skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
And where is the cost/benefit analysis for this? It would be nice if we could see the avoidance of simplistic 'instant expert' logic that fails to take into account the overall effect of a course of action. With lockdowns, consequent suicides, financial ruin, non-treatment of cancer, heart disease and a host of other conditions & adverse scenarios are ignored.

Does this mean there is a balance in favor of not imposing lockdowns; who knows? No one knows if a CB analysis is absent. The latter should include effect of vaccination and the ameliorative effects of an ever-widening range of medicines which have been shown in many peer-reviewed clinical studies to save lives and reduce the severity of the disease. But governments set their face against this. One wonders why.

Finally it should be noted that Covid-19 is not smallpox (lethality about 30%). Huge numbers of people who have competent immune function remain either asymptomatic or totally immune to the virus (lethality 0.007% - 5.4% or more depending on age and co-morbidity).
FSNotes is far from basic and can include images.
ExaFLOP != ExaFLOP
Sure, these early treatments have happened on a small scale; I've seen some of the papers. And don't get me wrong here; clearly we have to start with informal experiments and progress to small studies, to find promising treatments, before we expand their use. But there's still a world of difference between one doctor in one hospital cherry-picking the patients who happen to come in early and treating them successfully, versus basing one's entire public health strategy on early treatments. For one thing, if you do somehow convince people to come in early, you're going to have a lot more patients to treat. Not only do you have to make sure you have enough of the drugs and other supplies, but you have to have enough trained staff to administer them.

All that said, I would actually like to see someone try it. There are plenty of countries that have little expectation of receiving much vaccine supply this year anyway; they have little to lose. But it's no slam dunk; they face a daunting public education problem first, and then if they somehow solve that puzzle, they'll have to deal with the logistical difficulties.

Against all that, I think vaccines have more than just a marketing advantage. As long as they're reasonably safe and effective, they're a much more practical solution. Of course, what counts as "reasonably safe and effective" is debatable.
The problem is that that's not how the patent system works. If the Sonos patent is upheld, it doesn't just stop google from making speakers that synchronize their clocks with each other over a local area network.[0] It stops literally everyone other than Sonos doing that, for 20 years since the patent was filed. Even lone engineers working in their garages. Even if they independently reinvent it, patent infringement doesn't require copying, or even knowledge that the original system or the patent existed. Even if synchronizing clocks is something any skilled distributed systems engineer would think of within 10s of deciding to design such a system.[1]

It gives sonos a monopoly over the entire idea, that they can enforce against the world.

It's like cheering a law that allows anyone who wore a violet shirt in the last month to be shot, because you know someone who wore a violet shirt who you think deserved it. Maybe, but laws apply to everyone, and you're poisoning the commons just to fuck over that one person.

[0] https://patents.google.com/patent/US9195258B2

[1] the mechanism claimed being obvious to someone skilled in the art should be a reason the patent is not valid, but US courts appear to have a history of making that difficult to prove.
Bias or not (I briefly discussed that topic at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28168250), NYT and other more reputable publications are burdened by the reality, while ET/NTD/whatever else they operate simply aren’t. I prefer to get facts first (even if selected with bias) then work from there. But if you’re okay with op-eds dressed up as news reporting peppered with made-up events as needed as long as they validate your world view, go for it.
Feel free to suggest one.
I feel like training users to input codes into their banking app could lead to other less safe practices.
I wish there were an Emacs mode published on MELPA, to work with Pyret
This is a study of 1597 athletes who were tested positive for Covid-19. 2.3% were diagnosed with myocarditis:
https://wexnermedical.osu.edu/mediaroom/pressreleaselisting/...

As far as I know, you can get all the side effects that you get from the vaccines also from a real Covid-19 infection.
I believe may still be a good idea for me to disambiguate and rephrase:

the set of population I mentioned would not agree with your statement «virtually nonexistent individual risk». They may have taken the vaccine, but e.g. would consider it a non-easy choice to decide whether their infant children should be vaccinated (with Pfz/Mod/OAZ/JnJ) - whether the health risk for a child is higher (and how much) after infection vs after vaccine. (I insist: there's no limit towards the top, but they are the smartest I know.)

In fact, by the way, to help solving these theoretical doubts, the source of the damages should be properly defined. I am not informed of a clear, reliable, strong theory about the cause of damages in either (vaccine vs infection) - I have seen different ideas.

I do not know the NY and SF measures, but in general yes, if the unvaccinated represent a somehow higher risk of contagion they should remain proportionally isolated. But not even this proportion of risk seems to me well defined. Recently I found an article stating "The transmission rate for the vaccinated is 30% the normal". That value was the n-th of many other found in these months (and of course, that very statement is sketchy). But only yesterday I met an article that complicated the matter (and the numbers) for a(/the) dominant strain.

