skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Points to a bigger problem. Imagine how many startups simply don't come into existence because the founders are stuck on life long H1B visas.

> Or many times the founders simply can't even make it into the US even though they have much needed skills.

It points to a very obvious solution: Don't go to US to start a business. There are megatons of "startup visa" programs, government backed accelerators, and generally much healthier tech ecosystems than the US around the world.

> Skilled immigration into the US is much harder and way more uncertain than other nations.

Yet, the American Dream is still a such potent image, US still ends being the world's No.1 migration destination, unless you take the EU as a whole.

Canada has lowered its immigration threshold to the point of almost every professional with some degree, and English knowledge can move there by themselves in their late twenties. Yet, they the immigration digits are not driven now by the cutoff threshold, but by the number of applicants.

Canada is a heck of a good option to immigrate to, except for the job market. It's easily in the top 10... yet.

In my case, after living in Canada for 6 years, and getting a kick to the butt due to LMIA, I don't want to go back. First, because I don't want to beg the same government which delivered me a kick to the butt to give me a work permit; Second, the job market in is just that weak.
I spent two months salaries to buy just the cheapest latest GPU and a mid-range monitor.
Exaggerate is exaggerating.
> there are many other studies that show that lockdowns were ineffective

Where are these studies? I linked to multiple papers, themselves containing links to other papers, all stating that lockdowns are effective.

Put up or shut up.

Otherwise you're one of the people you're complaining about.
Peter Brooks Mahabharata: Krishna talks to Prince Arjuna:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B4Z1PB97KY

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mahabharata_(1989_film)
> It feels somewhat disingenuous to include a turing-complete meta-programming language (i.e macros) in your definition of the C++ type system.

But this is literally what a type system is about ? TS definitions don't care about compile-time and run-time ; what you call "macros" are type-level functions which are a byproduct of the expressivity of C++'s TS.

Remember that expressivity of a type system is just the cardinality of the type set you can express with it.

Type systems where you can parametrize on nothing are less expressive than type systems that can parametrize on types, which are less expressive than TS which can parametrize on meta-types, which are less expressive than TS which can parametrize on meta-types and integers (C++98, Haskell afaik), which are less expressive than TS which can parametrize on meta-types and arbitrary compile-time values (C++20, soon Rust I believe ?), which I'd guess are less expressive than full-blown dependent types but I'd need to check the exact definition
ULA might be inefficient and seems likely to struggle to compete with SpaceX, but Destin Sandlin's (Smarter Every Day) tour of their factory is pretty freakin sweet.
I have an old style HTML (and a little CSS) personal website, but making it responsive (mobile compatible) is a lot of extra work. It would take me a few months spare time to fix all my hunderds of pages.
Of course drug companies consider the buyers of their product when setting prices. I also don't think the article is suggesting abolishing Medicare just changing it's process to buying drugs.
If you're going to pick one metric, if the exponential growth of the disease has any chance of overwhelming hospitals, then regional Rt > 1 should be the only metric for any mitigation measure.

If you're okay with Rt > 1 until hospitals are close to overwhelmed, then it means you were okay with allowing a doubling rate for a dangerous disease. It makes no sense. If you're destined to put mitigation measures in place eventually, why not just do them sooner and save a lot of suffering?
Within biopharma, certain therapeutics have no hope of being sufficiently successful without Medicare. (The American taxpayer subsidises sales to support the massive expected profits.1) It is part of the marketing strategy, and thus the drug delivery strategy, that these drugs be eligible for Medicare. For example, let's say the drug is to be administered by the patient at home, unlike the drug in the article. The drug delivery strategy would be a system that qualifies for coverage under Part B. Medicare coverage is essential.

1 Personal opinion: This may be a recurring pattern we can see in other industries, too. Look for a situation where the customer cannot afford the product so the seller relies on the government, i.e., the taxpayer, to help the customer pay. One recent example is the steady rise in university tuition, student lending and now the student debt crisis.
Do You Need St. Louis Engagement Photographers?
If you desire to hire St. Louis engagement photographers, then Bright Focus Photography will provide you best engagement photographer services. Visit them at: https://st-louis-engagement-photographers.mystrikingly.com
Australia allows drugs on the market if they pass the TGA (our FDA) approval process.

Our PBS, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, which subsidizes drugs, is similar to the UK's NICE, which evaluates drugs to compare their price to the effectiveness in terms of QALY (Quality Adjusted Life Years) and other metrics.

The PBS then negotiates with the drug manufacturer, who either meet the government's price, or don't. If they don't, then the drug is not subsidized. So it's in the manufacturer's interest to get a large purchaser to buy the drug.
I disagree with both majority and minority rule, but regarding

> unfucked voting systems

What system would you propose?

