skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There ought be a bot to keep replying to people saying that the high margins in the US fund healthcare innovations.
This is a popular narrative promoted by the US medical industry. However, it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Just the first debunking I find in a google search is https://www.mhaonline.com/blog/healthcare-debates-funding-me...

I think the big profits to be made on _treating_ diereses in the US is probably a perverse incentive preventing those companies from developing preventative measures.
Market cap assumes that the company captures revenue over multiple years of its future existence. Therefore it could easily be more than one year ad spending, especially if it is assumed that year over year the spending would grow, and the company would continue to successfully exist over decades.
Probably gmail wants you to click on "not spam" for each, so they can verify you actually have a relationship with each miscategorized(on purpose) email sender.
aside from accelerating at stoplights, electric cars and gas cars make similar noise levels just from the rubber against the road. rubber is a significant pollutant as well, as is brake dust.

Don’t get me wrong, electric is much better, i’m only nitpicking since you said “eliminating”
My favorite description of consciousness is from Max Tegmark:

“I think that consciousness is the way information feels when being processed in certain complex ways.”
Finland had around 70 entries on the list of unreachable countries about a year ago. Haven't checked recently. But I noticed that letters to central Europe which took 2-3 days pre-pandemic, nowdays regularly take close to 2 weeks.
My point is that I don't think it is using it as an American legal term, it's using it generically for the the broadly understood idea, a lot being common. At least that would be my assumption.

They could hardly go out of their way to find a synonym not in use by any country, and then keep checking in case some country started using it and people started interpreting the document as using it in the sense of that country's law specifically.

It's not an American legal document, so unless it explicitly defines the term as such, that's not what it means, it's just words. If it said 'murder' or 'jaywalking' we wouldn't pick a country that uses those terms to interpret them in its legal sense, we'd just understand the broad sense of what they are anywhere, even in countries where they are not used ('jaywalking' here in the UK).

> The idea that minorities exist and should have some additional legal protection

Again, that's not what it is. The legal protection is against discrimination based on your <something> such as race or ethnicity. No matter whether the particular value in your case is held by the majority or a minority of people.
> Nothing in POSIX mandates that isalnum has to be implemented using UB.

That is a misunderstanding on your part. Calling isalnum with out-of-range values is UB. Per-spec: "If the argument has any other value, the behavior is undefined.".

> It is entirely permissible to return 0 for values out of range. Or -1. Or anything else.

Of course it is, it's UB, there's nothing it can't do.

> POSIX is not part of the C language, if a function's behaviour is not defined for a given input, that's not UB

So a behaviour which is not defined is not an undefined behaviour. Sure. Whatever.

> that's a license for the implementation to do whatever is natural. Which can be crashing embarrassingly, but why would you do that.

Why wouldn't you? A table-based implementation is flexible, convenient and efficient, and you don't care what happens outside of the function's bounds.
This is the funny part, isn't it? The article talks about opposition to a bill but doesn't clearly name the bill or even explain its actual contents. The closest it gets is a link to another article that talks about two bills - a social policy bill and an infrastructure bill. One would think that an article in 2021 of a bill or a proposed bill could have a direct reference (preferably a link) to the document in question.

From the article that's linked to in the article:

>The social policy bill could be transformative for millions of American families. Though the details are fluid and the overall package almost certain to shrink, the proposed legislation would extend the child tax credit, establish universal pre-K education, create a federally paid family and medical leave system, in addition to an array of programs to combat the climate crisis and transition the country toward renewable energy. The plan would be paid for by trillions of dollars in tax increases on the wealthiest Americans and corporations.

Maybe Apple and Disney are against the apparently myriad other things in the bill rather than the programs to fight climate change?
Annoyingly I feel like it's true. Personally I never had anything strongly against online advertising - there are tons of website and blogs where you can see that people have poured their hearts and souls into their work and the only thing they get in return are a few peanuts from ads. There's the case for trackers and cookies and whatnot but let's be realistic-the analysis and processing is done by a server in the dark corner of a datacenter, not an evil mastermind going through every website I've visited: no one is that interested in me or anyone else for that matter. Frankly I'd be flattered if someone showed that much interest into me but no... But at some point the over-saturation and overpopulation of certain species will cause cataclysms and I feel like we are close. While I stay away from all social media(I'm sure it's a similar story there), the thing that crossed my line was Google and more specifically Youtube. You open up a video, at which point you are already forced through two ads, one of which is unskippable, then you get to the "sponsored message" then another two ads if the video is slightly longer. If I wanted to watch TV, I'd watch TV. And this is what ultimately pushed me over the edge: Brave browser ftw and the hell with all that. And I see more and more people going that way for similar purposes. It's a question of time before enough people have had enough and ads become a financial burden to those who advertise online.
>every other modern democracy