Surely, I find it perverse that ideas are spread like: "Health care is part of the social package, so you do as we impose". At this stage, it makes more sense to go along the lines "If you want to drink soda, you will not be treated for diabetes" (example is stretched) - one's freedom of judgement is respected, and there is no weird blackmailing based on terms and conditions imposed. I much prefer the other idea of "Non-vaccinated shall compensate the proportional part (95%?) of the cost of the treatments".

You give the idea of mixing different sets, with «anti-vax people» and «fringe pseudoscience»: you seem to be focussing on the unreasonable positions, disregarding reasonable doubts. Again: you wrote of «virtually nonexistent individual risk», and it that were evident, the set of the reasonable doubts would not exist. Especially as people receive information of adverse events post-vaccine, they have all right to demand clarity on the scope and measure, what and how much - the opposite would be irrational. And this has nothing to do with pseudoscience - on the contrary.
London civil servant's bus odyssey sparks Twitter storm
> Curiously the places with the least foreigners are the most xenophobic ones and vice versa.

That's actually the standard. It's easy to be xenophobic when someone has very little exposure to other cultures. Once they get exposed over a long period of time, people realise that they are just people too.
I also did this, although I'm pretty sure the terminal velocity and mass of the falling arrows wasn't enough to do any serious damage.
Really?

I'm a developer who has gone into management.

Most of the software that is churned out just keeps the money flowing.

Garbage collectors, nurses, utility workers, teachers, parents.

All seem infinitely more valuable to humanity then anything developers do, unless you're advancing medical or bio-science.

Admittedly, due to demand and the ever increasing globalisation of systems software is exploding, so developers are in demand.

Most valuable type of person (I despise the word resource applied to people) I guess depends on your definition of what is valuable?
I think it's always been that way, but until recently journalists didn't realize they could create clickbait titles with it.

The job of a watchdog is to bark. They do it a lot. Sometimes it's a meaningful bark, and sometimes it's not. Actually doing something about it is the job of someone other than the watchdog.
Just pick your top level folder and then you're set.
Seven Vaccinated Florida Patients Die of Covid
Honestly I would argue that most SUV owners just want to own the biggest car ... if it would be anything else (safety, load capacity, comfort) you could get the same or better with a not-SUV.
https://archive.is/rrl1s
AMD Zen4 Ryzen CPUs confirmed to offer integrated graphics – VideoCardz.com
I really appreciate that this is a native app on both macOS and iOS. Props to the developer.
I actually like what I do though, otherwise why would I want to bring it with me? I feel good when I code, I feel good when walking, and I'll feel better if I can code while walking.

It's really a bit patronizing, as an adult without an AR headset I've obviously tried "just walking and reflecting".
I think you're deliberately missing the point here.

It's not whether it happens on-device, off-device, in the cloud, in the tubes, or anywhere.

It's that Apple said that they would not do this, and now they're doing this. You can make technical quibbles that what they promised was slightly different to what they're doing, but they're irrelevant. The core promise of "what happens on your iPhone stays on your iPhone" is being broken. It's that breaking of the promise that people are angry about. Does that make sense?
zerotier[0] is also a surprisingly great alternative to tailscale. stable as hell, adding devices is fast and easy, and their web panel is real-time and user-friendly as hell. cloudflare tunnel is a mess to set up unfortunately.

[0] https://www.zerotier.com/
That’s my point. The moment that a car says the safest thing to do isn’t to veer off the road (maybe to avoid a large compressed gas carrier in front) even when the human says it is, then we’ve achieved L5
It is impossible to find anywhere some statistics that will demonstrate either this opinion or its contrary beyond any reasonable doubt.

Therefore I base my opinion only on anecdotal evidence.

I have read carefully a lot of patents. I have read completely a few hundreds and I have browsed through the pages of a few thousands. I believe that few people happen to read so many patents, unless their job requires precisely this.

The number of the patents that I have read has been distributed rather uniformly over the years since the start of the USPTO archive until today. Because the number of patents issued per year has increased steadily, that means that I have read a larger part of the early patents than of the most recent patents, which are probably too many for anyone to read, unless they choose a very narrow area of applicability.

Besides a lot of junk patents, I have also read a lot of very valuable patents, which marked important points in the history of technology.

However, all the really valuable patents that I have seen have been issued before 1980. I have read a few patents from the eighties that were somewhat interesting improvements of prior techniques, but I have never seen any really innovative patent issued after 1990.

The patents that I have read were not chosen randomly, but they were found either by searching for the history of various important technologies or by following the references to other patents from the patents themselves.

