skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I must be missing some important part of what you were trying to communicate.

It sounds as though you are saying "colloquialism[s]" have some value or relevance to technical understanding of a process.

It seems to me this is the primary means by which information gets lost because people think they know what is meant, but they don't.

It's the stumbling block that always reoccurs.

----
If someone says "map" and means function, then I know what a function is (I think).

If someone says "map" and means a higher order function, like in programming, then that's also something I think I know.

If someone wants to talk about morphisms that are not functions, then that sounds like it may be beyond my ability to follow.

But in any of the three cases, using the word "map" out of context fails to tell me which it is. Other associations, like the paper rand-mcnally map that I once used to drive across the country, are not helpful.
Time Off Summer '21
We can't get people to give a damn about 700K deaths in a year.

What is this fantasy that people are going to drive more carefully and not however they want, or massive lifted trucks or manufacturers are going to take less profit by not making bigger trucks?

Yes, of course lawmakers could fix this. Never, ever going to happen. Hint: neither is preventing earth from boiling over in several decades because that also would require behavior change and less profit
Being apolitical implicitly supports the status quo which itself is a political position.
Then we agree very much.

I can happily say that this problem doesn't exist on the other platforms I deal with but I guess you already know :-)
> Can [the FBI] force them to add one more hash?

No. Because the hash causes searches to be performed on citizens' private property, this would be an unambiguous, indisputable, clear-cut violation of the 4th Amendment.
Doesn’t sound like a good idea to me… a malfunctioning battery would turn that into a blowtorch aimed at your nether regions.
I can state categorically that I have read a little bit on category theory and neither fell in love nor remember it.
Denser cities result in the heat island effect, making it hotter than the surrounding countryside, easier for the Gruaniad to fool you into thinking the planet is overheating.

We can't have those low information Brexit voters moving to the countryside to clog up the pubs near the elite's country houses.
I haven't read this book yet, just went through the summary in the link.
Seems to be useful though, thanks for sharing!
But seems like it was a rational play from him. He made tons of money from his book and speaking engagements, and is not going to go to jail over this. He might be laughing all the way to the bank
what about hybrid engines?
Is important for historians? How would it be important for "clinical reasons"?
The entitlement here is scary. You have every right to buy the land under that tower and build something yourself.

If you choose not to do that, then you can be quiet about whatever happens there. It's not yours. Mind your own business.
I was at a shop that had a "wall of shame" with sawstop cartridges that had tripped when people tried to saw wet wood, metallized plastic, and other conductive materials.
Just imagine if academia were like this...
There's a whole precedent for this with FRAND (Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory) licensing. It's really common for standards.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminat...
You’re right of course.
I can't make eye contact with a driver who's not looking my way, and it's not my responsibility to delay crossing the road for drivers who DGAF. Perhaps the proximity sensors do make a loud sound, but I've found that yelling 'hey' or hitting the car is sometimes the only means of getting some drivers' attention. It seems to me that if someone wants to operate a large heavy machine on wheels it's their responsibility to be alert while they're operating it.
You can't pull livestock in a car either.

Yeah, because so many people are trying to fit three head of cattle into a fucking Ford Expedition.
Yeah, it's the saddest thing. I think what sucks, is that people don't really know how much better our lives would be if we were less car dependent. There are 6 million accidents a year. That means that like at least 18 million people ar affected (gotta get that car fixed in the best case right?) each year, at a minimum (let's assume a family of one child and two parents and one of these people gets into an accident and let's assume they were crashing into just walls or something). Accidents aren't just bad for the people in the accident, but they cause financial stress and mental stress to the families affected.

If we just discouraged driving by even a small percent (and thus a small fraction of accidents) so many people's lives would be better, simply due to the magnitudes as play.
> human in the loop ML can be extremely useful

Human-in-the-loop ML can be extremely useful in avoiding obvious mistakes.

Human-in-the-loop ML can be extremely useful in fabricating desired results.
"Ford is (or has?) eliminated cars from their American offerings."

