skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Fingerprinting could not in any way be interpreted as the "mark of the beast" because there is no mark put on the person during fingerprinting. So that wouldn't stand any scrutiny. Religious or otherwise.
I'm no fan of Google but this does seem like pretty blatant piracy.
Yeah - I've never quite understood that "at will" employment status you have over there.

Here in Australia, we're a fair bit more heavily unionised than you are over there, which helps keep some of the power imbalance in the employers favour in check.

Not that unionisation is perfect though either. When I was growing up it was a regular thing for unions to wield their collective power in aggressively overreaching ways - it was common for transport unions and fuel industry unions to have extended strikes over pay claims right before christmas, tand truck drivers would stop delivering to stores, oil refineries would shut down resulting in fuel rationing, and dock workers would stand down resulting in queues full of container ships full of imported goods on the horizon at the beach in summer.
Pentagon seeks microbe miners to cut rare earth reliance on China
I actually do mostly just write*.

How do you write slack, email, or text friends? You probably don’t obsess about every detail. Once you get over the fear of it being a “blog”, you'll write faster.

* “write” as in get a reasonable first draft that I usually edit/polish later
Debugging Julia with GDB and VSCode
Gleam might be what you need then. The combination of strong types, dialyzer, guard clauses and pattern matching has been more than enough in my experience.

Fully static typing doesn’t bring its benefits without costs.
I have a few books already but none of those two. Thanks! I'll get that.
Education takes a long time to pay off though, it's like a 20 year investment. I think your blaming of the media is dead wrong. Vaccines are not a brand new thing; it was reasonable to think it would be OK to just put out the information in the form of a PSA.

Why are we blaming the media, and ignoring the people who deliberately spread false information, and have been doing it for years? Not people who are just wrong on the internet, but actively dishonest people who are working to lower confidence in public health measures.

It's not an mRNA issue. We were already having problems with a resurgence of measles which only a few years before was on the verge of being eradicated. It's an information warfare issue. Education is only as good as people's willingness to argue in good faith and commitment to searching for the truth. It's not an adequate response to propaganda.

Weaponized health communication: Twitter bots and Russian trolls amplify the vaccine debate (2018) -
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6137759/

Anti-Vaccine decision-making and measles resurgence in the United States (2019) -
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6657116/

I cite these two papers to point out that we were having this problem before COVID came along, and that it is engineered.
Thats interesting, but could it not just be cultural influence? Many English words have a Tamil origin.
This is interesting. I’ve been tinkering with using Jupyter Notebooks for our somewhat intensive onboarding of new engineers. Is Pathbird solely focused on the education market? Is there pricing info anywhere?
Relative risk vs absolute risk.

Once the risk is low enough, you dont care as much about relative risk reduction.

Covid is survivable enough (for my demographic) that I dont care much about how the vaccine increases my odds of survival. I care more about long term risks of the vaccine and long term risks of covid and how the vaccine may mitigate it.
GTK-Gnutella
Instead of vagaries, actually connect the dots.

The outcome of 9/11 in terms of the gov't seizing the opportunity was going to happen either way - you need a better argument than "look what happened after".
As has been pointed out, in the real world, the CAP theorem comes down to "do I choose to offer service to everyone in the presence of a partition?"

Consider a replicated database. A replica that's partitioned from the others cannot receive or propagate updates and will become inconsistent with those on the other side of the partition.

If you allow that node to stay up, you're sacrificing consistency for availability; and you're "AP".

If you force that node down, you're sacrificing availability for consistency; and you're "CP".