Considering our voting systems have only tended more toward 'fucked' over time, how do you propose we ever get to 'unfucked' voting systems when we are held fast by 'fucked' ones?
The Dystopian Reality of Human Data Trafficking
Introverts Understand People Way Better Than Extroverts Do – Yale Study
We'll see how the Chinese contractors are treated by the Taliban who no doubt have an axe to grind over the Uighur issue.
Litespot Premium Blogger Template
Unwanted Associations: Protecting Brand Reputation and Goodwill
I agree with you on the premise but not on the motives.

People who hold the money/power don't want to lose it. Quick (big) changes are a huge risk to their positions. Hence, we get slow gradual changes instead. It really is that simple to me.
Schmooze it or lose it.
Older content is fine and welcomed, though it's preferred to note the year if > 6 months old. Mods can edit that if you've missed it.
I was also using Google Authenticator before I bought a new iPhone a few years ago, when I noticed to my surprise that those 2FA codes were the only thing that didn't automatically populate on my new phone. I immediately switched to Authy.

In my threat model, losing my phone is at least 1,000x more likely than the targeted attack it would take to compromise both auth factors for my most important accounts.

Besides, as others pointed out in another similar thread: after SMS hijacking and social engineering, the next weakest link is cookie theft.
It's not that you can prove that it is exactly the same, which you can't, it's that we have strong and specific reasons to know that it is NOT materially the same, in most situations.

In the area of testing, for instance, I study testers, and I document many things they do which require social competence to achieve. This is tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is not automatable. But when you don't know much about testing you don't see any of that tacit knowledge in action. So you think testers are just button pushers whose minds contribute nothing.

When OUTSIDERS to a process claim that they've automated it, they are always wrong; and not just wrong but absurdly wrong.
And sadly quantum mechanics is the simple and obvious version of quantum field theory, which is what the standard model is. Electron energies around a proton in the atom are one thing, but particles as fields and renormalization kill. Tho Feynman wrote a non maths book on QED.
The two most important efficiency metrics are Lift to drag ratio (L/D) and energy per payload mass per distance.

Lift to drag ratio describes the aerodynamic efficiency of the vehicle. Typical values, depending on flight conditions, are 4-5 for a helicopter, 8-13 for small planes, and 12-16 for our airships. (Large planes can get as high as 17, but a larger airship would be also be even more efficient).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift-to-drag_ratio#Examples_of...

From the L/D ratio and the propulsion system efficiency you can calculate the total energy used, and divide that by the payload mass to get energy/kg/km.
My understanding is that the PUK is used to unlock a SIM that has become locked if too many incorrect SIM PINs were entered.

The advantage of the attacker having a PUK is therefore that they could then physically put the SIM into their own phone, or use the SIM in the target's phone (if they have their phone PIN as well as the PUK). This of course means that they need to have physical possession of the target's SIM, and that the target needs to be unaware that their SIM has been taken, because as soon as they realize they don't have a SIM they'll obviously contact their carrier.

So the adversarial use-case of having a PUK is pretty limited. Which in turn explains why the security in giving it out is comparatively low.

I guess I'm not seeing the issue here too much. There are cases of social engineering carriers that are way more damaging.
> From my limited understanding but referencing government sources - 500AG exactly the lower threshold for pilots, don't you think it's odd that they reported that they were 'just' at the threshold?

I will admit to not being an aviation law expert, but I'm "pretty sure" the "lower threshold for pilots" who are landing at an airport is zero feet above ground level, and that there is a well known path via which pilots pass through 500 and 499 feet on their way there.

I live directly under a flight path, about 3km out. Do you know how much 'stretching of the envelope' there is on aircraft approach paths? Very very little, they are always flying down what I estimate to be a corridor probably less that 10m sideways deviation from each other, and as far as my untrained eye can tell always the same altitude. They're all aiming to hit the same near end of a ~2000m long runway that's about 50m wide. They are not "maybe 0.5nm short, maybe 0.5nm long" - where I am, 0.5nm short means they crashed into the houses on the airport outskirts. 0.5nm long is probably just a really bad landing - at least for planes that don't need more than 2/3rds of the runway to land safely.

> there's a lot of ways accidents can happen in any discipline.

Sure.

But I fail to understand why you think there's _any_ reason at all to suspect the "accident" here involved errors on the part of the plane political, when it's so obviously a fuckup of the part of the drone operator that's 100% at fault here.

Why is it that you're so insistent on exonerating the cops here?
The only reason government politicians are worth buying out is that the power of government is the only check to even larger power accumulations. If you eliminate government then that capital power just does directly does what it wants with no transparency of even a politicians bought vote.
It's an evolutionary argument. A society that produces the kind of people who value harmful or useless things is not tenable, so societies tend to produce the kinds of people who value helpful things. In the long run, this tendancy is absolute.
I don't see the "bigger problem" here. Imagine if big US companies started telling red state legislatures "No, really, we need you to fix your education system". What's wrong with investing in the local economy?
I hope I'm alive to see the day voters scrutinize politicians whom take lobbiest contributions.

