skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In cryptography either you only need 'an x', in cases that the original x does not matter, or if it does, then you can just as easily find all x of size less than large enough N and find 'the x', it is still solely restricted by time.

Laplace's demon, information loss, Landauer's principle etc. are at most tangentially related to the problem discussed
This certainly is how it works for the UK knife violence problem; people start carrying knives to defend themselves from other people with knives, but it results in fights escalating.

(Note that this is still considerably less lethal than any major US city!)
'Trusted News Initiative' 'which is committed to censor anything that would impede the vaccine rollout, including any early treatments.'

Also including censoring the official CDC.gov guidelines because somehow that is 'False Information' according to Facebook. [0]

I don't know about you but I think this initiative is going to give big tech companies the green light to mass sweep and ban anything that moves or crawls against any criticism of their guidelines.

This is just the beginning, with lots of users getting their accounts banned without reason. Oh dear.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27999720
Back when I studied theology, the way we used to describe omniscience was to indicate that entities that exist outside of our universe can trivially see all points of our time stream.

Thus the hypothetical devil need not reverse the hash, they just have to view its creation to know what it was created from.
The Lyme vaccine: a cautionary tale (2006)
In the post he seems to only being talking about corporations (as far as I can tell). His point about corporations pushing products that people don't actually need, and in fact often make people less happy, seems fairly on point. The entire advertising industries that exist to be a conduit for advertisements (most of the media) are based on trying to get people to spend their money on things they wouldn't naturally spend them on.

His argument that the 40 hour work week is a deliberate way to force people to be consumers is extremely unlikely.

You're point about excess and un-directed capital, though, probably hits at the larger issue. It also can be used to explain things like administrative bloat and inflating tuition at higher education institutions, as well as a host of parasitic industries that go beyond mere consumption.

It seems like we hit the singularity years ago, but the majority of the new capacity mostly went into waste, unhealthy addictions and borderline scams that have taken up an increasingly large part of the economy. One wonders if more direct involvement from society (perhaps a robust industrial policy) could have lead us in a more prosperous direction.
> A company basically pays you for your cost of living. That's why pay is high in the Bay Area or NY, and why you take a massive pay cut when you move out.

That's the essence of another issue companies are forcing with remote work. It puts the lie to any claim that compensation is based on business value. Do I not provide the same value to the business if I live in Omaha, Nebraska rather than San Jose, California?

But, the company has offices in Menlo Park, you're more valuable because you're closer to them, you say? But the company also has offices in Omaha, and a dozens other places around the world.

This isn't theoretical: companies have already said that pay scales for remote work will be tied to location, regardless of the contribution a person makes to the company.

Employers are going to have to reckon with the fact that if I can chose to live more comfortably, I can also choose to expect to compensated for my contributions rather than my postal code. Am I worth a six-figure salary or not?
Python already has everything you need. The most important aspect is that you don't have to change your code to use it.

https://docs.python.org/3/library/unittest.mock.html
Yes, sorry I didn't make that clear. "Fact checking" and deplatforming are the Orwellian knockout punch to finish the job begun by the Huxleyan MTV (and similar influences in that vein) a few decades ago.

It's clear that not everyone will be so easy to control like some kind of oversexed zombie. But most don't have the fortitude to continue questioning when challenged by a determined opposition.
> How do you not expect a substantial portion of your respondents to either refuse to answer or simply lie when you ask questions like that?

Surveyers do expect it. And any errors are measurable and have been studied:

> Polling potential or existing consumers is often the first step when it comes time for new businesses to enter the market or existing ones to add new products. And in today’s tele-connected world, no longer do researchers have to rely on focus groups, in-depth interviews or direct mail surveys to get the job done. Instead, a host of remotely accessible options exist that enables savvy market researchers the choice of connecting to the market without physically having to mobilize it. One of the oldest and most staid of all the research methods is the ubiquitous phone survey. It’s a no frills, “tried and true” alternative for companies looking for robust information quickly. But it does have its limitations. Take a look at the phone survey’s advantages and disadvantages:

* https://www.cfrinc.net/cfrblog/phone-surveys-data-collection

Also: "A comparison of reliability between telephone and web-based surveys"

* http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.02.015

There's a whole plethora of papers on the reliability (or lack thereof) of various surveying methods, including over the phone.
> The salary is not Berlin/Zurich/Paris high

This makes it sound like these 3 are somewhat equivalent in terms of compensation in terms of salary, but to be clear, they're really not, as a quick look at levels.fyi indicates.

> Without effort I can save 40% of it for retirement.

I've been reading a bit about personal finances lately, and I realized that being able to save x% only tells you part of the story. More precisely, the comparison between two places in terms of saving rates are only relevant if the only two scenarios are to remain in one place or the other indefinitely. Let's say you want to retire in Berlin eventually, you might be better off saving 10% working in SV than saving 40% working in Paris. If you're flexible about where you'll retire, you should maximize the nominal amount you're saving.
And hunter gatherers lived to what age, 40?

