skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
People massively underestimate how much work it takes to turn an idea for a story into a working novel with a coherent plot and characters

A common piece of advice often repeated for fiction writing: when you finish your novel, leave it untouched for a few months (e.g. six months). When you return to read it again with a fresh eye, you'll spot all the clunky passages, clichés, and poorly written characters you didn't spot when you were immersed in the writing. The space of a few months gives you a more critical eye.

That's the advice. Whether writers actually heed it I don't know. (A pause of some months might feel too long for some writers itching to be published.)
Regardless, if Square were to offer legitimate 2FA I would probably feel more comfortable using their debit card for daily life..Can't seem to find any details regarding this on the FAQ though.
Sounds like the 1990s App Edition. (Remember bancassurance, universal banking, etc.)
Right, this is a small infelicity in Rust, it is easier to write

let x = size as i32;

... even if what you meant was closer to

let x: i32 = size.try_into().expect("We are 100% sure size is small enough to fit into x");

But at least it isn't C or C++ where you might accidentally write

x = size;

... and the compiler doesn't even warn you that size is bigger than x and you need to think about what you intended.

It's really hard to fix this in C++. Some of the Epoch proponents want to do so using epochs to get there, basically you'd have a "new" epoch of C++ in which narrowing must be explicit, and old code would continue to have implicit narrowing so it doesn't break.
I think people get confused when they think that each object has a wave function. This is not correct. The universe has one wave function. The wave function consists of a bunch of possible states along with the coefficient for each state. You can think of each state as being a distinct snapshot of what the universe might look like - including for example the position and spin of each particle. In the example of two electrons shown here, the wave function has non-zero coefficients only for states where the two electron spins are in opposite directions.

When we make a measurement, the state of the universe appears to collapse, meaning any state that is not consistent with that measurement disappears. This means the other electron is left in the opposite spin state. (Important aside here, some people believe the wave function collapses, "Copenhagen interpretation" and some people believe the wave function doesn't change but the the brain of the observer correlates/entangles with the electron, "Many Worlds Interpretation". Either way there is an operational collapse of the wave function.)

A special case for a wave function is when the coefficients are arranged so that state of one particle, say particle 1 spin, is symmetric no matter what the state of another particle, particle 2, is. This special case is when particles are NOT entangled.

(Edit: added paragraph on measurement)
"Scientific reality" is in the eyes of the beholder, unfortunately. Plenty of people will happily accept 'the science says' type statements if it's something they already believe in.

Show them something that goes against those beliefs, and suddenly you'll be fielding skepticisms of sample sizes, P-values, the ideological leanings of the principal investigators, etc.

People do not live their lives governed by scientific knowledge, and ignoring that isn't going to change the status quo.
The problem with your classical analogy for entanglement is that it doesn't match the data. Or rather, it only matches the data for quantum properties that are similarly blue or red.

The non-classical properties of entanglement start appearing once you start measuring combinations of the redness and blueness of those balls.

Let's say that instead of looking at the balls, you pass them through some machine that will let a red ball pass through with some probability P that you control; if the ball is blue, the machine will let it pass with probability 1-P. Let's say further that you have three such machines. You set the first machine to P=1. You pass each ball falling from this machine through a second machine, which has P = 0. You will never see a ball pass through to the end - if it were red, it would pass the first machine, but not the second; if it were blue, it would not pass the first machine at all.

But, let's say you now put a third machine between the other two, and you set P = 0.5. With classical balls, nothing changes - a blue ball doesn't make it past the first machine, while a red ball goes through the first, may or may not pass the second, and never makes it through the third regardless.

However, a quantum ball actually has a chance to pass through the 3 machines if you set it up this way. In fact, that chance is pretty large - more than half of the balls will start passing once you add the middle filter machine.

Still, this is easy to explain if we assume that the middle machine actually paints the ball instead of just detecting its color. This is where the entanglement experiment comes in: if you pass the pair of balls through the three machines, with ball 1 passing through machines P=1 and P=0.5, and ball 2 passing through P=1, you will find that sometimes both balls make it through, even though both balls can't be red at the same time, and they can't communicate about passing through the P=0.5 machine (you can repeat the experiment with the balls being taken arbitrarily far away before passing through the filters).
In this thought experiment, we'd be able to redesign the whole road infrastructure. I'd say mandating smaller cars would be a huge savings in general.
And having elected Trump, what did they get aside from triggering the libs?

I see a fair bit of attempts at understanding. Liberals love to write books like "The Righteous Mind" and "What's The Matter With Kansas?", attempting to understand conservatives from a liberal point of view. I can't think of anything comparable on the right. Progressives seem to me desperate to understand and cater to conservatives, and it feels like the only thing conservatives want is to make my life harder.

