skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah, the BBC doesn't have quite the same motivations as commercial broadcasting. To be honest it's pretty good if you take it with the caveat it'll always be at least mildly biased not to the left or right but towards the British establishment of the day. They're definitely not as bad for literally just making shit up to get eyeballs on ads compared to many of the commercial offerings.

Being a public broadcaster also means they can serve niche interests in a way that commercial broadcasters can't. For example, they maintain a powerful longwave service so that small and older boats can still get the shipping forecast when they're out of VHF range (and so people who haven't - reasonably enough in my opinion - adopted DAB can listen to the cricket!). They're also one of the most influential international broadcasters, it's nice always having the BBC World Service available in most places I've travelled to even if it's a bit more transparently an instrument of British soft power than the domestic service.
Understanding elephant trunks could be a breakthrough for robotics
Empty Epsilon: a fully open-source spaceship bridge simulator game
The proof that knapsack is NP complete is constructive - there is a known way to translate any NP complete problem to an equivalent knapsack problem (in polynomial time). If you can then solve that knapsack problem using any method whatsoever, you can convert the result back into the result of the other NP problem you started out with, in polynomial time.

So no, there is no way to redefine Knapsack so that it is not NP complete. Finding an easy solution to knapsack, however you did it, would prove P = NP.

There is much more room for questions about particular classes of instances of Knapsack. Perhaps all versions of knapsack with certain physically plausible properties can in fact be solved in O(n), even if the general case can't. The Simplex algorithm is famous for having this property - in the general case it is not even NP (it is in EXP I believe), but there are whole classes of instances, including most instances found of practical interest, can be solved with a simple quadratic (?) algorithm.
It's hard to find the balance between collaborative internal improvement, regulatory documentation requirements, and corporate naval gazing.
You're missing a comma before the pinwheel one, but otherwise this finds the same 686 solutions as mine.
The older wire based are more at risk, fiber is immune. I am not sure of the housing or any internal steel wires used for strength, but fiberglass or kevlar strength cable are also immune. Armor?- steel - that would get a current hit but would attenuate it via the spiral current path. In addition the conductive volumetric shield of deep sea water would also attenuate the EMP?
Do modern fibers need repeaters? or do they use distributed amplification via co-carried laser light that offsets losses?
Too slow for what? Which roads? Which type of roads?

Whatever we do to make things safer we eventually have to decide how much more effort we should put in and what we might have to give up in order to achieve the next increment of improvement.

There must be a cost benefit analysis that includes people's opinions about the status quo as well as any desired change.
If you buy "Artificial intelligence: a modern approach," I suggest coughing up the extra money for the latest version. It's several times more expensive than older copies but they really updated the content.
What about that guy who always prints out every email?
haha my exact thoughts
I wonder if bats mitochondria are somehow unique too. Can you transplant bat mitochondria into a mouse?
> I think it's a fundamental limitation of video games.

I don't think so. Game design is a whole art form in itself. Some games suck at it and some games succeed. I haven't played with the linked game, but played with Artemis. That one sucked. The good part of it was being nerdy and role-playing out a fantasy with friends. The bad part was that after the first "battle" engagement we quickly learned that the enemy is very predictable and the game won't provide any challenges to us. Basically yelling "Aye captain, proton torpedo loaded" was fun, rolling up to the next sprite and demolishing it within seconds no matter what "tactic" we employ was not fun. Basically our mistakes didn't matter, and we just had to shoot down everyone who was moving about. There were no commercial traders, everyone comms contacted immediately opened fire on us. Furthermore there was nothing we were protecting other than our own skin. The game forced us to be amnesic murderhobos going nowhere, doing nothing of value.

> You and your friends in charge of a spaceship would probably feel like commanding a PBR in Vietnam

I never commanded a PBR in Vietnam, but I don't think you did either. Probably you have a feeling of what you think it means, maybe action? Daring charges? High speed chases? Maybe inspired by the plot of Apocalypse Now?