There are websites that lay it all out, but not many people bother to do our homework, including myself.

I have heard the insurance industry lobbiests, and not just medical insurance, pretty much control my state (California).
> and one of these value systems simply can't win certain types of war.

You are suggesting that it is the US's gentlemanly morals that puts it at such a disadvantage as to make "winning" impossible. But what is "winning" absent those values? More dead Taliban at the cost of more dead civilians? If that is "winning" for the US, it is almost certainly not "winning" for the Afghans who live in the country and would prefer to be alive.

But say you kill more Taliban while generally tolerating civilian casualties, then what? The US is no longer a force protecting Afghans from the Taliban, but a force bent on conquering the land of Afghanistan. The Taliban will increasingly look like liberators against a bloodthirsty invader whose raison d'etre for occupying the country is not the livelihood of Afghans but to install a puppet government. The Taliban will regrow, resupplied by the friends and family of civilian dead, and emboldened with a moral mandate.

The more you "win", the more enemies you create for tomorrow. At the strategic level, there is no winning, only various ways to lose more slowly. But eventually the outcome is the same, as it has been in all Western colonies. The difference is that in the old days, the goal was just to extract wealth from a place, not to reconstitute its population (though the French did try).
the problem is that even those halfhearted measures have proven to be economically disastrous for small to medium scale businesses and virtually everyone without a line to nearly limitless private equity. pairing the rollout of ineffective 'lockdowns' with woefully insufficient safety nets [that were even further stripped down and delayed by politicking] has effectively poisoned the public will towards any further interventions across large segments of the country. you would have been hard-pressed to even deliberately design a containment more guaranteed for failure.
The ocean's "natural state"?

What is their natural state, when we look at the past 4 billion years or so? We know of several extinction events in the oceans tens of millions of years ago, the oceans always recovered without any (known to me anyway) fixed pH value.
And places without strong government also tend towards corruption.

There was an interesting article on HN yesterday about the failure of nation building in Afganistan https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28271799
That's a self fulfilling prophecy. Of course OCaml isn't used there... Because it can't hit the performance target.
There are no sure tests to know if someone is clueless about testing, but one of many indicators is when he suggests that with "good tests" you can automate programming.
It used to be more energy efficient to take dissolved CO2 out of water instead of air. Not sure whether or not that’s still true.
I have a different solution to the seat conflict: the only winning move is not to play

I've taken far fewer flights in recent years. It's just too uncomfortable to travel in steerage, and I'm too poor to afford first class.
Our primary value proposition is cost, but we're also faster on most routes because we fly point-to-point. To start off with, we're selling to customers who already fly cargo aircraft in areas where roads aren't an option. Our airship is much cheaper than the planes they currently use. Longer term, we think we're competitive with trucks for less-than-truckload cargo and in low population density areas.
NetBox is really cool. And I haven't even played with the automation side of it yet!

Also, I didn't realize that it was a DO originated project!
The prime here is needlessly small, I believe-- which will inflate the false positive rate. It's using 64-bit registers and 64-bit multiplies, so the prime could be 0xfffffffffffffb. For 32-bit registers and multiplies the prime could be 0xfffffd.

I'm guessing it's using an overly small value because it's based on java code and java is a little brain-damaged about unsigned numbers. :)

You could get a better use of your comparison register by using the syndrome of BCH code over GF(256)-- e.g. the full 64-bits for a 64-bit register instead of 56, though given how fast multipliers are these days using a prime modulus is probably fastest (in hardware or maybe in SIMD a characteristic-2 BCH code would almost certainly be faster and better!).

The code here also has the issues that permutations of the characters of the needle will match-- this may fairly bad performance for some plausible inputs. A BCH code would be less bad in that respect.

With the right choice of BCH code, you could be guaranteed that any false positive would differ in at least X characters out of Y, if Y is equal to or less than your window size, that may reduce the amount of comparisons you do for false positives (mostly interesting for very small hashes, I suppose).
That could be true if you have no affinity for the audience you're targeting.

If you choose an audience you are part of then you are less likely to end up hating the end product.

Building to scratch your own itch carries the risk of you inadvertently building for an n of 1.
Allowing total control of anything with no input from those affected ends badly. It is independent of if that concentration takes the form of a corrupted government or capital accumulation or a warlord.

Of those only a democratic government at least has the theory of responding to those governed. Either forms tend to be a hierarchical application of power with few checks.
> I was admonished that I was describing the behavior of only the most psychopathic individuals.