In principle, you can choose "CA". That's equivalent to saying "I choose to offer no service at all in the presence of a partition", so that's kinda sorta strictly worse for most workloads than "CP" and therefore uncommon in practice.
Do we really need more smart, internet-connected devices with embedded cameras? This seems like a privacy nightmare.
It didn't imply, it defined the term 'mild' as hospitalization or use of oxygen. What are you mad about? The point was to give an anecdote to keep people aware of what a breakthrough is like.
GP was overly broad IMHO but there definitely can be performance costs to C++ over C. Some are really subtle while others are blatant. I got real-world bit by try/catch exceptions. In a non performance-intensive app like Transmission I would guess any such things would be irrelevant, but I don't think GP deserved the downvotes for the speculation.
Current CDC data on breakthrough cases: .04%. 99.6% of vaccinated people are not contracting COVID.
Eleven proofs of the Gaussian integral [pdf]
It's got a 10W, 2019-launched Celeron CPU. Maybe adequate for light web surfing?
I've historically only used glm for matrices/vectors. Even though glm is specifically for graphics and limited to 4x4 or smaller matrices, I would've liked to see a performance comparison
Yup, database views are exactly how to do 'ontology-based' inference in SQL, in the rare cases where that makes actual sense. It can do anything that a graph or "semantic" database can do, and with on-par or better performance. Even CTE recursive queries work just as well as a general-purpose graph DB, though the latter sometimes has a more convenient query language.
You're in good company though with the WASM folks. It does feel like you've strayed outside of your non-goal of Speed. Also though as a nit, there are double precision forms (e..g, VSQRTPD), so:

> When it upgraded SSE to SSE2 (in 2000), most of its single-precision floating-point instructions got upgraded to double-precision — but not these two.

isn't correct.

It's still not likely that you needed to care about these for mu.
Quite useful, I appreciate the contribution!
What do you mean by synthetic fuel? And why do you see it as necessary or more practical than electric vehicles?
Salary development catches up pretty quickly though once you target and obtain desired roles down the line.
No, has to be more subtle than that.

The rate the simulators transmit data are irrelevant to our timeframe (since we’re a part of the computation).

I believe it’s more like a centralized interpreter with decentralized (NP) evaluation strategies. The limit reflects the minumium size of a recursive expression.
Could someone just start a religion that disallows taxation and stop paying taxes?
> Also symmetric free falling, from a fire?

Gravity is symmetric.

Once fire weakens multiple individual structural members, collapse is both inevitable and rapid as the loads transfer within the materials to the remaining supports at the speed of sound.
Steve Wozniak – “A Private space company is starting up, unlike the others.”
It's funny, as a programmer i had similar interpretations. Universe is like a processor and the c is the frequency limit.

There was a talk with lawrence krauss I think, where he explained that at galaxy scales, everything is distributed, there's not one reality but an infinity since no point in space can be aware of far points in the universe.

I also wonder if there would be ways to tweak C.
What has higher probability of causing contaminated groundwater than nearby fracking?
I have no experience converting a C or C++ project to Rust but have transitioned Objective-C projects to Swift and have found that even with Obj-C's newer additions to improve Swift interop, making the project as a whole safe is difficult until you've factored Obj-C out of all critical paths. It's just too easy for things to go wrong in the Obj-C half or in the Obj-C → Swift interop.

So almost unavoidably you end up with two refactors: first, the piecemeal rewrite in the the safer language, and then a second when the original language has been rooted out and you can take advantage of all of the features of the new language.
It shouldn't, but the organized religions have largely held their ground on principle, when others have given up rights for broken promises of safety, or equality, or "for the greater good," but most of all, because they think it'll only apply to others or be used in a limited scope.

And that's never the case.
Sounds like you agree with OP then. Content creators have the same motivation as the platform company. They want to make as many people view their content as possible, failing that they would like to make their exiting community see their content as much as possible. Exact same motivation just at a smaller scale, as they are just one part of the system.
> Returning travelers quarantining at home will be forced to download an app

Interesting .. how exactly will they "force" people to download an app if they said person doesn't have a smart phone, or refuses to unlock it? Are they going to buy them one?