It could very well be that I'm just not listening hard enough. That seems to be the response every time liberals lose elections: "understand harder", because the problem is with me. But I'm starting to think that maybe I do understand: they don't want anything from me except someone to be angry at, and whatever despair they're undergoing is more about the deliberate induction of that despair than anything I actually do.
"..then the calculus will be different."

We only get to "then" by challenging the norms we are faced with "now". The question is do we want to move forward to a more accepting world, or settle for the narrow, judgmental mess we've inherited.
A few years ago I was in Baltimore for a conference at Johns Hopkins. Decided to visit the museum. I was blown away by how good it is, and it's completely free. Definitely recommend it if you're ever in Baltimore.
The Covid recession lasted 2 months, the shortest in U.S. history
Only if you can completely isolate the balls so their states don't decohere. That is not practically possible to achieve, particularly since in your scenario you reach into the bag and touch the balls. As soon as you interact with the balls in any way, you become entangled with them and the behavior of the system becomes classical.
What's unique about the US system is its scale. It's 48,000 miles of graded, standardized highways with safety features, exits, services, etc. There's just nothing like that anywhere and it helped our country develop in the unique way that it did.

The idea definitely germinated in the Autobahn. The proof is in the pudding. (I just love that expression.) The US used its scaled interstate system to achieve a range of product and population distribution that was unprecedented. It also clobbered passenger rail in the process. Conversely, Europe, not having a well developed interstate (would need to be inter-country to even scale to a few US states), did not develop or extend its road system in the way the US has. Instead, it built trains.

It's not a matter of one is better than the other. Each one is better for the countries involved because of their size and geography.
> In France, you can walk from your apartment to the metro, change to the regional train, and even go international without getting in a car.

This is absolutely possible to do in the USA. When I worked with an engineering team in Copenhagen I did it several times a year. I don’t even live in NYC.

Even domestically I can take the train from my West Coast city to the airport, fly and then take the train to my family in the Virginia suburbs.
Microsoft is considering turning on by default checked arithmetic in the 2022 Visual Studio templates, by the way.
3 is underappreciated and incredibly important (it should be #1) for the simple reason than labor cost. You have to pay flight attendants/rail attendants and that starts adding up.

Moreover a rail attendant/engineer for a long haul trip cannot be back at home to family at the end of the day, for a transcontinental flight attendant or pilot it's possible, so the labor pool is meaningfully different, and supply and demand is a thing.
"I have a friend who took a couple of different jobs, and hated them all. He just decided that all jobs suck, and stuck with the last one for a long time."

Yeah, that's basically my view - they will all have issues
True, hard work and skilled work are not opposites, but you can work less hard doing skilled work (it's almost the definition of skilled work), and still have a bigger impact than someone working very hard at unskilled work.

I probably should have used the phrase "unskilled work" in my original post, but I was trying to convey the person's frustrations about "hard work." From an outsiders perspective, a skilled knowledge worker doesn't look like they're working very hard, but we know that's not true.
Joel Simon on AI Art and Artbreeder
It does, it just depends on your register, and they also change regularly.

Shit and damn used to be taboo, but they haven't been now for a while. However (in the American dialect, I think) "cunt" is pretty taboo, as well as the various racial terms, and "fuck" can be taboo depending on the context (i.e. you wouldn't use it to address your server at a restaurant).
It seems mainly concerned with companies that deal with cryptocurrencies. I wonder if private wallets will be affected.
This is definitely useful tech for space tourism. We can debate the size of the market and the exact demand curve, but I’m sure there are a decent number of people who will pay the expected sticker price of a few hundred K to go to space. And prices will only go down.
I'd love to see more emphasis on smaller, more numerous space telescopes. JWST will be great when it launches, and it's impossible to overstate how awesome Hubble has been, but space is big and time on these largest scopes will be very valuable.

There's a ton of work being done on ordinary 1m and smaller telescopes. As you say, space has big advantages in atmospheric, temperature, sun, and weather factors that may allow a smaller orbiting telescope to do work that would require a larger terrestrial scope. I'd love to see enough scopes in space that (1) ordinary Astro 102 students could do a lab assignment to point a satellite-based telescope at an object and take an image and (2) researchers could have more frequent surveys of the sky to find transient objects.
Can't say I have perfect intuition on it either, but the closes I've gotten was by reading this book: https://www.qisforquantum.org
B.C.C.I.: The Dirtiest Bank of All (1991)
Huggingface finally get a stable inference serving env for their 10k+ models
The local DQ sign says $16/hr all positions, so yeah I think they are.
This is true. Having an extra few hundred dollars made a huge difference to me since I was always juggling the payday vs rent money as well.