And you’re skipping a few thousands of years of civilization between hunter gatherers and the industrial revolution. I can guarantee a Roman or medieval farmer worked pretty much every hour of sunlight
Best wait for the incident investigation before declaring batteries dangerous and demanding they be banned.

I did not suggest that lithium batteries be banned (that was all you), I suggested that additional safety mechanisms would be needed to control the risk of spontaneous, uncontrollable combustion, which especially seems to be a risk with Tesla battery installations, seeing as how it has happened at every one of Tesla's Australian battery installations to date.
> in some way you take the opposite view as your criticism; reducing the chinese to some barbaric government system, and not the world 2nd largest super power.

China became world's 2nd largest economic power because money were almost raining on them from the sky, and not because of any level of sophistication.

Were they actually trying to play a better role beyond basic technocratic guidance, China wouldn't be a 2nd largest economy today, but a 1st one, and by a large extend.

With them seeing that the West was willing to pour money on them even when they were failing as hard as they did, they had not a single incentive to not to blow up the economy "just because", as you said, every few years, and being anything else than this "barbaric government system."

The extend of economic mismanagement during the so called "China's golden decade" was just that bonkers. 10, 11 digits sums were going up in flames, or vanishing in Swiss bank accounts almost monthly back then.

It's only when it got so bad as it is now economically, did the CPC turn on the current crisis mode. It is now slowly reverting to its pre-199x state — the perpetual crisis. It will be becoming increasingly more paranoid as the situation deteriorates, and increasingly more panic prone. The history shows that's how it was with every marxist, communist, or hardcore socialist regime in the past.
There is a lot implied in this article. Right from the word "quietly" in the title, we're clearly supposed to believe that something sinister is going on, but the article doesn't connect the dots on any sort of quid pro quo.

It doesn't seem inherently shady to fund research relevant to your area of business. Did the outcomes of research at these institutions change after receiving money from Google and Facebook?
They did this in the UK in the early 00s it was called Technogames

https://youtu.be/nOB5FtD7nnw
Yeah, I don’t think we should design policy around edge cases. Is it worse to make the exceedingly rare instance of a transgender gymnast select a division or to call the vast, vast majority of gymnasts an “other”? Female divisions exist to allow competition within the limits of their biological capabilities, and that’s a good thing. I think the classic example of how Serena Williams is outranked by most college male tennis players is an example of why those limits need to be supported. The whole thing about transgender women competing is thorny, but it can’t be as simple as someone’s identity determining whether they get to disrupt that protected competitive class. Physical traits must be adequately considered. Even that seems very hard to do fairly. Is it fair to only let transgender women compete against biological females if they rate poorer than some female top tier? If they rate higher than the top tier, is it appropriate to let them compete? IDK, but I’m in favor of sober approaches to these question rather than brow-beating from the self righteous.
Yeah I think their analogies are a bit mixed, but the general idea of ‘learned reaction’ is still there, even if the examples the author used didn’t mesh well together.
Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in
I work at one of those, and the word "at war" is a massive hyperbole. There's discussions and evaluation of if and how to best offer this new benefit with pleasing everyone and not hampering the actual work. There's questions of tax legalities, of budgeting for offices, and things like that that are also being considered.
I'm no expert, but if you ask me, I would completely erase the phone, upgrade it via DFU, and start fresh. After setting it up again, run another backup and rerun the tool to doublecheck. That or ditch the phone
Yes, there is no single printer that respects your rights.
Some states, such as Georgia, don't have party registration at all. You're not a "registered Republican/Democract," just "registered."
Any registered voter can choose to vote in either the Republican or Democratic primary (unsurprisingly, this "open primary" system was originally implemented in order to supress the Black vote).
The IRS goes after Bitcoin
"44 shot this weekend" in chicago

https://abc7chicago.com/chicago-shootings-gun-violence-polic...

I guess they should have applied the "You can always retreat, delegate to a specialist...etc"

You may argue about whether chicago police department is "capable" - they certainly have very strict gun laws which don't seems to be preventing this gun violence. But if they are not capable, "retreating" doesn't seem to be helping these people. Or are they doing it wrong?
> "required FBI background check", which I bet all are tracked and cross-referencable with the requestor, thereby giving a synthetic key to "gun purchase" does not translate to database of potential gun owners

It's kept on paper: https://www.thetrace.org/2016/08/atf-non-searchable-database...
It's hard to run a country if you make public policy announcements that don't reflect what you want. Even if you tell your inner circle not to take the policy seriously, there'll be a lot of outsiders taking it at face value, especially in a country with more than a billion people. Based on what they heard coming from the central government, various municipalities are working on stricter laws (e.g. Shenzhen's new data regulations http://www.szrd.gov.cn/szrd_zlda/szrd_zlda_flfg/flfg_szfg/co... ) and economic publications are talking about the potentially astronomic fines and steps compliance departments are taking to manage that risk https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/bAbyNyg4FZSsbrY9he5BkA

Sure would be a bummer if the government didn't really mean it that way, but companies end up improving their data management practices anyway.
They brought up Death Note, but not Jigoku Shoujo ("Hell Girl"), presumably because one is vastly more popular and well-known than the other.

