skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This flies in the face of 40 years of UI design. Muscle memory is a good thing. Muscle memory is exactly the point where you don't have to think about it at a low level. Imagine if they completely and wildly rearranged automotive UIs at the slightest provocation. Suddenly, your brake is on the right because somebody thought it looked better over there. Admittedly, Spotify changing their interface has much less risk for harm than non-standard automotive layouts. However, the idea still holds.

Hell, if something caused the icons on my phone to be rearranged, I'd be pretty damn mad. According to the logical end of your viewpoint, phones randomly rearranging the icons would be a good thing because you have to relearn everything?

There are ways to truly foster neuroplasticity. This ain't it.

I'm very good at learning a new user interface. The problem is when you change things up, you take someone who has become proficient and drop them down a few pegs when you change up too much. Ever wonder why, even with the changes that are present, the core concept of an application like Photoshop is still there, virtually unchanged? One or more edit windows, a toolbox, option panels, and menus. Even though it's been expanded on, the window layout of the latest Photoshop CC is very much rooted in that of the earliest versions.
India’s ancient tribes battle to save their forest home from mining
I mean you are anti-woke and supposedly much more informed than so called "woke" people and yet all your information seems to be coming from a single source.
Height launches public access and raises $14M
I am a smoker too and if things get particularly intense I have to take a smoke break!
Well, I do believe two FDA officials resigned in protest saying there was no scientific evidence for the efficacy of a third dose, and that does sound like legitimate informed scientific dissent.

I think the claim that this 'third dose' was pushed through by pharmaceutical corporations and compliant government officials can't be so glibly dismissed, given such issues.

Of course, future data might support or undermine this view, but it's hardly 'anti-vax hysteria'. Our pharmaceutical system has a long history of this kind of thing, due to their mindless focus on profit margins with much less regard for the safety or efficacy of their products. Look up the Vioxx debacle, for example.
Does this include those that made claims about the effectiveness of the vaccine that turned out to be overstated?
Google stands to lose a lot if DIDs take off. They'll stop at nothing.
>How many people make their vaccination decision because of Youtube content?

Way more than one would think.
I have an 8GB model with the B0 stepping. Is there a downside to this? Can it not address all of the memory?
lookup ad hominem
While the title says All anti-vaccine content, that actual article notes, it's blocking content that says "vaccines cause chronic health effects or contains misinformation on the substances in vaccines". A person who is hesitant about vaccine safety wouldn't be blocked then. Only if you say that cause x side effect (when that is not backed in science), or if you provide false info on whats in the vaccine, since the ingredients are facts. Someone saying their is a microchip in it, would not be a fact.
Why do people fear long-term effects of the vaccine (which seem very unlikely in light of past vaccine history) but dismiss equally unknown long-term effects of covid? It is true that most children are not affected by covid in the short term compared with other age groups, but some get neurological disease, and others have gotten "long covid". Those are not the same as the typical vaccine side effects. Feels like maybe a case of the "trolley problem".
Demonetised videos can be loss leaders, pulling views to other monetised videos and having the user stay on the platform.
Build your own Git server
GDocs, for one. Every time you share a link, some people can see it and some can't, and newcomers and agencies keep having to ask for permissions...

Sure, it's fixable, but again why introduce the complexity when Slack and Jira ALREADY LET YOU PASTE IN RICH MEDIA and handle permissions and sharing internally?

What does Dropbox Capture add that makes it worth the extra hoops? The markup? The embedded avatar? I just fail to see the worth of this product...
Here's the video in question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7lRV1VHv1g (reupload).
Assuming Youtube video IDs are unique even in the case of removal, we could just create a URN space for Youtube, say urn:google:youtube:<video id>. Another option would be a content-bassed hash, but that would make quality variations of the same video unrelated.

Once you switch to a permanent resource identifier, you don't need to rely on Google for locating the video anymore. That won't replace Youtube as the massive video store it is, which is probably not a (financially, legally) feasible undertaking even on a national level, but at least you untangled one part of the kludge.
> Months ago he was insisting that the people who had contracted COVID-19 and who had antibodies in their system may not need the vaccine. Now, we have a number of studies coming out to support that.

He was insisting without any studies? How is that not a problem?
And how do we get information if only one side isn't censored?
I was very surprised only 20% of papers had any image alterations. I suspect the vast majority of this is necessary due to including photographs. It's essentially impossible to make photos appear properly without messing with the levels. I also wonder about false positives from things like changing a chart legend label with GIMP at the last minute instead of regenerating the figure.
I'd rather listen to my library on Foobar2000 than on an ad-ridden web app with an Electron wrapper.

