skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't disagree with you and strongly agree we're having the wrong conversations. But in the spirit of thinking... 2 questions for you...

What is impossible about direct temperature manipulation schemes? I'm referring to proposals like building reflectors to directly lower the earth's temperature. There's nothing in principle preventing this from directly cooling the planet.

Also, what do you know about the physics of CO2 absorption/re-emission? CO2 absorbs what exactly? To start it's the 15 micron band. It is infrared radiation on the longer, weaker side of IR. How much heat does 15 microns contribute to, and what types of molecules [eg ice or water, or only atmosphere?] can actually interact with 15 microns vs. being transparent to it? Since water vapor already absorbs at 15 microns, how does that modulate the effect of CO2? Does CO2 even re-emit 15 microns back to earth, or does it just cause co2 to wiggle a little bit (it definitely causes it to wiggle, but what frequency does it re-emit, if any?) Quantifying heat caused by 15 microns is not something you will find information on, even though the entire carbon based global warming arguments depend entirely on it. But there is another relevant point to be made:

15 micron is in the terahertz spectrum specifically. This spectrum is notoriously difficult, if not impossible, to build any sort of transmitter or receiver for, mainly because the air/water vapor simply absorb it in a short distance. To this effect I've heard one college physics professor who publishes his lectures on youtube argue that 15 microns is 99.9% already absorbed in the atmosphere by such effects [1] [eg adding more CO2 will make effectively no difference at all; it's all absorbed already]. We do know the main atmospheric window where energy can reflect back into space does not include the 15 microns band [e.g. CO2's absorption profile doesn't fall in the main atmospheric window]. My question for you is how much time have you spent thinking about absorption/EM spectrum based arguments that get at the actual mechanism of how carbon based global warming is supposed to work? Most people have not. I don't have all the answers, but the physics actually seems to imply it's possible if not likely we could be completely wrong in our assumptions about CO2 and global warming. I would challenge you to come up with a rebuttal to that, in the same way folks have not come up with a rebuttal to the argument you posted. So yes, we're having the wrong conversations.

As an alternate potential explanation consistent with the physics, CFCs do absorb in the atmospheric window, and even though they were banned decades ago it turns out they are on the rise again [2]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57pU2F-bIQs

[2] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1193-4
>The capitalists are consuming more and more, so there is nothing left for ever-more-productive labor.

That's a plausible explanation, but a bunch of charts with no analysis other than red arrows[1] pointing to the early 70s, makes for a terrible argument in support of it.

[1] https://xkcd.com/925/
Unfortunately not, but we do release both the programming dataset and the math questions dataset, so in principle you could try those out with one of the open-source models from e.g. huggingFace.
Well scientists don't claim that my cpu has feelings
Maybe you can use generic usernames like freelancer01@mycorp.com and only change the display name e.g. Jim Smith <freelancer01@mycorp.com> in January, Sarah Lee <freelancer01@mycorp.com> in February?
Yes. See the above-linked Winston Churchill speech for an articulate summary of why, although there are plenty of other avenues to discover this.
Objective reality does exist, even if it's hotly denied. And brazen denial is one thing we do repeatedly see in all this, which has drawn my attention to the specific things that get the most brazen denial, with the most emphasis (and, where possible, the most brigading and reinforcing by mysterious upvotes/downvotes/manipulations)

I get that it's desirable and appealing to frame it as random noise and organically produced info pollution from dumb people who just want attention. It would be nice to think this.

There's also an argument that this is indeed war waged through other means… interestingly, with a death toll very comparable to the old-fashioned, less deniable forms of open warfare. If there were no pandemic, someone would've had to invent one… or make do with bombings, vehicular assaults, and other sorts of terrorist action. But since there is a pandemic, the war becomes essentially a matter of maximizing the performance of the pandemic by any means necessary.

Could be worse, could be nukes. That would be more obvious, mind you.
> Well that sounds a little weird - you're saying people aren't renting out houses on platform X because they rent them out on platform Y?

No, they are saying they don't rent them out in the long-term residential rental market because renting them out in the short-term vacation/travel rental market yields more income.
Previous: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28213727
Reversing the Pokémon Snap Station Without a Snap Station
Ask HN: What do you do with old textbooks?
What do you do with old textbooks? I studied maths and physics and a bunch of other things and have a special fondness for the books that I have been carrying around for the last 20 years. I also haven't looked inside them in the last 20 years. Should I just dump them at a local library? Recycle? Burn in a cathartic bon fire?
Not sure if this is still the case under USMCA, but as I recall, Canadians have been very against selling water into the US because under NAFTA once they started, they couldn’t stop. Well, whether that was ever true or not, that was the reason I heard cited.
I opted out of the 'must register your vehicle to a mailing address' a few years ago. The toll firms and meter maid cities send stacks of scary looking penalty assessment letters, which I forward to the landfill. No consequences to me, and the captured CO2 in the paper is sequestered in the dump.
What pathology of Google internal culture is responsible for this support site? Don't blame the human that you're all piling on; blame the process that allowed this abusive response to be a pinned (self-pinned!) top answer with a 0:105 "helpful?" vote ratio.
Well anyone looking at Python and Perl side-by-side is gonna pick Python, and that's what happened. PHP had relatively little to do with it.