Going by Jigoku Shoujo you can actually sell your soul online, though it is a bit closer to a "contact me" form, you only really get to buy "revenge" and only on one person. Definitely a far cry from what you'd expect of modern online commerce.
You can be a spy instead, and try to change it from the inside (however impossible that seems). That is the moral justification.
Likely none. But what would be interesting is to come back here in a few years and see how many of those defending en masse arming are now preparing to take refuge in Europe or Canada because the us would have succumbed to civil war. Or would have become so violent that no sane person could live there.
I belief only a small % of people can be healthy without eating meat. It’s anecdotal but too many stories of devote vegans who fall ill after years and miraculously recover after eating meat again. A common argument is they must have done something wrong but I don’t buy it.
I bought my computer chair about 15 years ago. The furniture company did not sneak into my house and smash it because it was too old.
You are missing the key point: reusable for hundreds of times.
Never buy HP, sane brands like Brother don't require that.
This seems to be mostly a history of ideas about devils and demons, but it also has things that sound like the oversimplified/mythologized versions of history that neopagans come up with. Mainly this:

> The traditional method of summoning demons involves drawing the sigil of your desired demon on the ground. If your summoning ritual is successful the demon will be conjured on the location of the sigil and be unable to move away from it. They are constrained to that particular location, and cannot affect anything beyond it.

And then the list of sigils. Is that, or any other specific thing, the "traditional" way to summon demons?
Perhaps at least some of the blame should be borne by your government and what some (clearly) view as onerous, economically nonviable, misinformed, and poorly executed regulations?
Cynically, it could be win-win, as it could give a big advantage to people smart enough to circumvent the ban, and remove an equalizing tool for people who aren't. Sort of like how drug laws empower cartels, and gun laws arm mainly criminals, a lack of google would mean only the extra-clever would have access to that set of tools, and they could use them to find each other and organize. :)
How does Mercurial show it? I always found it very confusing to use all the times I tried it so I would need some context to understand your comment.
It's clear Xi Jinping considers the platform companies to be middlemen that are not actually adding value, and not "real" tech companies unlike those that actually make physical goods like chips or devices. He does not want the platforms to be able to extract monopoly rents from the real tech companies as they have in the US, and he categorically does not want China's industrial base to be hollowed out. Same goes for the financial sector.

He is, of course, absolutely correct. Lax antitrust enforcement in the US (nonexistent, really) is leading to concentration and stagnation.

As for EdTech, it's an arms race of tutoring to get into a limited places in good universities, with diminishing results leading to a stalemate since everyone gets tutored, and just a parasitic drain on the economy, hence efforts to clip its wings. Nonprofits like Khan Academy that are genuinely interested in improving education would continue to operate. Much the same could be said of political contributions in the US.

I would expect the residential property business bubble to be next, since it's another huge misallocation of resources (although it's already started with Wanda and Vanke).

https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2021/7/28/in-its-latest-cr...
It's hard to believe western societies willingly and collectively wanted the fleshlight.
> A blind acquaintance of mine once lost his job because of a newly added requirement that he use an inaccessible application.

I find it hard to believe this happened as stated in the US, where any number of lawyers would be eager to take such an open-and-shut ADA violation case.
Do you know how everyone who isn't Tesla tests equipment like this?

They test the units individually, before connecting them to the system/grid/etc, especially if there are safety risks involved, like a fire that can't be put out until it burns itself out.

Everyone defending Tesla on this simply doesn't understand what proper safety looks like at an industrial/utility scale.
I strongly doubt GP has a choice. Not rich + insane rent means he's probably building up saving too slowly for a house near where his social group is.

It sounds like you've been burned by a landlord in the past and are taking it out on all of them unfairly.

I hate the concept of a landlord, paying a lot without building any equity, unlike a mortgage on property. But I've never had one that does absolutely nothing.

Between tenants, my landlords vacuumed, repainted, sometimes re-carpeted if needed, removed old tenants belongs left behind, etc.

I've had landlords be good about replacements of major appliances too. One thing I learned is you need to be assertive and advocate for yourself. Persistence and following up until they do something is key.

