skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
False.

Jeffrey S. Dukes, "Burning Buried Sunshine" (2003)

Marine sediments produced the majority (about 86%) of the world’s petroleum, while deltaic and lacustrine sediments yielded smaller amounts (about 11% and 3%, respectively) (Demaison, 1993). The organic matter in carbon-rich marine sediments is primarily composed of the remains of phytoplankton. The percentage of annually fixed organic carbon that accumulates in sediment (the PF) is difficult to estimate because it can vary over several orders of magnitude, depending on the length of time that organic matter experiences oxic conditions, and on other factors (Bralower and Thierstein, 1987; Bordenave, 1993; Canfield, 1994; Gélinas et al., 2001). Two types of marine settings are thought to have been the major environments for the formation of petroleum source rocks: silled basins with oxygen-deficient waters, and highly productive upwelling zones (which generated 78% and 8% of world petroleum stocks, respectively; Demaison, 1993).

https://www-legacy.dge.carnegiescience.edu/DGE/Dukes/Dukes_C...

Duke's paper goes on to estimate that the fossil fuels (coal and natural gas in addition to petroleum) consumed in 1997 represent over 400 times the current net primary production (plant growth) on Earth, and the petroleum consumed that year represents five million years of accumulated ancient biomass.

(The reason for the difference is that whilst conversion from biomass to fossil fuels gives the first value, the additional geological losses in forming and preserving petroleum over hundreds of millions of years give rise to the five-million-fold factor. Fossil fuels are a very lossy battery.)
Amazon “conditions of use” now preclude arbitration
> What I meant by accountability is deeper: people are not accountable for the quality or utility of their work, hence the endless tidal wave of corrupt and deceptive research that pours out of government funded 'science' every day. These researchers probably filled out their expenses paperwork correctly but the final resulting paper was an exercise in circular reasoning, or the data tables were made up, or it was P-hacked or whatever. And nobody in government cares or even notices, because nobody is held accountable for the quality of the outputs.

Have you ever received and administered a grant? I have to ask. You seem pretty certain about how it works, but it just doesn't match with my experience.

You say that there's no accountability in results and this leads to people committing fraud. In my experience, fraud happens when there is too high of an expectation that researchers can't meet. Let's say you get a $5 million grant to do X, and in the course of doing X you find out it's not possible. You have a negative result. First of all, good luck publishing a negative result. Without that publication, good luck getting the next grant.

High expectations for results incentivize fraud. There should be room for researchers to come up short with their research and still be able to progress in their careers. But when grants dry up, the publications dry up and then your career is derailed by failing to get tenure.

The fact is that not everyone can be researching world-changing technologies. That's just not a realistic expectation. Even Google can't do that, as much as you laud a profit motive (how many Google projects are in the trash right now?). But that's what we expect of everyone who gets grant money, precisely for the reason that people have an expectation that an immediate and tangible ROI must be demonstrated.

I don't know if you consider people at funding agencies like the NSF as part of the government, but they do notice when projects fall short, and they do deny 80% of grant applications (I would consider that accountability).
To be fair, it seems like a lot of backup systems were (properly) designed to recover data for when a single computer or drive or database fails or gets overwritten or specifically attacked -- but not for an wide-ranging attack where every networked computer gets wiped.

All the stuff in this article is great scenarios to think about (recovery time, key location, required tools), but it's still all at the backup design phase. The headline of "test your backups" seems misleading -- you need to design all these things in before you even try to test them.

It seems like a real problem here is simply that backup strategies were often designed before Bitcoin ransomware became prevalent, and execs have been told "we have backups" without probing deeper into whether they're the right kind of backup.

In other words, there's no such single thing as "having backups", but rather different types of backup+recovery scenarios that either are or aren't covered. (And then yes, test them.)
"Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I wonder how much selection/sampling bias there is. It’s probably a lot easier for JetBrains to publicize this to people who are more likely to use JetBrains software. People who use CLion/PyCharm, may be much less likely to use Visual Studio.

The Embedded section has no usage listed at all for Keil uVision or STMcube. That’s quite strange to me — not that they would be some small fraction, but that they would be entirely absent.
Aah thanks for that feedback - Out of curiosity, and if you don't have an answer all good it's not your job at all haha, but:

How would you go about explaining our pricing to a peer/what would you change about the page to make it more clear?

Thanks in advance :)
> TypeScript [...] adds to the bundle size.

tbh i haven't checked, but isn't the transpilation step for typescript just stripping out the type annotations? TSC is build-time only, so it won't factor into your bundle size, and i can't imagine the generated JS is significantly bigger than source -- if anything, it should be smaller ;p
There's significant misalignment of incentives at play here (irrespective of company, generally).