The police aren't going to see this as a useful use of their time and resources; and the public isn't going to put up with it either. There's one thing to make an announcement like this in Australia; and another thing completely to make it stick. Governments here have a habit of backing down completely when it's clear their re-election is at stake.

The proposal wouldn't fly in Victoria; but if it was attempted, I'm pretty sure it would be rolled back pretty quickly. Let's wait and see before getting too up in arms about it - the app isn't even written yet.
You can even do so without going near the speed of light if you build a very massive ship and utilize time dilation of gravity.

Arvin Ash has a cool video on this that is probably too complicated to describe in a HN comment:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PA66ah9b0U4
The "Smog over Los Angeles" photo is from the 1970's or 1980's. Most younger folks in the US don't realize this, but pollution here is WAY down from a few decades ago. Our air is cleaner, out rivers and lakes are cleaner. Hell, even the sides of roads are cleaner.

More to the point, people in rural areas pollute far more per person than people living in cities. We need to end rural subsidies to stop encouraging people to live in rural areas.
I hadn’t used Wiktionary for a few years, so I just spent some time looking through it. It was pretty good a few years ago, and now it looks even better. I’m sure many people find it very useful. The amount of information on each page, though, might make it a bit intimidating to some users.

It also seems to have some unevenness in coverage. For example, the entry for the word “anecdata” (a word discussed recently at [1]), has five illustrative quotations, which are quite handy [2]. The entry for the more mundane “anecdote,” however, has none [3]. Such unevenness might be inevitable in volunteer dictionary projects, as volunteers like to work on the more interesting words.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28375767

[2] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/anecdata

[3] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/anecdote
Drive 20 miles outside any blue city and nobody cares.
Well you certainly played some great word games of your own there.
> The trick is figuring out whether the "trusted" person is really unbiased

It’s impossible to avoid bias, however whether the bias is bad or not depends on the bias and the situation. My go tos are people whose biases I think are either actively helpful (e.g. experts in a field who I’ve previously vetted), irrelevant to the topic (e.g. an NYT journalist talking about cheesecake in pre-war Cambodia), or who have a history of self-deprecating humility to the naked truth regardless of where it leads them but also not incredulous but humble to their intellectual limitations (very rare but occasionally stumbled upon).
Huh. I'm amused at the Wikipedia section on this [1].

> The use of Greek letter names is presumably by extension from the common finance terms alpha and beta, and the use of sigma (the standard deviation of logarithmic returns) and tau (time to expiry) in the Black–Scholes option pricing model. Several names such as 'vega' and 'zomma' are invented, but sound similar to Greek letters. The names 'color' and 'charm' presumably derive from the use of these terms for exotic properties of quarks in particle physics.

What's with all the "presumably"?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greeks_(finance)#Names
That is the Dutch standard, “deep conviction”, but I see no merit in that either.

One should not be given special privileges because one's convictions be “deep” which is, if anything, symptomatic of not basing them on prudence but on hysteria and emotion.

It's also irrelevant for the company itself; if a company can reasonably accommodate a man whose convictions are deep, it can do so the same with anyone else for the same reason.
I very much doubt that any government would allow that, for obvious reasons.
For starters gasoline would detonate at 12:1 ratios. Which isn't going to make your 17:1 diesel very happy. Also gasoline detonation causes a shock wave whereas diesel is more like a controlled burn as it is injected.

