such sponsorships, but a lot doesn't

The F/OSS community has a weird collective amnesia about exploits that rubs me the wrong way -- just because someone can look at it doesn't mean that someone is looking at it, or even that the person looking at it is going to fix it instead of exploit it. Heartbleed was sitting out in the open for 2+ years, despite OpenSSL being a very popular package available under a permissive license.
I enjoy thr Royal Game of Ur and even made my own board. One recommendation I'm trying to propagate is to use 4 "2-sided" randomizers instead of a 4-sided randomized for purposes of more strategic play (normal distribution versus flat). I usually play with a reroll 0s option or my ultimate house rule: 0s get you maximum 1 free reroll token.
You missed a sentence.

"Many of the trials came from the same countries (Egypt, China, India, Iran, Japan, South Korea, and Turkey), and when John Ioannidis, a professor at Stanford University, examined individual patient data from trials submitted from those countries to Anaesthesia during a year he found that many were false: 100% (7/7) in Egypt; 75% (3/ 4) in Iran; 54% (7/13) in India; 46% (22/48) in China; 40% (2/5) in Turkey; 25% (5/20) in South Korea; and 18% (2/11) in Japan."

I find it particularly sad, since actively promoting academic integrity would do more for those countries than anything else, bang-for-your-buck-wise. Instead, many seem to be seeking the appearance of academic success.

(OTOH, I suppose Japan and South Korea may be on that list due to some kind intense pressure to succeed.)
Meta-analysis normally tries to exclude "low-quality" studies but if the standard of honesty in a field or sub-field is truly abysmal, I guess it's GIGO.
Google, the vendor in question here, has been previously busted putting hidden microphones in their hardware.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/security/a264489...
What makes you think NVIDIA did not opt into those ads, and is getting a cut of the revenue?
As someone who is maybe somewhere in the middle (I have a Masters in Maths, but haven't used it in earnest since graduating ~10 years ago) - I found this spot-on. Engaging enough to pull me in, technical enough to give some idea of what exactly is going on, but not too far in either direction.
true, but with airplanes they can at least take you from A to B, so they serve at least some purpose.
Interesting point though, airships come to mind that essentially were just floating cafes / restaurants.
Agreed. That's usually true when anyone including me uses "just" in a sentence like that.
Oh man, it's tough to answer this one well. I just counted up the books I've worked through on my shelf. After college, I've gone through about 15 completely, and partially worked through another 15 or so. Plus a couple reference texts that have been handy. Plus a huge number of papers. They take up nearly twice the space my old college texts do, which is kind of wild to look back on!

Are you curious about anything in particular? Or if you're just wondering what kind of books I'm talking about, highlights include CLRS, Probabilistic Graphical Models, Mostly Harmless Econometrics, and Characters & Viewpoint. Next up on my list are more creative writing books and a couple theoretical stats books (I'm working towards a book on semiparametrics, but first need a better foundation to follow a book I've been recommended).
It was all very long ago, but the NGPT project did M:N threading on Linux (https://web.archive.org/web/20020408103057/http://www-124.ib...).

There were also a number of M:N JVM implementations that were particularly popular in the soft-realtime space back in the early 2000's.

One of the fun trends with computing is that as hardware, software, and applications evolve, ideas that were once not terribly useful suddenly become useful again. It's entirely possible that M:N threads for the JVM is one of those cases, but it's NOT a new idea.
NOTE: article headline has changed from the submitted one after he announced that meant to say unvaccinated: https://twitter.com/uksciencechief/status/141720423535621325...

facepalm
Psychonautics
The US backed Pakistan while it carried out the genocide of between 2.4-3 million hindus in Bangladesh in 1971.

US administration's morality only exists to further it's political goals. Especially when it is not Europe.
My careers book focuses on the non technical side of technical careers and has an audio book! https://www.learninpublic.org/
After reading this thread and being frustrated by the pretty useless exceptions Brython gives, I switched over to using Pyodide (which took 5 minutes, both libraries are pretty simple). There is a huge improvement on usability with Pyodide. It doesn't wrap JavaScript objects in lots of additional structures like Brython does and it actually gives stack traces that end in user code!