Credit cards are not easy to get with no credit history either. I eventually was able to get a card but it had a $250 limit.
> She seems so old-fashioned today, but how many of us would be up for watching a hot new comedian on Netflix gabbing cockily about how we need to get over n*** and f***?

If you are using symbols indicating quotations, then you don't do unmarked editorial alterations. The quote from the article is “...get over nigger and faggot?”

By making the changes without marking them as editorial alterations (e.g., “...n[*****] and f[*****]”) you are misattributing your prudishness to the source article.
They aren’t “death” but only frozen.
I would not be one of the researches that are digging into the ice!
Big step towards peace. The persistence of the illegal occupation is one of the biggest road blocks to peace.
> try to avoid stringy types and add a lot of validations

Right there you've stated a key practice that may, by itself, be 80% of the solution. Of course there's no "right" set of of types, but just putting the work into thinking about the types and the essential constraints will drive towards exposing and eliminating assumptions that will come back to bite later.

Another huge chunk of problems can come from over-reliance on language primitive types. Is that numeric field really an integer, meaning that any signed value representable in 32, 64, or however many bits, including zero, is valid? Probably not. To give an example: A person's age is not an signed integer, it's a duration, we don't expect it to be negative. Maybe we should flag values above 90 or 100. If you're doing a one-off, that's the sort of thing you can code once and forget. If you dataset migration is your business, your Age type needs to be more robust, and perhaps there's even a need for the behavior of Age to vary with the domain.
Vantage AWS Cost Leaderboard
"View Source" may be helpful if you're just seeing a blank page.
Propaganda. Orban is a dictator in everything but name, like Putin.

He stacked the courts and government servants with loyalists. He controls over 90% of the media. The election system is corrupted to the point that nobody else can win.

He's been in charge for 11 years with no signs of leaving
Wait how does a user space daemon exhausting its stack lead to a kernel panic?
>Catholic Church just wanted to have the last word on who was allowed to use printing presses.

Which is the way government is treating big tech, government wants the last word on "truth." Sounds like you are agreeing with my analogy.
At 1% 100,000 or so max.
there is this tee - Baltimore, Actually I Like It - you need it fam. Been here for 31 years, working in IT now, raising a family and all that. Balto is cool.

https://atomicbooks.com/products/baltimore-actually-shirt
Instead the extortionary practices will be moved to the foreign exchange rate or some other more opaque mechanism.
> Step it up or step out, Bezos.

So much negativity in this whole topic, IMO due to Bezos's involvement.

Space is hard technically, politically, financially, so the more entrants in the space race the better. Every space program, government or private, has started off small and built on what they learn.
Our lawsuit against ChessBase
Fireworks explosion that injured 17 caused by ‘human error’ from bomb squad
It's not top 10, but at 10.4 liters consumed per capita it looks like it might be number 11. Not exactly not a problem.
Taking a look, I don't really see any concrete lessons to take away. Maybe the most concrete thing is that a 3 block is valued at 20 while a 2 block is valued at 8.

Unfortunately, this heuristic is probably just arbitrary, and nearly any set of weights would probably still produce a meaningful result since the main strategy is just Expectimax search. Disappointing. I was really hoping for some intuition that a human could apply
Hiding the economics has been successful so far. When stimulus options and eviction moratoriums finally run out, we can assess the economy at that time.

This is seriously jumping the gun. Well in advance.
Not a physicist, but my answer to you is that usually superliminal speeds is the price that physicists are willing to pay to explain what is observed in experiment. I get your objection to the rather convoluted argument that special relativity still applies to message transfer, but I accept it. John Preskill explains the information within entanglement with an analogy to a book. Normally with a book, you can read one page seperately from all the other pages. Further, if you unbound the book, and randomly distributed the pages to your friends, you could put your heads together and reconstruct the entire book. With a "quantum book", the information is encoded in the correlations between the observables, and you can only see the information when all the pages of the book are together and in the correct order. If you look at a single page of the quantum book, it's purely random gibberish, and you can't derive anything about the book by looking at a part of it.
I've frequently seen "Buddhism" adopted by westerners from a secular or Judeo/Christian background and treated as though it's some sort of feel-good practice which lets them feel vaguely superior to other religions without any serious changes in beliefs or practices.

I saw a well regarded movie recently where the main characterized Buddhism as "a philosophy rather than a religion" which made it clear that no Asians had been involved in the making of that film. I was with a friend at a Asian market and he looked snottily at some of the Buddha statues and said "Those don't have any relationship with _my_ religion". I wanted to ask if they'd ever been in a Thai restaurant. It's such a dismissal of the way Buddhism has been practiced in cultures for a couple thousand years - but this white American clearly knows better.
Yep, I can totally relate. I found multiple bugs in a MessagePack JS implementation that were related to this issue.