In reality it was probably 95% boredom, batting mosquitos and flies away, trying to stay hydrated, and maintaining the bilge pump while doing routine boring work. Punctuated with 5% "damn, we are dead because we just got ambushed" or "damn they are dead because we got the jump on them".

A realistic PBR simulator would suck. One written to follow the feeling or vibe you were thinking when you wrote that sentence? Now that would rock!

Making a bridge simulator is really hard. You are not just balancing one experience but a different one for each crew member. In a real ship if engineering is bored out of their mind 99% of the time that's not a bad thing, in a game that means you just ruined the experience to one of the players. You have to keep all of your players busy, and occupied with meaningful choices, while not pushing them accidentally into task saturation. If you want to make it fun you have to treat each station as a separate game interacting with the others. Which is naturally harder than just making a single game.
Measurement in Swift: Simplified
He is putting on weight and has a better than even chance he will age as if Joe Rogan or Dana White at 52.
That feels like a false equivalence, this is about preserving knowledge, not preserving user data.
It would be nice to get an example of how this wonderful REPL does all the cool things mentioned.

In fact Haskell has a decent REPL, and you can (if you really want to) explicitly allow IO outside the IO Monad, or skip the type checker, though I find them more of a moral compass than an impressive dictat. I don't know if you can crash straight to the debugger like in common lisp though.
I don't know if this analysis also included changes in what is considered hypertension. They've changed multiple times, every time decreasing the limit. Sure, it would be great to have 110/70 every time, but even for a healthy and young person I find myself borderline.
Ah, I haven't had that happen to me thankfully, I wasnt aware it was a thing for electronics outside of the black Friday/post Christmas sales..
I mean, I only say this bc I wrote a tool like OP's back in the day and got a ~5x speedup over `ls -f` in a particular environment, but sure YMMV.
Work less. Keep you brain with enough energy for the important things.
The problem is that I can “go to my corner” but I can’t stop people with no intention of playing by any set of rules from coming with me.

We’ve gone to our own corner here on Hacker News. And yet there’s moderation to keep discussion on-topic and respectful. In my estimation you likely choose to participate in this corner of the Internet because of the moderation of both link submissions and comments. Without it, HN would devolve into a cesspool over time like every other attempt at unmoderated forums that’s been tried. Well-meaning participants would be driven out by trolls, spammers, and angry people with an axe to grind.
Keyword is "stray", it's not theirs.
There are actually 686 solutions. The problem is you're exiting the solve function before showing the ones that include the last price. Swapping the order of the two if statements fixes it.
> Deaths in Del Norte County from COVID-19 have more than doubled in recent weeks, from 10 on Aug. 15 to 22 on Friday. Four people died in a single day, officials said.

Apparently there are 27,000 people in Del Norte County. That's a terrifyingly high rate (about 1/day) now that vaccination of the elderly should now largely be done.

In Ireland we have five million people and a persistently high rate of covid (~2k cases/day). Since over-65s were done, deaths have typically been 1-3 per day; the difference, I suppose, is that virtually all over-65s took the vaccine.
Some people just wont shut up about this. Sure, requiring a server to display some html is really "advanced", doubly so when you use a dozen of "technologies" because a js only codebase is lame.
> These "big idea languages" tend to assert a kind of "programming ideology" over reality, and tend to, in my opinion, distance you from the thing you are trying to do, often, they claim, "for your own good" ... "You want to give HOW many objects a mutable reference to this value?" complains the Rust compiler. "Are you insane? You are a Rustacean, you don't do that kind of thing!"

I agree with the spirit of this line of thought: in general I favor pragmatism over zealotry, and I think it should be up to the programmer to determine how a tool should be used, not the tool itself.