source: I worked at Yahoo in the early 2000s and I watched it happen.
ppm and paq are a LOT slower than LZ77.
Yes. Yes it was. :)
I personally agree that this experiment is evidence that there are certain problems that cannot be solved simply by making the models bigger, and one of the main research questions I'm interested in is what we need to do to elicit more reasoning-like capabilities from them.

There are people who fall more on the side of bitter-lesson/scaling-law-maximalism, and I think it's probably healthy and valuable that there are people in the research community placing both types of bet.
> ML can’t invent future ideas, it can’t evolve itself without us making new hardware for it. But it will implode the blue collar dev job market eventually.

I have doubts about that. Open source code seem to achieve a large part of the same function as ML (implement "boring" code for the Xth time) but it only has increased the number of blue collar devs. On the other hand, some no-code tools are opening programming to a large number of people (Excel, actions with your iPhone, things like that). Programming is one of those things that everyone would benefit from knowing, but time is limited, so anything to lower the barrier of entry will just lead to more programming. And more programming means even more programming (someone has to develop the no-code tools, the cloud infrastructure, etc).
Ah man the breaks in this mix. I got into electronica (mainly trance, progressive and DnB) around 2004, but then found breaks around 2005-6. Adam Freeland and stuff. It's such a different vibe. But I always felt the craziest part was, after you recognize the breaks stuff, you then realized it was there all along among the various Oakenfold or Paul Van Dyk or Judge Jules or LTJ Bukem mixes you downloaded off of LimeWire or BearShare. It's an eclectic sound that is all around you, hollow and futuristic, and so good!
The term “commute” is typically used for the daily drive to work. You seem to be using it for something else.
The climate models did not predict the current heat domes. I listened to a podcast just yesterday where the climatologist was explaining how they were caught by surprise. But I forgot which podcast it was, so here's a Guardian article from a few weeks ago:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/02/canadian...

The climatologists are saying warming increases the likelihood of these extreme events. The problem is the models said they shouldn't be happening yet. So maybe something additional is going on.

The issue now is the media is going to report any bad weather as climate related, which is no better than claiming there is no global warming because one experienced a colder winter than normal.
> I break about a USB-C cable a week

I don’t know… that seems excessive, even people I’ve known to handle all of their stuff like it’s free have managed to go mostly through 1-2 cables a year.
Load directly into Elasticsearch: it supports SQL as well as visualizations and simple querying via Kibana, and is far more performant than PostgreSQL for this kind of thing.

Ingest speed is tunable via number of shards and translog sync frequency, so no need for message queue if things get busy.
That is because that package internally steps down that voltage. Any LED that produces light in the visible range will have a bandgap in the 1 to 2 Volt range. Feeding it a higher voltage than that would lead to disastrous current run away. The package that contains the LED and the current limiter and whatever other electronics are in there might of course accept 24V DV, or 110V AC or 230V AC or 17.4V at 4kHz. But the question that your parent comment was asking is: For which of those choices is the conversion most efficient to get to the voltage and current that the LED actually needs in the end.
> Raising wages doesn’t create more workers, though. It will just convince them to leave other jobs for the higher paid alternatives. This creates new job openings that still need to be backfilled.

Others have correctly pointed out that the supply curve is not flat. But even if it were, well, economics is about the allocation of scarce resources that have alternate uses (Thomas Sowell's definition). If people are scarce, and they go where they produce the most value, and places where they would produce less value don't get filled, is that a problem? Isn't that exactly what you would want to happen?
‘Migration is the phenomenon of our time’
Hypernormalization is phenomenal. It's passionate, but outlines some specifics about how things are done, that are pertinent to this discussion. Highly, highly recommended.
That's also the first thing that comes to my mind as it starts with "Ali".
There is a line that’s incorrect in the article:

> AC won, mainly because of its higher efficiency when transported over long distances.

AC is not actually more efficient at long distance transmission, it’s less efficient due to the skin effect. AC is just easier to convert.
It's so interesting. I'm all for _not_ firing coal for electricity but many environmentalists seem to really just be against everything. I also have nothing against a rational look at and discussion of all the options. The problem is the _same_ people will condemn you for coal and nuclear power trying to get you to use solar, wind and water. Then you do that and they block wind for killing birds and destroying the view, solar for using so much space and precious materials and water for the impact on the environment.