And by ads, I don't mean free tier ads, I mean Spotify draping their entire app with ads for a new Drake album, for free and paid users alike.

https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/03/spotify-users-push-back-at...
Strftimer: Generate Ruby strftime code from plain English
I don't see it as politicized science, but as abuse of science by politics. Just as when religious speakers abuse science for their purpose, science doesn't become religious, analogously when politicians abuse science for their purpose, science doesn't become political. And this abuse isn't new, politicians did it for ages, it just hit the fan now.
My car repair shop runs some software for billing on DOS box currently (Portland, OR)
Are you suggesting YouTube helped reverse the position on masks?

The anti-mask recommendation was a decision made by the political mainstream, not medical. It wasn't a poll of doctors or scientists that determined whether we thought masks worked. And in the end, at least in the US, I don't think the official position switched because of contrarian voices. It switched because supply caught up with demand.
In your role as a scientist, shouldn't providing evidence of truth (or falsehood) be your main concern?

Statements about importance are value judgements that no doubt you have made, but are not really science and are basically political.

An easy example, "covid restrictions curb covid" may be true and you can provide experimental evidence. "We need to impose restrictions" makes a judgement about the overall situation under the restrictions being preferable to the one without them. This is not a scientific call, this is a societal judgement.

People too often pretend that an action immediately follows from some identified causal relationship. Smoking kills you does not immediately imply you should quit smoking, without the intermediate step of "you value your later life and health more than the ongoing benefits you get from smoking" (disclaimer, nonsmoker)
There were other "special cases". Here in California and many other places in the U.S. committees were formed by non-medical people to decide who should get the vaccine first. Decisions were made not by whose more likely to catch/spread it first, but who was most worthy.

See: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/05/health/covid-vaccine-firs...

From that article:

> Harald Schmidt, an expert in ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, said that it is reasonable to put essential workers ahead of older adults, given their risks, and that they are disproportionately minorities. “Older populations are whiter, ” Dr. Schmidt said. “Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already had more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit.”

In fact, if there was a supply problem, the best populations to give vaccines to first may have been some of the most "privileged" people in our society (even if we don't like them). Frequent travelers, college kids who are going to party anyway, etc. (Of course, people who work in retail stores, or front like health workers were obvious groups that nobody disagreed with.)

The point is, _who_ got the vaccine first wasn't decided by science, but by politics.

I admit to fudging my eligibility in order to get the vaccine early. I may do this again to get the booster if I decide I need it.
> Youtube takes down videos of war crimes. Destroying or covering up evidence of war crimes is, itself, a war crime. I'm surprised that Youtube isn't in hot water over that.

Do they actually delete the videos? For all we know, the video is still stored on Google's servers indefinitely, there is just a flag set which blocks public access to it. If a government or UN agency asks for a copy of the video, is Google able and willing to provide it? Knowingly destroying evidence of a crime is (often) a crime; denying public access to evidence of a crime is not a crime, especially if you are still happy to provide it to the proper authorities on request.

Regarding "Destroying or covering up evidence of war crimes is, itself, a war crime", I don't believe that is actually true. Under the Rome Statute of the ICC, war crimes are crimes against article 8; destroying evidence of a war crime is not a war crime, because it is not an article 8 crime, it is a crime against article 70 ("Offences against the administration of justice"). Other international treaties against war crimes (such as the Geneva Conventions), and national laws against war crimes (such as the US War Crimes Act codified at 18 USC 2441), likewise do not consider destroying evidence of a war crime to be a war crime, instead it is a non-war crime against the administration of justice.
The "slide to power off" prompt literally says "iPhone Findable after Power Off >" right under it every time, but 99% of users will never see it or care about this feature because no one ever turns their phone off.

But if you're one of those few people who does turn the phone off, it says right there, and you can tap on it to shut down to unfindable state this time instead.

Note that it requires a passcode to disable, which is key to this feature. If someone steals your phone it will remain findable unless they open it up and pull the battery.
This is a tactic and works largely the same regardless of what narrative is being weaponized.

Indeed, just look at how "carbon footprint" came from the oil industry. I left behind a conservative religious upbringing, but never found an escape from tribalism and guilt tripping, whether for conservative or liberal causes. Manipulating our need for agency (by touting personal responsibility) and belonging (by guilt tripping and shunning) is an astonishingly good way to divide and conquer a society that really has a lot in common.
> Somebody introduces a new technology to address these concerns every couple years and it doesn't go anywhere.

That's the problem, we need protocols and standards, then laws to enforce those, not _technology_. The DID specification is a "old" attempt at this, I remember first coming across DIDs back in 2015-2016 sometime, so DIDs are hardly new.