Many "management types" are measured solely and almost entirely by the bottom line - the share price in a traded company, or profits in a private company. Share price is based usually on profits. Usually they're delivering reporting to their boss or the board quarterly. Every dime they save this quarter is "profit" in their eyes.

Obviously there's a line here - you don't want to save the dime that causes the factory to burst into flames and result in 4 months of production downtime. But if that dime can be saved this quarter when times are tough, you'll be seen as a well-performing hero, and next quarter you'll spend a few dimes getting the sprinkler system inspected... Until you need the boost to profits next quarter too(!)

In management and generally in business it's hard to go backwards. Nobody wants to increase their spend on IT unless they are making more money. If they could sign a new deal this quarter, they'll probably give you a decent percentage of that deal as IT budget to get the deal signed (factoring in the risk of the customer not signing).

But in an environment focused almost entirely on pursuit of unrelenting growth of profit or revenue or share price, security simply won't become a priority until you can convince manager-types that the issue is commercial and measurable and that it impacts the bottom line. Even if the issue is unexpected costs of recovery from a breach, the first questions they'll ask are "How likely is it to happen? What will it cost? Can we insure against it? What do our competitors do?" - it's not about preventing the breach, it's about defraying the potential loss of profits without compromising on growth or profits when it isn't a problem.

Hence you'll see people hired to fill roles (new or existing) then being hamstrung by a total and outright refusal to act, because it isn't a commercial problem. Skilled tech leaders are good at turning the problems into language leaders can understand, but there is a limit and a line, and the solution in my view is clear regulation the leaders can "get", involving individual penalties and obligations of competency - even if your core business isn't safety, you have safety obligations as a business to your employees, contractors and the public. It's expected and required that you become suitably competent to do this, or get the expertise to do so, but with you still liable. We need the same for security (in my view).

It's not all bad news - I'm a "management type", but from an almost entirely technical background. Bean counting isn't my style... Maybe we can infiltrate more organisations and bring some basic engineering understanding to decision making? It's frustrating to see most hide behind MBA-waffle though rather than try to actually do real things that make a difference.
Ben and Jerry's Stops Sales of Ice Cream in Palestinian Territories
That's what the article is about, you should check it out!
Linked lists are better for immutable/persistent structures
Email received today: "One of our updates involves how disputes are resolved between you and Amazon. Previously, our Conditions of Use set out an arbitration process for those disputes. Our updated Conditions of Use provides for dispute resolution by the courts."

And in the conditions themselves: "We each waive any right to a jury trial."
Very literally: just pick one, even if it's at random.

People have this awesome ability to work around all kinds of inefficiencies and stumbling blocks. If you had nothing else but pen and paper which you then submit to another person who somehow feeds it to a machine you would still find ways to achieve what you want efficiently.

Remember what people were able to do with punch cards!

Once you have a better understanding of the thing you're learning you'll be able to make your own reasoned choices about tools.
No, because this is written in broken English, and is ambiguous. If you want to make kids think that math is all about "ha, gotcha! Technically this question could be interpreted to mean X" then by all means this is an excellent question. Anyone with a basic understanding of English would have phrased the question differently, unless they were a Russian with a mediocre understanding of English syntax, or were purposely trying to be clever and ambiguous. Both are probably true in this case.
Not really. But with tools like CertBot and ACME Terraform Providers, (or just a periodic cronjob), it's not too difficult to keep your certs up to date. (just don't spam their prod provisioning servers).
The Results here aren't from the GPIO operations, so that's not really relevant.
"it is thought that this happened 6 times in earth's history... all living creatures were wiped out... only to begin again..."

interesting. If true, doesn't this have implications for Sagan's Equation? i.e. if life is wiped out and it (somehow) starts again, that implies that any planet like Earth will develop complex life forms given enough time? (or am I missing something...)
I mean weed, psilocybin, shrooms, peyote, LSD, and MDMA are all pretty effective without a prescription.
I always thought paying the Ransom was about the customer, PII, financial, and HR records/systems that are breached, less about getting the business back online. What a sorry state of affairs that it's both.
Does "desk-rejected" mean it was rejected by an editor who decided the paper was so wrong it wasn't even necessary to get a referee report? (I am familiar with the scientific publication process being a mathematician, but have never seen the term "desk-rejected" before, it may be a CSism.)

EDIT: Huh, "desk-rejected" is a common term not just in CS but also in medicine and other fields. It means, as I thought, rejected by an editor without even getting a referee report. I do think even though that thing does happen in math, the term "desk-rejection" is not used.
Wasn’t trustworthiness what “peer reviewed journals” was all about? Clearly research fraud isn’t “seeking the truth.”
Thanks! So its no just me. This feels like reading one of those Haskell-Blogs: certainly impressive, where author explains the dimensions along which this solution is superior, but its just incomprehensible brainfuck and doesn't pass any standards of beauty.