A pretty apt description of the cops operating that drone...
Cool idea. Coincidentally, I used to a share a ride to work with a guy who spent a number of years at Hybrid Air Vehicles (the blimp with the rear-end shaped rear end). I myself worked in UAV start-up in a previous life. I always had to evaluate aerostats as a competing technology to what we had to offer.

Do you see any optionality in markets you can target besides delivery? Defense/surveillance? Anti-poaching? We had quite a bit of interest in wildlife sanctuary and border surveillance. Monitoring for illegal fishing is a very hot topic for a certain large SE Asian archipelago.
100%! Both are true
As the owner of a domain that matches with an ISP in Washington state (except for a missing "M" in mine), I feel Gail's pain.

I send back a canned response to most people once, then blacklist/drop the incoming address.

The worst I had was when someone decided that I was the one doing the wrong thing and demanded that I forward the email to the correct person. I engaged them back and forth for a bit, then eventually found the contact details of the company, forwarding the email chain to them and pointing out their customer service person's stupidity.

I got a nice reply from the CEO thanking me and an apology email from the CS person.
Ninjalitics (Notjustanalytics) – Dominate Instagram – Best Software Examples
Is it to stop you paying for your carrots, or your rent (et al), in potatoes.. or trading your potatoes for gold rather than fiat to avoid taxation? Governments are incentivised to force all transactions in terms of fiat.

That said, I agree it's frustrating that you are liable for what are unrealised price changes (IMO it's not profit until it's in the bank).
So the transparency of free market negotiations is inferior to the transparency of corrupt taxpayer sponsored price fixing?
lol simply become god and create politicians that don't want to live in huge mansions. Problem solved!
Ideally that should be illegal and we shouldn't tolerate naked political corruption and bribery.
There is no free market without some government keeping it to some measure of free. If no one enforces property rights then the strongest just takes property from anyone with no consent.
This headline is exhibit A of how the NYT is our Pravda, the propaganda arm for the .0001%.
direnv is fantastic -- also good for setting a per-repository githook as well
You're still falling into the identity trap. Speaker. Listener. Medium. Message. That's it.

Anything else is a control mechanism layered on top. Moderation is not necessary to communication. Rather, it is necessary to facilitate some kinds of communication over others, and the concept of identity makes that a far easier and more effective a lever to apply to facilitated signal amplification.

It all comes back to the age old question at the heart of net neutrality: dumb tubes, or marketplace of traffic valuation through optimization and classification of traffic provenance. One necessarily excludes the other. Both have rather undesirable failure states.

Dumb pipes means hello spam. The other side means hello memory holing and censorship. In the end, you can survive the spam with enough patience and filtering. You can't survive malicious pruning or preemptive packet drop. The information either propagates, or it doesn't. I'd say there is greater utility overall in info propagating than not. Even for the most abhorrent types of info. You at least know of the horror out there, and that you need to investigate if the info propagates. If the signal never propagates, you'll never know there is a problem.

The act of separating Signal from Noise is the Essence of the Art.
"What if...?"

My answer is you could never know, because that is a testing problem, not an AI problem, and there is no test or set of tests that could settle this.

We certainly can have AI that seems to claim it is smarter than humans. But we also have idiot humans who claim they are smarter than humans, too. So what? Anyone or anything can make any claim, however untrue.

Imagine an AI that is smarter than most humans in terms of some technical ability but is stupider than most humans in terms of moral judgment. In other words, and automated sociopath. Please don't give automated sociopaths any power.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_democracy
Ah yes there is actually:

https://www.justice.gov/criminal-afmls/file/839521/download?...

It covers crypto, real estate, stocks, and a bunch of other things explicitly.
Looks to me like our voting systems work fine. Our campaign finance systems however...
There's 'arrested' and 'detained'. In the US police can detain anyone for up to 48 hours (72 hours if it's a weekend or long holiday). If they don't file charges by then they have to release you.

For a silent/duress alarm it's easy to cross reference the person at the door with a list of personnel authorized to be in the facility. Security in a scenario like that would normally ask for an ID, radio it back to their security office to validate the person is on the access list for that office/building/facility/etc and then do a quick walk-around.
On 1, It was surprisingly easy to get started. We fly under Part 107, which basically says as long as you're flying low, in line of sight, and not over people you're unrestricted. And we found a local municipal airport that has a drone test range, and they've been enormously helpful.

On 2, we're big fans of vertical integration and will definitely manufacture the envelopes in house. Goal is to build the envelope/structure, and buy the propulsion/avionics off the shelf.
ICON’s first money market is now live
50x the immigrants with 100k+$? That would be a huge win.
This is great thanks for sharing. My problem i can fix with this is the different forwarding aliases on GitLab and GitHub.
Definitely. This is a longer term market and hard to quantify so we talk less about it, but we think that vertical takeoff aircraft that don't use the road or rail system will enable tons of new routes.