However when we talk about something like the safety constraints imposed by Rust, it's more about citizenship than it is about the compiler being overly opinionated. By baking those constraints into the language, I can have confidence when I use third party code that it reaches at least some standard in terms of memory safety and thread safety. Much in the same way as a strict type system, those constraints free me up to not have to think about certain types of issues.

If I am writing code which only I will consume, I'm also free to use escape hatches to sidestep these constraints when I know they're not relevant.

I've written tens of thousands of lines of Rust by now, and I'm still not convinced the Rust model is the right one in terms of achieving its goals, but I think the approach is "reality based" with respect to avoiding some of the problems which can occur while developing software in collaboration with others.
In The vital Question https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vital_Question Nick Lane is arguing that the eukaryote symbiotic cell (archea host, bacterial mitochondria symbiot) leads, via sex and the requirement for gene compatibility between the small mitochondrial genome and the host nuclear genome, to a "best fit" pressure on organism with extreme metabolism. Simplified, "Heartbeat hypothesis" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rate-of-living_theory) doe snot apply to, say, birds, that have extreme metabolic requirements (= flight). The fact that, among mammals, is bats that fit the same longevity may indicate that the mitochondrial-nucleus gene match idea could be right.
It's an attempt at bringing procedural workflows to SQL but the two paradigms aren't really compatible. It's much easier working with a scripting language like Perl or Python and embedding SQL queries. Use a relational language for the relational logic and a procedural language for the procedural logic.
I discovered JRE shortly before the move to Spotify, and I'm still an avid listener, but honestly Spotify just freaking sucks compared to YouTube, and I would never actively search for more podcasts to watch on the platform. The load times and video display are worse, there's no ability to read or leave comments (Joe did say he asked them to work on that), I often have to refresh the page just to get it to respond again, it loses my spot and I have to scroll through 1,000 episodes to find what I was watching again, it's clunky and slow to skip forward and backward within an episode, and possibly the most egregious issue is the lack of search for episodes within a single channel.

That said, Spotify gave Joe written guarantee of creative freedom and dollar amount up front. With YouTube, every episode was subjected to demonetization or down-rank roulette, which understandably made him really nervous to be on the platform. As long as Spotify respects this creative freedom (despite complaints of some Spotify employees), I can respect Joe's choice to move.

I'm even a little happy that he left YouTube for this reason. A media platform should be accountable to consequences for its repression of speech.
Unsurprisingly, it's "too slow to meet a target":

> However, progress has slowed in most countries. As a result, the EU target of halving the number of road deaths between 2010 and the end of 2020 will not be met.
I'm very happy that this seems to applied to the majority of coffee equipment manufacturer ( or at least for manual brewing equipment ) . Even big brand like Hario will happily sell you a set of replacement burr at a reasonable price if yours ever get damaged. I hope the coffee community keep it this way for eternity.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21922504/
Mitonuclear match: optimizing fitness and fertility over generations drives ageing within generations

also https://nick-lane.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Lane-Bioess...
Great news. Freshdesk is decent for a small startup looking to scale up support.

The login flow to Freshworks is and has been confusing since they rebranded. I hope they fix it and sensitive the spam filtering better!
The BBC transmitter in the story was either medium wave, or perhaps more likely long wave, Radio 4.
Yeah, I have a ton of stuff I'd like to scan and have scanned some of it. But very little of it is in the category of just load in the hopper and you're done. And once you're looking at scanning hundreds, if not thousands, of pages of stuff and attaching metadata to it, it's pretty much a matter of laying down until the desire to digitize it goes away.

As a side note, I've been involved in a project to digitize the back issues of a student newspaper I was involved with. It's all a combination of very labor intensive and expensive (given the issues that they only have bound copies of are a real pain to scan even with an expensive large format flatbed scanner).
Because space is fuckin rad

Also, Subnautica. Also also, barotrauma. And piles of submarine combat games.