I've written some Rust; I know it is workable, and "if it compiles it works" is mostly true. But its so ugly.
Owning is nice. But it's more limited and more time consuming. There's a cost associated with that.

I'm not sure I agree that owning is limiting, it can be more time consuming if you don't want to hire people to do the work that the condo gives you "for free", but there are few limits.

In my last condo, a neighbor spent months trying to get approval to put a pre-fab sauna on her outdoor patio, she submitted the architectural review forms, made several changes so it would "fit into the character of the complex" even though it was on a back deck facing a natural area, no one would see it unless they walked in that 5 foot strip of land behind the complex. I'm not sure if it ever go approved, I moved out before she had final approval.

On the other hand, my wife and I decided on a whim a few months ago that we wanted to put in a hot tub in our new house’s back yard. We talked to a contractor, he came out and did a site survey, then put us on a wait list for a hot tub. A few weeks later, he had a returned unit (new owner didn't like the way it looked) that matched what we wanted, the next week he brought it out and installed it. The whole process took about a month from start to finish, and probably could have taken a week or two if demand wasn't so high.
> Why road transport at all instead of via by military aircraft/helicopter instead, at least for the majority of the way?

Failure modes. Trucks crashing are, while more frequent, less energetic than planes. There's an elevated risk of capture, but that is more manageable.
Appreciate that feedback! The existing designs are about 2 years old and we've just spent some time redesigning certain parts of the marketing website (rolling out the new homepage first). Did lots of customer calls and are pretty excited about it!

I'll be sure to ping you once it's live. Alternatively... would love your feedback before it's live if you're up for it :)

hiba at hypercontext.com. We can even loop in our UX designer who is also the marketing designer. :)

Lmk!! Would really love to connect
Unfortunately the "geometry" involved is not the kind of geometry that lends itself towards being easily drawn to give understanding.

If you had to draw a picture of it, it would just be a sphere (since it shares many properties with a genus 0 complex curve).

But it's a very different beast than usual geometric shapes. A lot of modern number theory is motivated by an analogy between "p and t", where t is a parameter in a polynomial like t^2 - 2, and where p is a prime number. This space takes the analogy to an extreme where p literally is the parameter for the space[0], like t would be a parameter for the real line.

[0]Not exactly true - true for the "disk" cover of the FF curve.
> In Massachusetts, for example, a house that spends $1,200 in a winter on natural gas would spend over $6,000 on electric resistance heat

Just buy it from Quebec at 0.05$/KWh. They have been willing to sell it at that price for decades. Bonus, completely green. [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_%E2%80%93_New_England_T...
Although an exageration, I know what you mean. I hope for a better future, and while I am waiting, I need to be allowed to exist. App Stores are an existential threat
It's also the norm in some fields to provide only high level info in the methods section, often without supplemental method details accompanying. This makes it even harder to tell if they did the work correctly, because usually half the methods are intermediate steps which don't have any results directly reported in the paper. In a perfect world those methods would be uniform across labs, but in practice they definitely are not, and it makes tracing down the source of honest replication differences a nightmare.

There's also no way to really know if the researcher entirely left out 10 other tests they tried that failed. Sometimes you can guess that it's a stretch because of the stupid categories they use (I'm reminded of those ESPN graphics that say things like "most home runs on a rainy Tuesday in June"). But it's harder to detect if someone straight up removes data points, repeats tests and reports only the nicest, etc.

So at some point you basically need to be an insider in the field so you hear the gossip about what doesn't replicate. Or if you have access to thousands of dollars to blow you could try a dozen different variations to try getting it to replicate yourself.

I think for something like COVID that is actively affecting many people, there should be funding explicitly for replicating studies, and some slots reserved in a prestigious journal for the findings of the replications. I get that it is not feasible to be replicating everything in science, but I don't see why we can't have ~one lab per relevant university department that specializes in replicating important studies. If you make that a path towards becoming a tenured prof I think that could change the culture surrounding replication studies in general.
Extend.
> Do you have an example of someone who holds that belief?

Which belief? The belief that corporate spyware devices and software are infinitely superior to anything in the F/L/OSS world? I literally can't escape 'em. Especially in "gamer" circles, I get endlessly hassled by Windows users tryin'a convince me with decades old Steve Ballmer FUD that Linux is inferior junk and a cancer on the software industry, and that I should just switch to Windows.

> That feels like one of those stereotypes that people are sure exists but actually doesn’t.

Sadly, you name a stereotype, and I promise you there's people out there that'll do their best to prove that stereotype true. Cryin' shame, because they're just doin' harm to an entire group of folks who never asked for it, and harming an entire other group that believes false stereotypes are true by reinforcing their wrongness with "proof".