That being said, there have been engines that run on diesel or gasoline. The M35 (deuce and half) has an engine that can run on just about any flammable material, preferably diesel. Gasoline's lack of lubrication will eventually kill it, but it'll run long enough to get you out of trouble.
Knowing better does not make you immune to psychology. Social media, more than any other form of communication, is optimized to drive engagement through dopamine - the endless quest for likes, views, and so on. The weaponization of this to spread misinformation is an inevitable consequence of the business model, not an accident. The biggest players in the industry know these feedback loops and their consequences and encourage them still to prop up profits. This has serious consequences to society and to human lives. The executives of social media companies are just as culpable as the executives of oil companies who suppressed research on the effects of tobacco in the 60s/70s and global warming research in the 80s.
I'm not sure it's that bad. It's still the law in the United States that you cannot claim a religious exemption to a (state) law of general applicability. If the law applies to everyone regardless of religion and was not intended to impact a particular religious practice, then you cannot challenge it you because you claim that it affects your right to exercise your religion. See City of Boerne v. Flores, which affirmed Employment Division v. Smith despite Congress's attempt to legislate it away.
Yes, but in order for that digital protocol to spread and be used widely, you usually need massive investments in infrastructure without immediate returns, which the state often funds.

In fact, Morse was supported by Congress to build a demonstration of his telegraph system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Morse):

> Morse made his last trip to Washington, D.C., in December 1842, stringing "wires between two committee rooms in the Capitol, and sent messages back and forth" to demonstrate his telegraph system.[19] Congress appropriated $30,000 (equal to $833,250 today) in 1843 for construction of an experimental 38-mile (61 km) telegraph line between Washington, D.C., and Baltimore along the right-of-way of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad.[20] An impressive demonstration occurred on May 1, 1844, when news of the Whig Party's nomination of Henry Clay for U.S. president was telegraphed from the party's convention in Baltimore to the Capitol Building in Washington.[20]
Any scaled taxation would TWR under your definition.

Even flat taxes impose extra burdens upon the poor as the marginal value of each dollar is very high near the poverty line.

Tax is the least restrictive aspect of US democracy.
That's incredibly wrong. Nearly every conservative I know feels that government services should be ran like a business, as also profitable like a business (at least self-sustainable). What they disagree with is funding those services with tax money. Which obviously follows.
And they rarely do in countries that award special privileges to “religions”.

It all comes down to whether some court, quite arbitrarily, rules whether one's convictions are a “religion” or not, and if they be, one may derive special privileges from it.
How about building 7?
> people supposedly taking 'livestock medication'... really?

Yes. Really. And then apparently shitting their pants in the supermarket. Appalling, I know.

> If they're taking the latter, why call it 'livestock medication'?

Because a lot of them are not, they are taking livestock medication bought from agricultural stores, because their doctor won't prescribe them what they want. You and I both know this is the case, so please don't bother pretending it isn't.

And to be clear. the people who are taking literal horse dewormer as opposed to getting vaccinated are doing a stupid thing. It is the wrong answer to COVID, no matter which way you look at it. Even if Ivermectin -- formulated for humans, qua Stromectol -- is actually a useful treatment against COVID, there's another more useful prophylactic against COVID: A vaccine.

This isn't an opinion, it's a bald-faced fact. You don't need to be given Ivermectin to treat severe COVID if you never end up with severe COVID in the first place.

Should hospitals be administering Ivermectin clinically? I dunno, jury is still out and I'm not a doctor, but an alternative to the vaccine it is not.
There’s the conundrum for society, especially American society. When there are a million rules covering every minute operation of society, it feels a lot like living in a benevolent dictatorship. And that is very near the best outcome to hope for.

But to not have those rules ultimately invites leaded gasoline 2.0 as technology progresses.
A (mostly bootleg) video bundle from a not super popular band. I'm pretty sure everything in there is easily accessible via Youtube now but it's the principle of the thing
There is an implied clause.

> Unvaccinated are 5X more likely to catch delta (than vaccinated), 11X more likely to die (than vaccinated)

Fixed the headline.
I’m not locked my house. Sorry to hear you are. Might be some other reason.
It's directly linked to the same sum discussed by Rumsfeld.
Thank you for pointing this out. I wish more people thought like this instead of instantly reacting. It turns out the Internet in the real-world is opposite of Monsters Inc. The crux of the movie was that children's laughter had more power than their frightful screams. Publishers have discovered that rage-inducing click-bait is more profitable than in-depth stories that help us resolve issues.