What? Do you have a source?

"People don't need SUVs. They provide like no advantage compared to a wagon to most people and endanger everybody else."

Can you pull a livestock trailer with a wagon? Anytime you get in any vehicle there is the potential that you endanger other people. Should we ban EVs? A Tesla S can weigh more than an F150...

"The analogy of the hot and cold person assumes the hot person is wearing a t-shirt and sweater, when in reality when you compare it to vehicles, it's more like they are wearing that gortex jacket from Seinfeld + 3 layers of sweaters."

Then the analogy still works well because the hot person still has clothes to remove. It's when people complain about being cold in the summer and don't wear heavier clothes while the warm people are already wearing the socially acceptable minimum. It's about approaching constraints.
How do you define the “required technology” for these problems?

We have actuators, sensors, and computers to build humanoid robots, isn’t it “just” a software problem like flipping rockets was?
The cat's out of the bag. Computers learned how to be connected to each other a while back, and everyone got at least one internet-connected computer each more recently. Social media is technology, it can't be undone.

We could identify what is it that we think is so harmful about platforms like Facebook, and place legal limits on the _scale_ at which those deemed harmful elements are allowed to function unregulated (i.e. regulate them).

Seems like you'd just end up with a cat and mouse game. People are social creatures, and there's a goldmine of real or imagined social activity on the internet. In order to use it, you must look at the screen. We can also place ads on the screen...

What can be done? Make it illegal to run a business whose incentives are to increase "engagement"? What about newspapers?

Maybe social media giants' true crime is being the first to do an old thing at a greater scale and more efficiently than technology previously allowed.
> Why not set SUVs and trucks as the default then?

(1) Many people can't afford larger vehicles.

(2) It is a bad idea to make everyone spend more money on transportation.

(3) Larger vehicles have worse gas mileage and are thus worse for the environment.

(4) How do you implement the "baselineing"? Does congress pass a law that says all cars on the road must weigh more than X lbs? Seems like an odd policy.

(5) Moving more people to SUVs will increase pedestrian and bike deaths, not decrease.

(6) So everyone has a SUV. Won't some people just buy bigger SUVs to regain their previous safety status? Doesn't this just cause a race to the bottom? Why would you want to encourage that?
I should have been more clear. 20/20 refers to vision and is used in the traditional form of the expression and is supposed to mean "very good". 50/50 refers to percentages, meaning 50% chance of being correct and 50% chance of being wrong, which would be very bad.
Because they are claiming that the energy mismatch is immoral. Still allowing larger vehicles on the road does not address that mismatch and the "moral" aspect.
I took "50/50" to mean like a coin flip odds.
Interesting idea. I find that it's pretty hard to modify the end of a password though, I'm likely to press enter rather than add anything else. Probably a good idea to change the first character, so you have the rest of the password to remember that you're supposed to do that.
I believe that unfortunately the fourth amendment aspect, regardless of Smith and third party doctrine, will fall flat because of another line of cases, namely the contraband cases. Caballes, Jacobsen, Kyllo, all of them tend to point in the direction that if the "search" reveals only the presence of contraband, that it's not in fact a search at all, and the Supreme Court has tried as hard as it can to avoid creating such "quasi-searches". Florida v. Jardines seems to have been decided primarily on the place being "searched" (the home) and while a phone is probably an "effect" under the Fourth Amendment (Riley) it's far from an easy case and in fact may be a difficult one because they will argue that it's not a search at all.
Your coworker likely moved in privileged circles and therefore experienced less corruption in their home country. I say this as a relatively rich person residing in a poor country. The poor and lower sections of people here bear the brunt of corruption, while people like me pay money to be shielded from corruption.
The Afghan debacle is vastly different. They have 12th century mindset and there is no way democracy could be established there in 20 years. Mark my words, China will tame them in next couple decades.
One can't determine distances driven outside of the tax jurisdiction based on that.