> we came up with in the Identity 2.0 days and adding a blockchain

Good thing no one has suggested to add any blockchains! Commentators here on HN would do themselves a service by reading the actual specification before commenting, seems to be a common misconception that DIDs has something to do with blockchains.
Context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hague_Invasion_Act
>Ballistic missiles of course have these kind of ranges and can carry conventional payloads.

Just call while the missile is on the way to let the people it's going to kill know its not a nuclear bomb headed their way so they shouldn't fire a nuclear bomb back.
'Overemployed' workers juggling remote jobs
That’s not really true that vaccination is always more protective, immunology is complex and there’s more interesting nuance to that. See the latest twiv with Shane Crotty, he goes into detail about how natural infection plus one shot creates a better response than reversing the order.

I’m not wringing my hands over anti vax content being pulled at all, but I don’t think we should be reductive about the science. That doesn’t help to establish trust.
The PyPy FAQ addresses this. To my eyes, it looks like this is partly to provide the same promises CPython does for C extensions, and partly because their transactional memory approach hasn't gotten the attention it would need to succeed. I think both of those show CPython stealing the air from PyPy.

https://doc.pypy.org/en/latest/faq.html#does-pypy-have-a-gil...
whats the end-game? I dont see it...
The rationale is:

"There's no time to be debating the scientific consensus right now. We are in a crisis. Lives are at stake. Debating and questioning the consensus (even if it changes) will cause misinformation to propagate and lives to be lost. The only way to optimize for lives saved is to temporarily take away some fundamental freedoms like speech so that the smart people in charge can resolve the crisis with minimal loss of life."
We were mostly dealing with 5km to 10km links, and it was some time ago. There were other considerations as well, so I didn't get into it too much ... not my field, the peeps doing the work seemed to know what they were doing (both customer and supplier), and I had other things to worry about. Extreme real-time data compression is interesting when you're on a lossy link.

I don't think budget was a problem for this customer, getting it right was important, but useful to know about the options and constraints ... thank you.
Last february Liberapay passed the highest weekly volume of Gratipay. And it's still slowly growing: https://liberapay.com/about/stats
> The best the scientific process can do is establish facts about repeatable processes.

And if everyone had the time and resources to discover and digest every fact, facts might be definitive.

But everyone doesn't have time and resources. To compensate, we rely on others to curate facts for us. When we encounter an internally consistent subset of facts that suits our ideals and our interests, we adopt that point of view.

There are infinitely many subsets of curated facts that can be presented as internally consistent. That's why there are so many different points of view.

To complicate things further, it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.
I disagree with the article. I will choose to put my government documents as a backup in my Apple Wallet. I don’t care if other people choose not to, that is their decision.
Transformers’ Learned Representations Change After Fine-Tuning
Is it this one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7lRV1VHv1g

I've never heard of the meme before, but that seems pretty benign.
Over 42% of Koreans in their 30s unmarried
I think that you will find that science has been pretty much that way since the beginning. Can't do science if you don't have funding. If anything, this is simply more transparent these days.

Grant review sessions most definitely have some amount of cronyism, and that famous luminary in a field will almost certainly get funding even if their grant application is worse than that of somebody with fewer citations or younger and with less of a track record. But there's awareness of it at least. And you'll find scientists on Twitter being very open about it, whereas before you'd mostly only find it at the pub during conferences.

There's a great passage from ET Jaynes that I'm having difficulty finding right now. He was a physicist from the 1940s on, and as a young graduate student he talks about how he had to be very careful about what he studied, because if it had the potential to contradict one of the big names of the field, then it could tank his entire career before getting started. If he hadn't "played ball" early on, we'd never have gotten his later Bayesianism.

Science is always a human process, there will be politics to some degree. Politics can only be minimized, not eliminated completely.
> She thinks they’re taking it down because they don’t want people to know the truth.

The sad truth is, they do this just because of fucking ad revenue. There's no grand conspiracy against, or even for anti-vaccination movements. It's just people selling the world for a quick buck.

And some people are still shooting me weird looks when I keep telling them that advertising is a cancer on modern society.
These are not remotely comparable.

One is a company that built a product with a design flaw effecting only one aspect of the product (cell radio) that was only triggered under certain circumstances (placing you fingers in certain positions). A civil lawsuit against the company caused the company to issue a fix (free bumper case which insulated the antenna) that retroactively fixed all products that shipped with the flaw.

The other is a medical device company that sold a product that didn’t work, giving incorrect results that directly informed how people treated or even detected health problems. People inside the company knew this and lied anyway, repeatedly, and then those people induced and conspired with others to hide their fraud. Those specific people are now facing criminal charges.
So your solution is for someone else to come up with a solution which you would find satisfactory by criteria you are unwilling to provide?