It doesn't matter if I wholeheartedly agree with an article that causes me to have negative emotions. Yes, the climate is getting worse. Yes, a few power plants and containers ships are responsible for a significant fraction of the pollutants. Yes, humans are not working to fix it fast enough. Yes, politician X supports horrible thing Y.

Nevertheless, I don't recall giving a push notification the right to trigger my emotions.
I thought the “jet fuel can’t melt steel beans” guys were way off base from day 1. You don’t have to get steel fully melted to weaken it. Anybody who has messed around with a blowtorch and a section of rebar knows this. Plus the building had just been hit by a fully loaded jumbo jet and several of the supports were damaged in the impact.

The idea that someone snuck in hundreds of explosives and attached them to the building without any of the thousands of people who work in it noticing as a backup to an already elaborate air hijacking plan makes no sense.
[December 2020]
I've never bothered to look but it wouldn't surprise me if I'm the only seeder
> Under the "justified true belief" one might say that their knowledge was undermined because they learned it wasn't true. But their teacher, born (say) circa 1970, has no more direct access to the truth of who was the 3rd U.S. President than their students.

I'm not quite sure what you mean and I think a bit more precision is helpful here. If one adopts a JTB conception of knowledge, then one wouldn't say that the knowledge of undermined because the student didn't have knowledge. Yes, it's also true that the (weak) justification for believing Madison was the 3rd president was outweighed by the (new and stronger) evidence that he wasn't... but that's about the justification, not the knowledge per se.

(Quick note: philosophers tend to use "undermined" for when something removes the evidential force, rather than countering the force. For instance, suppose I see someone who looks exactly like you in the library. Ordinarily that's pretty good evidence that you were in the library, and it would be reasonable for me to believe you were in the library. However, if I found out that you had an identical twin, this would undermine the evidence, and assuming this is all the evidence I had, it would not be rational for me to believe you were in the library.)

For what it's worth, the post-Gettier literature (and failure to get much clarify about the concept of knowledge) is one of the things that pushed people towards the more Bayesian approach to epistemology.

(Personally I think the Bayesian approach is avoiding some hard but genuine issues about rationality. Specifically, in Bayesian epistemology everything is relative to your priors. But there are lots of probabilistically coherent priors. Are they all equally good? If so, then there's really not much we can say in general about what's good or bad evidence, what people should or shouldn't believe, it's all pretty relative. I don't think that's right... it seems like one can be irrational yet coherent, otherwise it's hard to say how people like you and me are more rational than people believing massive conspiracy theories. Lots more could be said here, but that's why I and plenty of other folks aren't happy with an "anything goes" view about priors. But then for folks like me who want to say that all coherent priors aren't equally rational, it's hard to say what would make some priors better than other in purely Bayesian terms... so I think we end up back in the realm of traditional epistemology. That said, all this is pretty controversial and this is a pretty quick sketch of an argument, so there's of course lots to be said in response.)
There are other somewhat similar cases however.

In Finland, conscription may be avoided by being a Jehova's witness, that sole religion, on the basis of that it is a non-violent religion, ignoring that many other religions have similar tenants, and many non-religious people are also deeply pacifist who are still conscript. — That sole religion, so named, is exempted from conscription.

And one only need prove membership, not prove that one actually holds those non-violent beliefs to be exempt.
facial recognition technologies and fingerprinting are not normal and please, don't try to normalize them. biometric surveillance technologies (such as facial recognition) in public places should be limited, but also other form of biometric data — such as of faces but also of gait, fingerprints, DNA, voice, keystrokes and other biometric or behavioural signals.

When monitored, we change behaviour and self-censor.

When categorised, we are judged and discriminated against.

It's a vicious circle of power imbalances.

This is NOT normal.
Even if you don't personally believe in any religion, it's useful for a society to formally acknowledge an authority that's greater than the individuals to whom it gives political power.