We have geofencing set in place for fuel tax incentives in Canadian provinces. Truck operators need to report that if they want part of their fuel tax money back. In Europe it's basically the same and gen2 smart tachographs already record GNSS coordinates at the start and end of the trip along with distance, as a non tampering measure, so there's data trail that can theoretically be used against you if you misreport. You are required by law to keep the tachograph files for two years and supply them to the control authority if needed.
I never said that the infringement was related to the brake. I thought I was pretty clear that the patents were about skin-sensing technology.

And "not superior" is subjective. If the SawStop tech has enough false triggers and destroys as many blades as it apparently does based on what I've read (probably depends on material being cut), the increased cost almost certainly isn't worth it unless you're a high school shop class.
I didn't say they aren't leading. I said they stepped back from being the prominent leader. Microsoft is making more money now than ever. https://www.geekwire.com/2021/microsoft-beats-earnings-estim...
My Dad used to do a 'trick' where he would zero out a 6 decimal place readout on the big ground glass comparator..

You could then move the table anywhere you wanted in X/Y, cover the display, and he would bring it back to 0.0000X by eye :-)

He actually went to some institute in Sweden that did ultra-accurate measurements to show them how he did it. I think the 'trick' was, he moved the shadow till it was just past the blueprint, and back it off till a sliver of light shone thru, rather then trying to 'walk' the shadow up to the blueprint..

Neat stuff - but I decided on a tech career when I was mucking out the Holyroyd mill and he turned the cutting pumps on :-P Being drenched in cutting oil convinced me I liked computers better :-P
I'm glad to hear that Bloomberg is still talking about this - there was a point where it looked like they were just going to wait for it to fade away.

If it's real, it really shouldn't be that hard to prove conclusively - find the chip, scan it, dump what's in it. The technical parts are possible but not that plausible - not just the manufacturer but large internet companies with the right expertise were sceptical, and most of the people who thought it was genuine seemed to be non-technical. E.g. "had a chip encrypted on the motherboard" does not inspire confidence that this is someone who knows what they're talking about.
Publicly owned broadcasters and news agencies came into existence, in some countries, and unburdened by the need to compete primarily on gathering attention they could focus on quality.

The CBC and BBC, for example.
I have always looked at Moore's "law" as a proxy for performance, so I felt it was relevant, if tangential.
I'm not actually advocating this. The other person is saying the mismatch in size/weight is immoral, so SUVs should be banned. I'm asking why ban SUVs and not cars. That eliminates the mismatch and provides use to the most people.
If everyone could run a 4 minute mile, would they force feed everyone French fries all day…
Exhaust will always mix with ambient air. You make it sound trivial to develop a turbine engine that won't show up on a thermal camera. If have figured out how to make doing so simple I'm sure many militarys are willing to pay billions for your ideas.
This is true. I doubt those are the result of an operation however (what system creates NaNs like that?). It sounds like that is interesting data manipulation.
Both QuickLook Satellite and also com.apple.appkit.xpc.openAndSavePanelService are affected. Who knows what else. I think the save panel is actually trying to generate a preview in those instances, though.
> Simpler, don't do fiscal stimulus.

Do you have some kind of economic intervention in mind that could produce the desired results of stimulus while dealing with some of these side effects. Besides tax cuts, that is. Those are boring and have their own well-understood issues.

If the idea is to do nothing, that something that works better in fiction than in the real world (because the real world has real problems that are harder to hand-wave away).
Opinion: Today's shells should have structured data; `jq` is a symptom of a shell that can't handle structured data.

https://ilya-sher.org/2018/09/10/jq-is-a-symptom/

My bias: I'm the author of Next Generation Shell.
It's essentially a Socratic dialogue. Personally I find it really refreshing to see something like this outside of Philosophy.
This is how you "integrate" `jc` with Next Generation Shell ( https://github.com/ngs-lang/ngs ):

data = ``jc PROGRAM ARGS ...``

The double-backtick syntax runs the external program, `jc` in our case, and parses the output. It means that the "integration" is not `jc` specific.