Whether regulation should stop YT from doing this is a legitimate question. Nothing else will prevent it. Observe that the government telling a private company what they must host on their platform is potentially more dangerous than the government telling a private company to take down a piece of content (neither of these are happening here but if we entertain the notion of regulating YT then these are to be considered).
You need to tell me what you do and why I might care; then you need to make it obvious what I could do about that.

Everything else is superfluous.
They'll notice it if the data can be discussed freely.
The Actual Next Million Cloud Customers
> Free speech used to mean the right to say anything without persecution.

It never meant that. People have always been similarly free to say "that guy is a dick, we shouldn't invite him to our get togethers" based on your free speech.
Modern C has the restrict keyword for that. There isn't any competitive advantage left for Fortran over C or C++, the only reason why Fortran is still part of the modern numeric stack is that BLAS, LAPACK, QUADPACK and friends run the freaking world and nobody is ever going to rewrite them to C without a compelling reason to do so.
Hope nobody against abortion is at the wheel in this scenario.

Censorship is a shortcut to avoid doing the real work of de-radicalizing people and convincing the undecided. It's not even a working shortcut.

For every issue liberals focus on, there has grown a loud minority who want to normalize Big Tech using their power to ban opponents because they don't see how it will always backfire, and/or they're bullies who crave power over other people.
This response is full of mostly terrible, uninformed takes.

> No practical interoperability. As Microsoft & Google expressed, the DID “Core” spec has not demonstrated any degree of practical interoperability, instead delegating that to a registry of 50+ “methods”, none of which themselves have interoperable implementations.

While there are 50+ DID methods, they're all trivially made accessible via a uniform API [1]. DID method specs and implementations are service-specific drivers, which are meant to plug into a generic resolver and registrar service endpoint which anyone can run.

The point of the DID W3C spec is to provide a standard for creating individual DID methods. It is not, and was never about, creating a uniform API for using them.

> Encourages divergence rather than convergence. The DID architectural approach appears to encourage divergence rather than convergence & interoperability.

Again, the author misses the point. DID methods are service-specific drivers; providing a uniform API is the responsibility of the layer above them. The "divergence rather than convergence" dichotomy here is absurd -- it's like saying that the proliferation of link-layer protocols encourages divergence rather than convergence in networking protocols, while completely ignoring that IP exists and is meant to provide a uniform narrow-waist protocol for using them. Obviously, link-layer protocols don't implement IP, nor are they expected to. Similarly, DID methods are not expected to implement the higher-level universal resolver and registrar protocols.

> Centralized methods allowed, in contradiction to WG & spec goals & name.

This I think is the only fair point in this email. Why the fuck is did:ccp considered a good-faith DID method?! It's a DID method for Baidu Cloud.

> Proof-of-work methods (e.g. blockchains) are harmful for sustainability (s12y). Also as noted by Google, the registry contains methods which rely upon proof-of-work which is wasteful. “Successful” proof-of-work systems waste a staggering amount of electricity world-wide (e.g. Bitcoin consumes more energy than most countries.

The amount of electricity PoW blockchains spend is orthogonal to the worthiness of the DID spec. That PoW spends a "staggering amount" of electricity is not a consequence of PoW blockchains' designs; it's a consequence of the governments of the world permitting it to happen. The absolute energy use is not an intrinsic requirement for these systems -- PoW blockchains would work just the same if the world's budget for mining was only 1 KW.

I expected better from the W3C.

(Disclaimer: I am the author of one of the DID method specs).

[1] https://github.com/decentralized-identity/universal-resolver
How many people have to die because of misinformation before it's OK to take it down?
I think modern solution is https://react-query.tanstack.com/

Haven't tested it though yet.
> The Switch performance

Nintendo consoles aren't exactly targeting the high performance games. What they are targeting with extreme prejudice are people using their hardware in ways they did not bless, the need to lock down the console probably supersedes everything else.

> userspace drivers like DPDK

Which drops all processing in the userland because the large amount of system calls necessary for traditional network operations is too damn slow. Newer kernel APIs like io_uring are trying to address some of that.

> Project Treble (userspace drivers with Android IPC)

I have an eight core android phone, I do not understand why I need eight cores to run a phone but apparently performance did not hit rock bottom back when feature phones ran on a Java based system.

Everything you mention screams horribly bad performance to me.
You're simply wrong

https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101

This religious fervor that has developed around the vaccine has done as much to burn the establishment's credibility as anything.
I’m curious why it was unable? Is it because it had exhausted its storage those days by cashing in on arbitrage bets rather than any technological limitation?

In which case, it’s a breach of contract issue and thus the whip?
That defense is not likely to work.

The reason she's using it is because the evidence is so overwhelming, there are no other cards to play.
unmarried as in not living with someone else?