I don't think people want to play human body repair games, typically. Putting existential woes on hold is usually a nice side effect of games.
To anybody dealing with higher than ideal blood pressure, try supplementing magnesium. Magnesium deficiency is not often diagnosed by medical professionals, yet it's very common.
Take it yourself for 30 days. Don't count on that one visit to the doctor's office.
Last week's Saudi tech initiatives – the full list (LinkedIn)
I think Japanese generally don't put sugar in tea as a cultural thing. Same way most of the world wouldn't even think of putting milk in tea like Brits do.

I read some story about "customer is always right" in US vs. "customer must be saved from his ignorance" in Japan.

Author ordered green tea with sugar in Japan. She got no sugar when she requested it she was told that sugar ran out. But she could order black tea with sugar right after.
>>> Basically yelling "Aye captain, proton torpedo loaded" was fun, rolling up to the next sprite and demolishing it within seconds

Basically every battle sequence in the original Star Trek. It's why they had to invent Tribbles.
Yes, which is most bizarre, since school-level arithmetic is the first kind of mathematics ever invented, far before writing, specifically for its practical uses.

Are you really claiming that it's of more practical use to understand the properties of monoids and rings than it is to understand that 2 + 2 = 4? Or are you actually talking about arithmetic beyond what is normally taught in school?
Any user of any Facebook property needs to understand well in advance that the company engages in active psychological manipulation and experimentation on its users and then decide if this clashes with their personal autonomy.

Remember them talking about how they engaged in experiments on their users by trying to influence their mood via intentionally showing their various groups different types of content algorithmically on their news feed? Or when they intentionally kept crashing their Android app to see what’s their user retention rate even on faulty software? Or just open up the app on two phones of the exact similar make and model and see the app menu?

My personal anecdote and experience with this is that they also use random errors to disguise bans. I have a personal and a dev account which I made the first time I accidentally got banned for 24 hours because it also reset OAuth app keys, the next time I got banned I logged in to my dev acct. and tried to make a post, since they managed to associate the two accounts, I ended up banned on that one, too. But it didn’t say that, it kept throwing random errors as if it was only a backend issue. These disappeared once my main ban was gone.

So all in all my point is, people should understand that the platform outright does these kinds of things and use or find alternatives based on that
You can definitely use awk (I use it myself). But lets not pretend it’s readable for anyone after the original writer. It has a single purpose and that is to get the text munging task in front of you done as quickly as possible.
I don't know. Our (I'm sure multi-K$) Xerox copier/scanners in the office are pretty temperamental if you don't give them fairly clean stacks of paper to scan--especially double-sided.
Yes, that's about right with overheads.
One argument is that the total revenue of Concorde did not cover its total costs, therefore the program should have been cancelled.

But it's more subtle. One interpretation is that past costs don't matter, therefore decisions should be based on expected value of further investments. In a slightly round-about way, more "sunk costs" means higher leverage on future investments.

Whether it's a fallacy depends on high well you can estimate the future expected value, and how it depends on the current state.
What a polite way to say “whoosh” ;)
Also anyone suffering from insomnia. Magnesium should be the first thing to try. But never magnesium oxide (the cheapest form) because that does not absorb at all.
I thought the republicans hated Facebook too?

I seem to remember after the first time, everyone here was complaining that the initial case the FTC put together was so incoherent there were no surprises it failed. I could be mis-remembering, but that was my general impression though I didn't follow it that closely.

Just sounded like incompetence rather than cronyism, but that could be from decades of underfunding.
That's true :( very sad.
Video of a Rocket Sled Doing 6,599mph at Holloman AFB Is Absolute Insanity
That’s a ratio of near twice what the article recommends, it’s really weak.