I believe that the patents that I have read are more likely to belong to the better patents, not to the worse. Therefore I think that the failure to find recent innovative patents in my sample is likely to be consistent with the low proportion of such patents in the entire set of recent patents.

Not all patents are junk, many present competent solutions to various technical problems, but nevertheless they do not contain anything really new, they are just new combinations of already known techniques, that could be found after some work by any competent team that would be hired to solve that problem. Such patents fail the criterion for patentability of being "non-obvious for someone skilled in the art".

There are also patents that do not cover actual inventions but discoveries of various useful things, e.g. some new alloy that was not predicted by some theory, but it was just found in a series of empirical experiments, or some bacteria that were isolated from some environment and that happen to contain a useful enzyme.

Such discoveries are very valuable, but they do not have the novelty that they had much earlier when nobody had yet clear ideas about how to search for new materials or microorganisms.

Now such searches are well understood and it is mostly a matter of having enough time and money to enable such a discovery.
A popular story told to Israeli Defense Army soldiers who serve at checkpoints is of this gesture: https://i.ibb.co/ZBJSY1c/image.png

Apparently, in Italy it sort-of means "go f*ck yourself" (for Italian hnewers, this means "please wait" for the rest of the world).

The story tells about a soldier who once did that gesture to a car carrying some Italian politician, on their way to the West Bank.

Don't remember the rest of the story now, but it did not end well.
> A strictly typed database would error out here, a dynamically typed one will just assign the int to the string column, potentially corrupting data.

I would assume posgres is considered "strictly typed", yet it will never error on the correct version of this: all parameters are necessarily passed as `char*` equivalent to "normal" untyped literals/strings.

The best you can do is provide an explicit type (via `paramTypes`), which skips inference and is equivalent to typed constants[0].

[0] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-syntax-lexical.h...
Rust traits are opt-in, C++ concepts are opt-out; you can think of C++ concepts as having a "blanket" implementation for all types, so you'd need to opt out using negative reasoning. For example, in C++, you can declare a trait:

template <typename T>
struct totally_ordered : std::false_type {};

and opt-in implement it for some types, but not for floats.

Then you can define a TotallyOrdered concept that requires the trait.

The C++ standard library didn't do this, so if you happen to accidentally implement a type with an API that conforms to TotallyOrdered, then it becomes "accidentally" TotallyOrdered, which is a big footgun.
First Intergovernmental Quantum Communication
You still have to go through an on-ramp provider or OF does the on-ramp but then probably lots of reg headache. Plus I bet impulse buying is the way to activate OF users. One way to solve this can be to find an on-ramp solution w/ UX on par with card payments and then handle pay-in and pay-outs via Zcash or Monero or using Aztec protocol.
Have a look at Shelter[1] or Insular[2]. Both make use of Android's work profile feature to completely isolate apps in a separate environment.

[1] https://f-droid.org/en/packages/net.typeblog.shelter

[2] https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.oasisfeng.island.fdroid
To fill in the lack of explanation:

The demo shows that color is perceived globally, as evidenced by color swatches below transformed and original image that can pick colors from respective images. In fact, some of the preset images have settings filled so that what we perceive as color is actually gray (128,128,128).

It's a variation on the blue-black dress illusion.
Coinbase plans to add $500M worth of crypto to its balance sheet
According to Apple Fitness for the past year I've walked on average 15.9 km per day (or 19715 steps). It's fair to say that I enjoy it immensely.

The thought of walking being a privilege of certain a subset of the population hadn't even crossed my mind, but does make me a little sad.
You’re right. Your post inspired me to look up oed.com, which is the “full” OED and available through many British public libraries.

The quality of that definition seems to be rather terse and restrictive as well. It’s got a lot of references to obscure and historic meanings of “coach”, but sense (e) is quite simply “a single-decker bus” with some references.

And even good old Megabus (a budget coach company) has double-decker coaches[1].

[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=megabus+double+decker&prmd=i...
If there's anywhere in the world that solar makes sense, it's Australia. Vast stretches of land, more sunshine than you can throw a stick at. Good to see it's starting to happen.
> Also extra money allowed us to hire babysitter who can assist my wife during the day and we still have extra money after babysitter's expenses. We also got cleaners, started to send laundry out, ordered in more food, enrolled kids in various day camps or classes.

300 IQ move here, bravo sir, well done. That also alleviates workload from your partner for sure.
I didn't mean that T1 was directly responsible, but running Linux is quite difficult after T1/Touchbar MacBooks were introduced in 2016.