`data` is now structured data that comes from the parsed JSON.

Example (run from your shell):

ngs -pl '``jc ifconfig``.filter({"name": /docker/}).ipv4_addr'

Will print IPs of all docker interfaces, one IP per line
> Which is why good analysis looks at excess deaths (ie, compared to the average over the last few years).

The excess mortality graph you link to only goes back 19 months, not a few years.

Here's an article which [0] references a paper which says that over the past 4 years there's no difference between all cause mortality in Sweden and Norway:

> "Our study shows that all-cause mortality was largely unchanged during the epidemic as compared to the previous four years in Norway and Sweden, two countries which employed very different strategies against the epidemic," emphasize study authors in this medRxiv paper.

It may be that Sweden had more older people than Norway at the beginning of the pandemic, i.e. a more vulnerable population. Also they admitted to doing a poor job early on in nursing homes.

I think you are simplifying this too much, insisting that it is valid to come to a conclusion on lockdowns based on a comparison of Sweden to two nearby countries. That doesn't exactly explain why a bunch of countries like the U.K., France, Spain, and Portugal that did lockdown had more per-capita deaths than Sweden. It ends up looking like you cherry picked your data, ignoring contradictory data, and not really explaining anything.

About Dr. Bhatt, from the same article you quoted:

> Samir Bhatt, professor of Public Health at the University of Copenhagen, and one of the team at Imperial College who pushed the UK's lockdown strategy.

It's too bad nobody asked him why the the U.K. with lockdowns had more deaths that Sweden without lockdowns.

[0] https://www.news-medical.net/news/20201116/Study-compares-de...
> J1772 chargers are plentiful and cheap (sometimes free).

And where do you live that that's the case? Because they're probably far more common in California (or the PNW) than elsewhere in America.
Noted constitutional law expert Bill Maher…

This is basically blog spam coverage of this weeks show, just watch the show.
Unless it’s an Electron turd, in which case YMMV regarding system services and interface conventions. :p
Coming from Asia, especially tropical countries, walking is not very common during lunch time as you can get sweaty and disgusting coming back to work.

After living in AU I'm surprised by how many of my co-workers do walking as part of their lunch break. Me on the other hand just stay at my computer, code, when I'm stuck I stop and think.. Maybe I should start walking rather than being a lazy ass
The other person is saying the mismatch in size/weight is immoral, so SUVs should be banned. I'm asking why ban SUVs and not cars. That eliminates the mismatch and provides use to the most people because there are things you just can't do with a car, and even people who cannot comfortably/safely fit in them.
Very interesting ideas here. A similar one that has stuck with me is my notion of "personalisation" in a game. The idea is that your experience with the game is a combination of two things: a) the game itself and what it chooses to show to you, and b) the imagination that you unconciously employ in order to fill in the blanks of the experience.

This is more obvious when you think of older games with very coarse-grained levels of detail, that essentially require you to imagine what is actually going on. Conversely, it is destroyed in modern AAA games which are over-designed and developed by a team of hundreds to the N-th degree.

How well the game surfs this edge between "just enough detail" is more an art than a science, and you often find it games that had some kind of developmental problem that prevented a coherent vision from being thoroughly implemented.

Take Quake, for example, in comparison to Quake II. For this reason, the former will forever hold a special place in my heart. I can vividly imaging myself sitting beside the watery bridge in E1M1, or leaning up against the bricks in the START map. It's truly that ingrained on my psyche, partly because I spent so much time in that world due to the modding scene, and partly because the game never tried to "tell" me anything about the environment, or try to instruct me as to how I should and should not interpret it. It was left up to me, and that made it more special than any designer could have imagined, because ultimately I became that designer.
I think the "come on" is justified because the article doesn't even expand on it. It brings up race out of nowhere and then trails off somewhere else. It just feels like a grab for woke points.
People who don’t want to die can get vaccinated if they think it will help. Or isolate. Some of us have natural immunity and don’t need a “vaccine” subscription.
> What is the purpose-driven answer to the quintessential kids question "Why is the sky blue?"