Yes absolutely, flooding a huge area for a dam can potentially destroy habitat for both humans and animals and will create greenhouse gases from dying plant matter and such. Agreed. What is the alternative? Burn a bunch of coal? That btw does the same but is not renewable. Look up "Garzweiler 2" in Germany.

Wind is curious. Destroying the view? Really? You care about 30 wind turbines destroying the view more than coal combustion particles in the air killing people slowly and painfully? That said, if you look at the "total possible wind capacity" in Germany for example it is laughable compared to the energy needs. As in the solar potential at max built out capacity ignoring all 'view' concerns is in the low Gigawatthours territory. Energy consumption in Germany is in the hundreds of Terwatthours. As in over 500 TWh, so over 500000 GWh. Installable wind capacity less than 15 GWh with estimates around half of that actually usable due to 'view concerns' and such. Other countries will have better ratios for sure.
The housing stock is what it is because of low fossil fuel prices. Most families prefer detached single family homes with two car driveways and quarter acre lots, away from all the homeless and in the most exclusive school districts they can afford.
Congrats on the new launch Iba and Syed, I still remember meeting you guys years ago in LA, you've come a long way!

I'll echo some of the other comments here that most of the bigger companies I've worked with want a better JIRA but are weary of smaller companies, data security, and the switching costs involved.

Is there a way to offer this on top of the existing Atlassian tools? A similar model would be something like Scratchpad for Salesforce: https://scratchpad.com/
> Using amazon is not even fair. ...but for most things they are seriously crushing the competitors.

Not in my experience. I've seriously dialed back my usage of them, but what started me on that path several years ago was comparison shopping for the first time in a long time, and finding that local stores usually matched and sometimes beat Amazon's prices. Why wait 3+ days for two day shipping when I could literally pick it up now for the same price? Now the main issue I have is all the garbage products with fake reviews.
A shortage occurs when price cannot rise. When the answer is “just pay more”, the question is not about shortage, only unfulfilled dreams.
A "SEV" (severity) is a production failure or incident, usually indicted with a level value.

For example, a SEV 0 would be a total system unavailability incident, SEV 1 might be a major issue with parts of the system, SEV 3 is a less critical failure affecting a subset of users, etc.

You'll typically have a postmortem meeting afterwards to discuss the incident, the root cause, lessons learned, and action items to prevent future occurrences, which is the meeting described in the article.
That's what people enjoy I think. Much less serious outrage, serious preaching.

Lots of cooking, dancing, music, laughing.
Of course I'm not saying it should be our one and only focus, but it should be our primary objective.

I don't see into the future better than anyone else, but my guess? The sheer amount of resources we need and the waste we create is drastically reducing biodiversity around the globe, and keystone plant and animal species are on the verge of becoming extinct. This will cause a cascading ecological collapse, including our own food chain.
AMD Epyc chips help calculate Pi to 62.8T digits smashing the old record
Opportunity cost is totally the analysis. Not just the developers, but the tech writing and support and product marketing and management oversight and continuity planning and support commitment. Building production software in a large organization is 10-50 times more expensive than a random open source hobby project. If you have a team to do that, is yet another graphics API really the best use of their time?
Japan sees peril in U.S. chip hub to counter China
I mean, the people who design this stuff don't do any user research, they sit in offices and think everyone else sits in offices.

Reality is if you go out at all you've probably figured out that phones only come with 1/2 day of real battery life (because they do the damn factory tests with full bars of reception, not real world 1-bar reception), and you needed to charge a phone stuffed in one pocket with a battery in the other pocket, connected by a USB-C cable, and bike, ski, run, hike, climb rocks, whatever it is. Or had to use a laptop in a bus where an asshole plops their heavy ass next to you and you accidentally ram your laptop and USB-C connector into the side wall. Or because pants are designed with only 2 instead of 3 front pockets, one is occupied by wallet and another by a big fat keyring, you have no cohice but to put phone in your back pocket and battery in the other back pocket with a wire between the two and sit on it while plugged in. Or had to stuff your charging phone and battery into a jacket, crumple the whole thing and stuff it into a TSA bin. Or children bite your cables. Or dogs. Or the phone was in the car with a suction cup holder and fell off ramming its USB-C cable into some hard part of the car floor. THIS is daily consumer life.

If one hasn't experienced the above, they probably sit in an office all day and work out in a gym and are oblivious to the realities of active lifestyles and how they are highly incompatible with physically weak connectors like USB-C.
How are you folks positioning this differently than day PaymentsOS?
You're just redefining "monopoly" to make some ill defined emotional argument.

> Rent-seeking is the activity by which people try to gain more economic rent; that is, they are trying to gain something without doing anything in return. Those who own a second house and rent it out are actually doing two things: they are hiring out a house, which is not rent, properly speaking. And they are extracting rent for access to the land, which is economic rent. Building a house and maintaining it is a productive use of capital, and hiring it out is not rent-seeking. Owning land and renting out it is, definitionally, rent-seeking (unless one were to only charge as much rent for the land as the costs of keeping the land).