I also worked on a project once where unique IDs of objects could get quite large (because they were random u64 integers). Those IDs were serialized and sent to a browser. Sometimes two objects were viewed as "the same" in the browser application because their IDs were truncated by the floating point precision issue.
When I got to this line "Ever since I started Stonemaier Games–and with increasing frequency–people have come to me with their ideas." my first thought was about screenplays.

Many people who are actually working in the filmmaking business will absolutely refuse to even glance at a screenplay that doesn't come to them from an agent or a producer or someone else they know who is actually working in the filmmaking business. The primary reason is that they may already be working on a project like the one in the screenplay being offered to them. If they read the offered screenplay they may be opening themselves to some really annoying legal hassles. So they just tell the would be screenwriter to take their screenplay to an agent.

I wondered whether the same kinds of legal hassles happen in the games industry. Does someone come up with an idea, offer it to a game company or a game developer, and then call a lawyer if they get told the idea is already in development?
No it won't. A few years ago, we had an Amtrak passenger train come off a bridge over I-5 between Olympia and Seattle at 78mph, ending up on the freeway.

Three fatalities. Seventy-two people transported to hospital.

Fun fact: I was on the first fire engine that arrived on that accident.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Washington_train_derailme...
Also bookmarked, but also read 80% of it. The author is talking terabytes of data, but I see some overlap with my own humble 'backup flow' (as I call it).

In my case, I'm doing a couple of gigabytes max. I made a distinction between my essential files on one big USB stick (what I need to get going again in case of a broken computer), and the bigger files like audio and pictures on another big USB stick. I also use rsync (mostly) and a mysqldump per database, all nicely in a bash script that I can quickly run but also quickly change.
The USB stick is FAT formatted and the contents are not zipped or otherwise compressed. Just plain files as I saw them on my origin computer, easily accessible with other computers than my Ubuntu machines. And the most important part, I can quickly verify the success of the backup with my own eyes. Is that important file also backed up? Yes, it is!

I also decided on and implemented a 'backup flow' wherein I:
- set up new computers with the least amount of files copied from the previous machine (this is done manually, and usually I take one week in which I gradually transfer the files I need);
- just keep all files from the old computers on my backup USB stick, so I have access when I need to and can forget it for the rest;
- just backup the new computer to it's own 'root folder' on the USB stick, so old and new computers can have their backups on the same USB stick (gives me more oversight and makes it more portable for me).

Just my two cents. I'm very curious how other HN'ers handle their backups!?
Show HN: Leaf – Create interactive coding tutorials
This doesn't sound superficially like addiction. It sounds more like a mild anxiety disorder, something in the family of OCD.

You have to start to feel comfortable with the idea that you will miss out on 99.999999% of all the interesting things to know about in this life, much of it useful. You will be wrong and ignorant about some important things, and it will hurt.

All of that is OK, normal, and unavoidable. You just have to get there emotionally.

Cutting yourself off of the information hose shouldn't feel scary or inefficient, it should feel good or at least neutral. Your brain needs time to rest, absorb, and find satisfaction in things outside of learning.
Also, there's more than one way to execute an idea. If they are executed simultaneously, the better execution will win, making the alternates worthless. The implementation itself IS the business.

Ideas are a dime a dozen.
Cool. How many years closer has this brought us to a $1 pill that extends life span by 1 year? Cos let's face it that's the only prize that really matters in this whole field
Reviewing Bell's theorem - described in this article - has resulted in experimental evidence that all classic analogies in the style of "some state was embedded in each particle at the moment of entanglement and the measurement just revealed something about what was in that single particle locally at that time" can not be true.

Bell's theorem describes the highest possible upper bound of correlations for spin measurements along different axis if it was as you say. But it turns out that in practice they are more correlated than what would be possible according to Bell's theorem, ergo, that analogy (which, in general, is plausible and reasonable) is not compatible with the physical reality we live in.
I think many of the issues will probably happen at other jobs (employers not following their own policies, eroding benefits, etc). I'm also in an area without a lot of tech jobs (Philly region). Relocation is out (wife says no). Remote is something I like, but think I perform better in the office. At least for onboarding. I have a family to support, so I can't take much of a cut in pay either. The bulk of my years were spent working on obscure tech like Filenet.
Ball Balancing Wheel Puts a Spin on Inverted Pendulums
Hyper Founder Program
Not sure why you were downvoted - for sure, we have alert systems these days so that test ICBMs and rocket launches aren't misinterpreted by foreign actors, and we would in any future where there were tens, hundreds, thousands of launches a day - but as-equally, it would be a lot easier to mask nefarious intentions in such traffic.

Irrespective of nukes, I shudder to imagine what the impact of an out of control de-orbiting Starship would do at ballistic reentry over a populace... .