The sky is blue because its "purpose" is to scatter harmful electromagnetic radiation from the sun (Raleigh scattering), a process that creates a blue hue. If the atmosphere runs out of the right kind of particles, the sky will not be blue and this loop will be broken, allowing harmful electromagnetic radiation through to the earth's surface.
"Ford is (or has?) eliminated cars from their American offerings."

What? Do you have a source?

Doubling down on the livestock angle? I thought you were trolling.

Can you pull a livestock trailer with a wagon?

I see now that domestic livestock logistics is a passion of yours. Surely you have sources to tell us how many F-150s it takes to get our bacon to the local Wal-Mart.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/fordauthority.com/2020/10/execu...

Not everybody needs to do those things. I have lived 28 years without owning a truck and will never need one. My father knows how to drive many sized trucks for work, but he never needed to own one. Trucks provide utility and to be clear, I singled out SUVs because they have basically no value for people buying them, except that it makes them feel safe because they aren't the smallest vehicle on the road anymore. Most are terrible off-roaders and if people need to carry more people they can buy wagons and vans.

Also, the EV remark. The issue is that SUVs are correlated with more deaths, including hitting peds at higher rates.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_sport_utility_v...

If an EV car was correlated with higher deaths than other vehicles, that should be examined and we need to consider it.
I don't really understand. Why is it important that there be two zeros so that

1/ (+0) = +∞ but 1/ (–0) = –∞

but not that there be two, say, 3s so that

1/ (3⁺ – 3) = +∞ but 1/ (3⁻ – 3) = –∞
This ain’t anarchy, people have a say in what goes on around them, even if they’re not millionaires.
Your comment would be more interesting if you could provide supporting arguments instead of mere accusations, imagined motives and insults.
did not find my doctors in the list; all of whom are gastro at a teaching hospital with very high complex cases volume.
In general, protecting pedestrians is not the main goal of car design. They are built to protect the passengers of the car. As long as there are very heavy, dangerous (in case of an accident) vehicles on the road (samis/trucks, buses), I don't see a strong case for making passengers more vulnerable to benefit pedestrians, especially considering the market forces involved. Pedestrians are better protected with assisting technology without compromising the safety of the passengers.

Also, the article is a bit sloppy with its claims. For example, it cites the SUV increase in market share and later the increased involvement of SUVs in accidents with pedestrians, as if the 2 things were not related. It's as partisan as expected.
No, the "only 400 syllables" refers to the syllables without taking into account tones. But tones are as much a part of Mandarin syllables as coda consonants; taking the tones into account, there are over 1200 distinct syllables.
I think the point is supposed to be that that figure can be traced to specific decisions regarding nursing homes. The supposed counter factual being that, if they had isolated sick patients from nursing homes, those deaths could have been greatly reduced.

I think it still begs the question that those patients could have been saved, but it is not trying to say that old people don't count. More, that the full lockdowns didn't really protect them, by themselves. As seen in NYC, where it is fairly heavily believed that any good the lockdown did was more than offset by sending patients back into nursing homes.
Watch what can happen: https://imgur.com/a/BAmzgkm

It's quite amazing.
I assume you’re also a fan of StrongTowns & Not Just Bikes? I’ve taken a deep interest in the topic.

https://youtu.be/ORzNZUeUHAM
I'm asking a legitimate question (like that you provide the data for your claim). Where is the nitpicking, or are you just trolling?
I'm asking why ban SUVs and not cars.

Because you are willfully ignoring the pedestrian angle by saying the default should be SUV over sedans. Here's one of many sources that is very easy to google for.

https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-todays-s...
Take a driving class then? If driving a truck scares you because you’re not used to it, how is that any kind of argument against other people driving them?