No it isn't. You're doing lots of handwaving about semantics but you still haven't actually explained what rent-seeking activity these people engage in when they hire out their house-and-land to someone else.

>As it turns out, if you and, say, 1 million others owned all the water in your country, you would in fact be part of the group that has monopolised control of water.

Untrue.

> You could then charge whatever you want to those who do not own the water, given they need it for life.

Also false.

> This would be rent-seeking, as the amount you charge could far exceed your marginal costs of production. Water is actually a form of economic land, it just happens to be in great abundance and is slippery enough to be difficult to monopolise.

That is not what rent-seeking means, but at least we have gotten to the point where you agree that ownership of land is not fundamentally different from ownership of other assets in this regard.

> Ricardo's Law of Rent does explain this quite clearly. You can see an introduction here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_rent

It actually doesn't at all.
Lenovo's Thinkpad series is also a good bet. Some of their laptops now ship Linux (Fedora) by default. You can get the list here - https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/d/linux-laptops-desktops?sort=s...

I run F34 on a Thinkpad 13" myself and have used Macbooks in the past. UX-wise it's a bit of a downgrade
- The trackpad isn't as good, and is quite a but smaller because it has physical buttons.
- The screen is matte instead of glossy (personal preference - but I prefer matte screens).
- The Fn key is where LCtrl should be. (takes some time to get used to honestly)
- Battery is good, but not Macbook good

But Thinkpads generally have pretty good customer service, good upgradability (RAM, SSD, maybe WiFi chip) and a good number of ports.
When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to become a good measure.

They say this about a lot of things, but it’s hard to imagine a worse “target metric” than marriage.
> Tesla only requires periodic, light torque on the wheel while other manufacturers (Subaru, GM I believe?) have moved to eye tracking.

That clearly didn't work when the driver of that car was distracted and went down to search for his phone when he dropped it. He took his hands off the wheel and the car still didn't take action to detect that he was distracted.

> Pretty obvious why Tesla doesn’t want to go down that path, they don’t want to invest in a strong implication you have to watch the road.

It is also 'pretty obvious' that using the wheel to assess driver attentiveness is not enough, otherwise the car would have slowed down and detected that the driver got distracted.

Tracking the drivers eyes has also worked well for Comma.ai.
I'm wondering if a Wikipedia entry would help - it's an authoritative source that will come up in search.
> do you see improvements in Transformer or attention based architectures as essential...

I do personally, but there is some disagreement about this in the field.
In fact, I would go further and say that (in addition to using large pre-trained models) we will need methods of training that are pretty substantially different in order to elicit robust reasoning behavior.

Even supposing I'm wrong about this, if you go and look at the scaling plots in figure 3 and try to figure out how big your model would need to be in order to be solving most of these problems, you'd get a really big number.
Even if you had such a big model, it would still require post-processing of the samples to actually get the right answers.
From the perspective of applications, that's fine, but it's a little unsatisfying from the perspective of studying intelligence.
Even with those caveats (!) these problems aren't that hard compared to general software engineering tasks...

> What do you think about leveraging unsupervised training to improve program synthesis? Could synthesized programs be executed on generated input in a way that supports contrastive learning [5]?

I think this is an interesting idea and someone should try it!
I do think that, even restricting our attention to just getting neural networks to execute programs, that we will need to do something a little more drastic to robustly get the results we want.
In this context, it refers to an incident. Incidents are often referred to by their severity, such as SEV1, SEV2, etc.

E.g.

https://www.gremlin.com/community/tutorials/how-to-establish...

https://www.atlassian.com/incident-management/kpis/severity-...

https://response.pagerduty.com/before/severity_levels/
For those interested in depth imaging, Stereolab's RGB stereo camera is good for situations where ambient IR is an issue or reflection is an issue, such as looking through a window. In other cases the Azure Kinect is fantastic.
“Reality” is starting to become a very loaded term in and of itself. None of us sees actual reality, we only see perspectives of reality.

But partisans have happily decided to associate their worldview with the concept of reality.
There is some investment. E.g., San Diego has had a desalination plant since 2012: http://carlsbaddesal.sdcwa.org/financial-affordability/ .
Debian: Day 3
There are great tutorials, textbooks, explanations, sibling post mentions Grant Sanderson's 3B1B youtube channel and I agree with that example whole heartedly.

I haven't seen or read any that have the words in their title "A Gentle introduction..." It's those words I'm talking about as an indicator of being anything but what they claim in the general case. I'm very open to counter examples.
We use JIRA and GitLab at work. In the GitLab CI/CD configuration we define a few hooks that update JIRA task status on various events (MR is created, MR is merged, etc). It's a bit of manual work but it's working flawlessly for years. How is it different from this offer?