And I don’t make it like this for guests because it’s too weak. Well, maybe okay for Americans.
That just means the grift ends. It’s not really favourable to Bell.
Logan Paul Hater Spotted in Real Life at Jake Paul vs. Tyron Woodley Weigh-In
> he number of people living with high blood pressure has more than doubled since 1990

> To find out how hypertension rates

So are they talking about raw numbers of cases or rates? That's confusing because the population has massively increased in the past 30 years so of course there should be more cases...
I worked with Ada a lot during the 90s (and even maintained the Linux port of GNAT early on). This document does not address one thing that I am curious about. What does the modern, idiomatic Ada programmer do about memory management? Are library implementers still required to use Unchecked_Deallocation? I don't see how a language where Unchecked_Deallocation is used can be considered safe at a time when we have modern choices with automatic memory management.

Edit: I guess another way to put this is, "Can a non-trivial project be developed in modern Ada without using Unchecked_Dealloation?" Because I don't see how I can consider a library safe if it is allowed to call Unchecked_Deallocation.
Solution in SageMath:

from sage.numerical.knapsack import knapsack
knapsack([122, 275, 185, 597, 647, 216, 713, 457, 146, 518, 316, 489, 711, 645, 477, 804, 671, 231, 621, 98, 87], max=4394)

Note that this only finds a solution, not all solutions.
Shouldn’t they measure in miles driven, not per population? And then cross reference other transit safety?

Reduced deaths on roads could simply be due to less driving. If everybody moves to a less-safe transit option, that’s not a good thing. (Other transit likely is safer, but we shouldn’t just sssume it is)

Failing to do so assumes people aren’t dying using other transit.
Can you imagine a world where people stuck post-it notes on everyone they passed? Soo we would all be thickets of moving mounds of post it notes - great hate - slowed progress.
Similarly the cookie baggage we accumulate - great hate - slowed progress.
Sure the free content has to be paid for.
What if the ISP's charged $5/month. Then divided that into micro-pence = 5 million of them. They know the URL you clicked - 1 micro pence per click. At end of month pay those micro-pence to the URL. Baggage is zero as you carry nothing, they count and collate a list = no baggage carried.
You could also allow session cookies to reduce the login burden. It is possible that such a system would reduce traffic to self finance?
Comments/critiques?
deficiency of ions is almost never measured in any blood test afaik. Almost nobody seems to be looking for deficiencies.
I have a 40min time limit each day exclusively for HN, shared between iPhone and Mac
> The Rust or Haskell compilers, for example, insist on policing whatever private understanding you might have about the meaning of your code.

The thing about "private understandings" is that they're just another way of saying "we expect ceaseless, flawless vigilance" (as one writer put it), not to mention "flawless communication and training."

Languages which impose weird restrictions tend to do so because it allows them to offer (nearly) ironclad guarantees about something else.

There are certain programming idioms that work brilliantly in Haskell. Those same idioms would be utterly miserable in the presence of unrestricted mutation.

Or to take the author's other example, Rust forbids shared mutable state, and it keeps careful track of ownership. But I can freely use native CPU threads without worrying about anything worse than a deadlock, and I can bang directly on raw bytes without worrying about anything worse than a controlled runtime failure. And this remains true even if team communication occasionally fails or if someone makes a mistake.

Sometimes I want to rule out entire classes of potentially dangerous mistakes, and not just have a "private understanding" that nobody will ever make certain mistakes.

As always, it's a matter of using the right tool for the job. If you need to write a high-performance, heavily-threaded network server that parses malicious binary data, Rust is a great tool because of those restrictions. If you need to do highly exploratory programming and invent new idioms to talk about your problem domain, Common Lisp is awesome. And if you need to build libraries where everything has a rigid mathematical structure, Haskell is a great tool.

In my experience, Commony Lisp is a deeply opinionated language, and its most dramatic opinion is that "your code and your data should have identical representations and structures." And for the right problem, that restriction is extremely powerful.
It could be possible to go faster than light and preserve causality. The problem is we don't know a way to do this -- all explored ways create contradictions based on the physical laws as we know them.

If you can imagine teleporting and still having a consistent timeline, then you can imagine going faster than light.