As to the bein' called "paranoid" from my earlier comment, it happens to me frequently when I try to talk to people about backups, network security practices, or passwords, and I'm not alone there. I've had more'n a few discussions with other IT folks who've met frequent resistance to security ideas until after there's been an issue, and then the "people in charge" still generally wanna seek the absolute minimum solution they can get that they think would cover their asses, even if it's nowhere close to enough of a solution for the problem at hand.
Post history suggests further inquiry is unlikely to be useful.
You can get pretty far with nodejs, plain JavaScript, and express or something.
Every government dev I know who isn't a manager will strongly disagree with the "professional management" take. People generally don't become managers of government dev shops because they're great at managing people. They become managers because they're what's left after everyone else has gone on to do other things.
A magnetic pole reversal wouldn't do it, but a sufficiently large change in the rotation would. Of course, to get such a big shift would take an asteroid hitting us...
You have plenty of choices: Netflix, prime, apple, crave, cbcgem, Paramount, acorn, mlb, nhl all access.

Add them together and it cost more than cable and cable offers more shows.

I have cable. I subscribe to a number of streaming services. I get more out of a weekly show where you wait vs having all shows available.

If you compare the circle vs big brother. Both are similiar shows equally good or bad depending on your preference. Binging all of circle at once is enjoyable but having a new big brother show to look forward to tonight offers something else.

I often tape shows and fast forward commericials if I feel ADHDish or leave them if I'm feeling lazy.
I don't think people understand burnout.

If your kid is studying 16 hours per day, bored, you're gonna get burnout.

Burnout isn't about challenge -- which is good. If you have dinner table conversations about hard topics, that isn't leading to burnout.
It probably wasn't Linux 5.0 though, was it?

There likely were also some nasty, performance-sacrificing hacks involved. A comment above mentions "booting a riscv vm".
If your data structure is immutable, then an array is always faster than a linked list.
Since the telemetry is opt-in, some people disagree that Audacity should be called "spyware" for including it as an option. From the original pull request:

> Telemetry is strictly optional and disabled by default. No data is shared unless you choose to opt-in and enable telemetry.

https://github.com/audacity/audacity/pull/835

Ars Technica published an article describing the controversy as "massively overblown" and I agree with their analysis:

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/07/no-open-source-audac...
> Pegasus “activates your camera, your microphone, all that which forms an integral part of your life.”

Purism might have an opportunity here to pitch journalists on their hardware switches
One thing that has irked me about everyone's flippant comments about moving to the cloud is that the "devops as a recovery mechanism" generally only works for single-app startups or small shops with only a few dozen simple VMs at most.

Some of my customers have thousands of VMs in their cloud, and they aren't cloned cattle! They're pets. Thousands upon thousands of named pets. Each with their individual, special recovery requirements. This then has a nice thick crust of PaaS and SaaS layered on top in a tangle of interdependencies that no human can unravel.

Some resources were built using ARM templates. Some with PowerShell scripts. Some with Terraform. A handful with Bicep. Most with click-ops. These are kept in any one of a dozen source control systems, and deployed mostly manually by some consultant that has quit his consulting company and can't be reached.

Most cloud vendors "solve" this by providing snapshots of virtual machines as a backup product.

Congratulations big vendors! We can now recover exactly one type of resource out out of hundreds of IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS offerings. Well done.

For everything else:

WARNING: THIS ACTION IS IRREVERSIBLE!

Fantastic. No worries though, I can... err... export the definition, right? Wrong. That doesn't work for something like 50% of all resource types. Even if it "works", good luck restoring inter-dependent resources in the right order.

Okay, you got things restored! Good job! Except now your DNS Zones have picked a different random pool of name servers and are inaccessible for days. Your PaaS systems are now on different random IP addresses and noone can access them because legacy firewall systems don't like the cloud. All your managed identities have reset their GUIDs and lost their role assignments. The dynamically assigned NIC IP addresses have been scrambled. Your certificates have evaporated.

"But, but, the cloud is redundant! And replicated!" you're just itching to say.

Repeat after me:

A synchronous replica is not a backup.

A synchronous replica is not a backup.

A synchronous replica is not a backup.

Repeat it.

Do you know what it takes to obliterate a cloud-only business, permanently and irreparably?

Two commands.

I won't repeat them here, because like Voldemort's name it simply invites trouble to speak them out loud.
Hmm I interpreted “two floor apartment” incorrectly it seems.
I've used chrome's ability to save a single .mhtml file that contains all the resources for this purpose in the past.
Sometimes things that "feel" dangerous can be safer due to the extra attention garnished.

That, and the beta is simply really small.
It doesn’t work like that in every place in the world. Those gift cards also aren’t that easy. It’s all taxable benefit to the employee and a cost for the company to put on the books. That needs to be justified and tax office may really slap you on the wrist for doing so.
The author comes across as an insufferable know-it-all.