I've only been exploring Pyodide for the 10 minutes since I switched over and discovered these two pieces.

I'm curious if there's a good reason to use Brython over Pyodide.

Edit: Ok one weird thing with Pyodide is that I cannot use subscripts with JavaScript objects in Python. I have to use dot accessors. So not `row["age"]` but `row.age`. Kinda weird, not too Pythonic.
Well you’re right about the libraries—Python really does have everything (although sometimes those libraries are not great quality, but at least they mostly work). But Julia makes it easy to use Python libraries with Pycall. And there are big things that just don’t exist yet in the Julia world, such as a web framework. I recently tried to create a web project using Genie.jl, which advertises itself as a ready-for-prime-time web framework for Julia, and I gave up after a few days. It’s just not in the same universe as something like Django, plus it’s barely documented.
Using Prolog for Sudoku Variants
Note: this is for the new RISC-V ESP32 (not the older xtensa based one)
"Without systems that promote quality, non-ideological, nuanced, original, tolerant dialogue we will keep running into the false dilemma of unmoderated cess pools or heavy handed moderation."

Hey you might not have the actual same definition of ideology I have but I think that most people would find "non-ideological" debate basically an impossibility, we can hide ideology with a certain kind of "politeness" if you might but considering what we know about language and how words themselves are loaded I dont even think it is possible to have that kind of debate. I am trying to think the last couple debates I have had both casually and on a more direct setting, and it is impossible for me to see those debates as something that could have been non ideological
You're welcome! I'm getting really close to having the print and ebook editions ready for sale.
I'll give you my two cents, recognizing that I very well might just be ignorant about Julia and multiple dispatch, and if so please continue to educate me.

Consider if we want to run many different types of models. Logistic regression, gradient boosting, NNs, etc. We want the ability to easily plug in any type of model into our existing code base. That's why model.fit(X,Y) is attractive. I just need to change "model = LogisticRegressionModel" to "model = GradientBoostingModel" and the rest of the code should still Just Work. This is a big part of SciKit's appeal.

But all these different models have very different training loops. So with "fit!(model,X,Y)" I need to make sure I am calling the compatible "fit" function that corresponds to my model type.

You might now say "Ah! Multiple dispatch handles this for you. The 'fit' function can detect the type of its 'model' argument and dispatch execution to the right training loop sub function." And I suppose that's theoretically correct. But in practice I think it's worse.

It should be the responsibility of the developer of "model" to select the "fit" algorithm appropriate for "model." (They don't have to implement it, but they do have to import the right one.) The developer of "fit" should not be responsible for handling every possible "model" type. You could have the developer of "model" override / extend the definition of "fit" but that opens up its own can of worms.

So is it possible to do the same thing with "fit!(model,X,Y)"? Yes of course it is. It's possible to do anything with any turing complete language. The point is, which system provides the best developer ergonomics via the right abstractions? I would argue, in many cases, including this one, it's useful to be able to bundle functions and state, even if that is in theory "less flexible" than pure functions, because sometimes programming is easier with less flexibility.
A person taught his son about sine and cosine. He himself got introduced to them as ratios of side lengths in a right triangle, but he didn't like the idea of changing definition when angles become more than 90 degrees, so he defined those functions as abscissa and ordinate of a point on a circle of unit radius, centered at origin.

I think this is not perfect. Education is more of "progressing towards lesser and lesser lies", and changing definitions is an important part. The student might face it when he'll wonder about equation sin x = 2 , which will get to complex numbers.

Similarly, here getting a one less power of x might correspond to "divide by x". But might sometimes not - choosing that it actually does correspond to "divide by x" is a choice. Often obvious, but sometimes not - which is seen in Gelfand's explanation of why "negative multiplied by negative makes positive", or similarly, why 0^0 is 1.