WiFi and audio devices still don't work on most models released after that: https://github.com/Dunedan/mbp-2016-linux
20 posts in the past 48 hours seems like a bit much.
The trackpad is unparalleled. I'm assuming they have a patent on it, because the physical clicker trackpads in every other laptop feel awful.
You’re not referring to North America, which has spent the past century propagandizing against socialism, I presume?
Why the comment in the subject of only a year late?
پارافریز مقاله
Sounds to me like you actually want an electric motorcycle then.
I use freebsd and nginx in production its a great system super stable
The comparison to a turbo got me thinking if some of the compression energy could be recovered in the expansion stage. Turns out the answer is yes, but the energy recovery is limited to 7% at best: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187661021...
No wonder you are so opposed to the idea of a 6 hour journey without taking a break. In the US, a road trip usually involves planning to minimize total stops. It's not uncommon to bring snacks/drinks/coffee with you in thermoses/coolers.

(Also, nitpick, the word you want to use is "horrible" not "horrend" if you want to sound correct to the widest group of English speakers)

That was intentional, to create an exaggerated phrasing of the statement. Beyond stating a truth, that many Germans would consider it offensive to eat and drink in their cars, I also wanted to make some fun out of how protective some of them are, as well as making some fun of those, like Americans, who think their car is a great place to eat and drink :)

I am very aware of the differences in driving habits between Germany and the US, having driven in both (though not taken longer road trips in the US). There is certainly a significant size difference between the US and Germany, but considering how large the EU is and crossing borders inside the EU usually isn't any different from crossing state borders in the US, there would be large distances to drive in the EU too.

Still, I think road tripping is larger in the US. Might be interesting to consider the reasons for this. To a large part probably, because the open borders in the EU are a more recent thing. Also, because passenger trains are still a very important means of transportation. And in general, population density seems to be higher, it is very easy to find something interesting much more nearby.
For Germany specifically, you also have to consider driving speeds. If traffic isn't too heavy, there are still many sections of the Autobahn without limits, so travelling at 100-120mph is quite common. Which on the one side makes for quicker progress but also, you don't want to try to eat or drink at those speeds :)
The CN gov is not addressing the living standard thing as usual, but they are “shedding load” on parents by messing with the curriculum again. There has been harsh enforcement on private tutors[0] and reheated talks about making English non-mandatory.[1] (Let’s just say without the English curriculum I will not learn many of the “skills” that lead to me posting here at all.)

[0]: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-09/why-china-s-cracking-down-now-on-education-tech-firms-quicktake
[1]: https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202103/1217396.shtml

And guess what? They are also backpedaling on women’s rights. They are requiring people to jump through extra red tape (managed by the gossipy “community” people!) for getting an abortion and are becoming very conservative with treating uterine fibrosis.[2] Back in the days it was only the ob/gyn requiring family signature to perform hymen-breaking examinations…[3] And relatively barrier-less elective abortions were, well, possibly one of the few upsides of that one-child thing.

[2]: https://twitter.com/notmychris/status/1429455469039419395
[3]: https://jezebel.com/why-is-it-so-hard-for-unmarried-women-in-china-to-go-se-1729393595
Possibly. Sky's the limit, as usual...and there are some dirt-cheap _very_ used cars available, so that's not a very useful comparison.
Exactly. I do not believe that Apple will be reviewing the actual images. More likely they will be reviewing the metadata for "chain of evidence" purposes. When Apple pass evidence to NCMEC they will be able to say "this was flagged for CSAM and we have double-checked that it actually came from this person's phone".
> I'm not claiming this means the story here is false, but frankly I'm surprised posts from this source are even allowed on HN.

And? Is what they have posted about this story false then? So their sources are wrong and are spreading conspiracy theories about this story then?

Rather than bringing up the past behaviours of newspapers and creating associations can you just comment on whether if the article is true or not.

If this particular story that is posted is proven to be false THEN you would have a point. In this case it is true and it is widely reported and also has credible sources for this article. You are welcome to prove otherwise.
That they are nontransferable and 99 times as diffcult is not any kind of null hypothesis. That's just a nasty rhetorical trick: Take something reasonable, piggyback something ridiculous onto it, and argue that the reasonable thing is reasonable.
API with NestJS #44. Implementing relationships with MongoDB
In a previous story on the Nvidia acquisition the UK government post-Brexit seems to have decided it needs an industrial intervention policy [1]. Unfortunately after 40 years of a studious lack of interest there's not even the basic understanding at any level. It's painfully obvious whenever they try to express opinions on takeovers and try to link their interest to defence or chip shortages.

There was a flurry of government concern last month [2] when Wingtech/Nexperia announced they were acquiring the UK's "largest semiconductor manufacturer" - actually a small plant in Newport making niche analog and compound semiconductors. It was linked by government spokespeople to games consoles and "computer chips" shortages despite the plant's focus on MOSFET/TIGBT/Silicon Photonics.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56804007

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jul/05/chinese-own...