But I've had multiple washing machines, laundry machines, and garbage disposals be replaced for no charge to me, without me doing anything but letting them into the house.

I'm still getting a bit ripped off with inflated rent, but that type of convenience takes a lot off my plate.
The spike barely appears in the data: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/57581270
I've often argued this. I'm a meat eater, but have in the past slaughtered pigs and chickens myself. I've told people this, and they often express disgust, while happily munching on a hamburger or chicken wing.

As far as I'm concerned, if you're not willing to face up to the fact that you're killing a sentient animal to feed yourself, then you shouldn't be eating meat.
Depends where in Europe. Definitely not common in France. I know it’s common in the UK, not sure about other countries
I DO NOT want to get anywhere near compiling dependencies at install time, that is how you make your Python build process entirely irreproducible!

I didn’t feel in control of Python builds until I had a wheels only policy. (For one things you can download about 2% of a wheel and get the dependencies to put into an SMT solver and globally solve the dependencies before you build anything. pip, poetry and similar systems use eggs and have to run setup.py to figure out deps which means they solver locally and eagerly and back themselves into corners that they may or may not be able to get out of.)

If I have to build from source I want to build a wheel, archive it, then reference the wheel in my repository. I don’t quite have the tooling to make it as easy as it really is.
This is an expert response.
> But the open file limits aren't a trust issue, they're a resource issue.

Not necessarily. I might use open file limits to deny all OS resources to user code except for some pipes that I explicitly provide it with from the parent process, like the following pseudocode:

pipe(child_stdin_pipe);
pipe(child_stdout_pipe);
pipe(child_stderr_pipe);
pid = fork();
if(pid is child) {
dup2(child_stdin_pipe[0], 0);
dup2(child_stdout_pipe[1], 1);
dup2(child_stderr_pipe[1], 2);
close_range(3, INT_MAX);
setrlimit(RLIMIT_NOFILE, 3);
// maybe setrlimit a bunch of other stuff, like cpu time
exec(...);
}
elif(pid is parent) {
close(child_stdin_pipe[1]);
close(child_stdin_pipe[0]);
close(child_stdin_pipe[0]);

// send info to untrusted user code
write(child_stdin_pipe[0], ...);

// retrieve info from untrusted user code
read(child_stdout_pipe[1], ...);
read(child_stderr_pipe[1], ...);

wait();
}

Of course, this can be easier done with platform-specific tools like seccomp, but the point remains.
I'd probably offer some sort of support/consultancy services and prioritize the work of the paying users, making it clear when filing github issues and pull requests. This could easily sustain you in a passive income way so you can spend most of your time working on things that matter more to humanity.
I've been a user of your project and it's fantastic. I think you're being too hard on yourself.

The proliferation of marketplaces and assets to trade (and all type of projects, automated trading, market making, etc... that your project enabled) can been seen as a net positive, as a win win for all parties involved and more.

From a microeconomic perspective, your library enabled access to startup using js and with relatively simple tech stacks access to a tool that would otherwise be relatively complicated and time consuming and for which they would not necessary have the resouces. By doing so you lowered the cost of entry and allowed new entrants to challenge the status quo.

And from a macroeconomic perspective I think it's one of the reason access to capital has been simplified and has lowered in cost, it's one of the reason for the low cost of mortgages and the relative resilience of economies during covid (central banks interventions are useless without bank and other financial intermediaries participation, it would be like pushing on a string).

Don't be fooled by the contemporary contempt against finance. It's still the most important reason that explain the constant improvmements in prosperity and peace of recent years, and the best thing one can do is to make it less arcane and open it to more people. One of the achievements of your tool.

You can be proud of your work.
If anyone is an emacs user and this sounds compelling, I recommend counsel-jq[0] for the sort of feedback loop described here.

[0]: https://github.com/200ok-ch/counsel-jq
First of all, C++ 11 may feel like thirty years ago, and certainly some of its proponents look thirty years older than they did at the time, but it was only ten years ago. C++ namespaces date to standardisation work (so after the 1985 C++ but before the 1995 standard C++) but they don't get this job done. Inline namespaces are a newer feature.

Secondly this technique does something different. The C hack doesn't touch the old code. But this "inline namespace" trick means old code has to explicitly opt into this backward compatibility fix or else it might blow up.

Lastly, I didn't try this, but presumably you did. Are the two separately namespaces classes the "same thing" as far as type checking is concerned? A vital feature of this union trick is that it's just one structure, it type checks as the same structure because it is the same structure. At a glance, I think the C++ solution results in two types with similar names, so that would fail type checking.
What are the consequences of my choice? An animal dies, and I eat it. I'm fine with that. I have yet to hear a compelling argument for why it's bad for me to effect an animals death, but fine for a wolf. If it's actually wrong, let's kill all the predators on the planet. Or least capture them all and feed them kale.