Just saying that "x to one lesser power is the same divided by x" can also be seen as a convention (e.g. for some objects division can be not defined). And if it's a convention, not universal truth... then to somebody who's studying the subject this convention should be justified.
Wow, how brave of them to come out 20 years after this was consensus amongst health professionals.
The pricing page is admittedly confusing, but look carefully at the bottom of the free tier... it says "∞ [infinite] 90-day ACME Certs". It appears to only be limited to 3 if you issue them through the web UI.

Based on documentation elsewhere on the site, it seems to clearly include all kinds of ACME certs, even wildcard, but I've never actually used ZeroSSL myself, as far as I can remember.
This tactic of dipping your true intentions in the aesthetics of progress is new and designed to trick people with a north-star cause to sympathize with the oppressor.

Unfortunately it only takes a few brain cycles for even the simplest of persons to realise that upholding apartheid because #girlpower is a sad stretch and a half.

It's relevant because the goal is to delegitimize criticism of apartheid and it's export of oppression to its neighbours.

There is no other point of relevance to my original comment and, in all honesty, it amounts to blatant propogandising. I'll just leave it at that.
Disagree - or maybe I just don't know what high-school level is.
Hey, Finally a way to make the lines of a BMW attractive... ;-)
The Carboniferous was roughly 60 million years long. And oxygen levels were much higher than today. This showed up in large insects. For example they had dragonflies over 2 feet wide - that's over 6x as large as the largest today.
The way to reduce friction is to reduce the number of tools and frameworks.
Maybe a small Python engine (MicroPython, Snek [2]) on WebAssembly might also fit some niche uses.

MicroPython has a version working in the browser using unicorn.js (which emulates ARM CPU). [3]

[1] https://micropython.org/
[2] https://sneklang.org/
[3] https://micropython.org/unicorn/
That's true, all of that wattage is being turned into heat in the metal of the wok itself. But, like the other commenter to my post alluded to, a common wok cooking method in restaurants involves tossing the food up into the air, where presumably the food is being heated directly by the heat of the flames. In a home-cooking environment that would likely not be the case, and heat conduction even on a gas stove is primarily through contact with the wok.
There was a study of psych papers that had worse results than the CS one (which might be cited here https://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2020/8/246369-threats-of-a-re...)

Having trouble finding them again...

I experienced the effects of this as a PhD student. While trying to write a paper and compare results, I was unable to reproduce the competing ideas results. I came across one author who published better results without code or data any time anyone compared to and beat his results. I suspect he is highly fraudulent. He only seems to publish in Springer rather than they typical conferences for the field
I just watched this video a few hours ago because youtube randomly recommended it to me.

I wonder if it's just the Baader–Meinhof effect or if the post was caused by the same youtube algorithm.
You're right. We should make exceptions to free speech only for recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally:
-making unreasonable noise and continuing to do so after being asked to stop
-disrupting a lawful assembly of persons
-speech made for the principal purpose of creating panic
-if the speaker intends to incite a violation of the law that is both imminent and likely.

My solution to the original problem would be to make it technologically unfeasible to solve. The architecture of the communication platform should be constrained in such a way that operators & owners are unable to make choices about which speech to include. This is because nobody is equipped to solve this problem, and nobody should be forced to do anything to try and solve it.
Bloomberg don’t want me to know (paywalled)
99.9% sure that I did, but I had to transcribe the address by hand since I couldn't long-press to copy it like I expected. Tapping the email address in the app opens Mail.app, which I've never bothered to set up in 6 years of iphone usage.
Page/Site is down.
The purists will not approve because he did not sing any hateful lyrics about Docker != serverless.
> In the meantime, Google and Amazon simply ignore all complaints about spam originating from their networks

How did we get to equating selling tools for murdering journalists to spam in just three comments?
It's full on IPFS with a bit of IPFS on top.
You are trying to take a very general statement and make it a statement only about one very specific subset. That does not mean that someone pointing out your logical flaws is falling into the converse fallacy.

It's like someone writes an article about drought in the west, and you're saying that they must really be talking about El Centro, California. Yes, it probably includes El Centro, but it's also talking about Phoenix, and LA, and Salt Lake City, because it's really talking about the west as a whole. Trying to make it be "about" El Centro is missing the point.