You realize how retarded this statement is, right?
It's basically a bribe -- there was pretty well-sourced reporting that UAW was going to lobby against the electric vehicle package because electric require less manufacturing labor than ICE cars do (ugh), so this was the way to buy them off. It's sort of annoying, but probably tactically the right move given how much power labor has in Democratic politics.
It's not the pines themself. It's when its only pines i.e. lack of diversity.
Mt32-pi: A baremetal Roland MT-32 emulator
Unaddressed in all these comments: are companies simply too stingy with promotions?

Take a look at startups with strong engineers they got from FAANGs. I'm willing to bet in most cases, those people jumped because they were sick of being denied promotion.

Take a look at the number of engineers on your team who have been contributing for years and are still stuck at junior engineer level. The next candidate who "seems strong" will get slotted in higher.
Frankly aside from the carb, the maintenance and reliability are pretty much the same. A new bike's parts would wear too.

However the computer won't crap out on you, and this is now happening with new bikes. Adventure bikes mind you. I wouldn't want my adventure cut short by a computer problem I can't fix in the field.

They still sell bikes without that crap, and they are absurdly reliable.
You say that, but I get the feeling we've been here before. Pretty much every time there is an ambitious and expensive spending bill after a couple of years it turns out that the 21st century is still ahead. Eg, Obamacare would probably have been described as dragging the US into the 21st century and getting somewhere close to what every other modern democracy has offered for decades. And yet it turned out not to, the rhetoric is still that US healthcare is pretty bad.

There needs to be some scepticism about what these bills actually achieve rather than what people would like them to attempt to achieve. And when trillions are involved there is going to be massive corruption in the political process.
I wonder if they're missing a trick here.
In poor soil conditions it might be beneficial to have a fast turnover of trees to start off with; you could bootstrap the soil by burying baby trees to improve the conditions for the next batch.
I don't know what lift tests are. It should be easy enough to devise a tool for measuring incremental ROAS under the following assumptions: a) all purchases happen online; b) I have a complete history of ad impressions and ad clicks for each user who made a purchase

As you said yourself, b) breaks down for multiple platforms. It also breaks down if users have disabled tracking.
This is the big problem with the idea that consciousness is just complexity, and that sufficiently complex systems might become conscious. Stars, storms, gas giant planets, nebulae, etc. The problem is these things are complex yes, but except at a very macroscopic level they have no mechanism to maintain a consistent state, or to control and reliably change that state. They're just heaving masses of particles. Computers and the brain are incredibly ordered systems, and are incredibly fragile to even the tiniest disruption of that order.
UAE: Tolerance Narrative a Sham
I pay for google music, or whatever the name is today, and I see no ads. Bandwidth, servers, the employees, etc. have a cost, so it is only natural that companies make money somehow, either through ads or by subscription.

EDIT: it is YouTube Premium.
> Li-Ion battery production had been growing at double-digit percentage for decades. I think they've proven you wrong many times over

Mold in a petri dish grows at an accelerating rate, until it doesn’t

My conjecture is that there’s not enough lithium/etc in the world to store the energy the transportation sector requires

small cars, passenger trains, sure. but freight is a different animal. we’ll see.
i don't see how that's relevant
I totally agree with your 4 points. However, OP, in my interpretation, is arguing that the job change process is so much more dependent on those few hours of interview rather than career-long growth that career-long growth (or on-the-job performance) doesn't matter.

Of course, interviews are meant to test candidates on their career development and growth as well, but in reality, it is uncertain whether they do, especially if they are focused on LeetCode/theory questions.
If it is a bubble, whom is it going to affect? Dotcom bubble was the investor's money. What is even ad bubble supposed to do when it pops?
So it seems you agree this is not about climate change.
None of those countries offer birthright citizenship: https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-who-offer-birt...

That changes the political and migration dynamics significantly.
وظائف الوسيط اليوم 1/10
The Readme defines:

// Data NonEmpty = | New a (NonEmpty a)
NonEmpty
|A :: ~ * ~> * => {(list A) :: |new}. // A list non-empty is list only with new constructor

The haskell datatype reads like a co-inductive definition: a stream of list elements. But the NonEmpty in your language should be

data NonEmpty = New a (List a)

right?
A video of his "yumihiki-dozhi" little archer and the automaton's mechanism:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5zYK9FxORI
TypeScript 4.5-beta blog post
If you look at eg. Bitfinex and Binance. It's hard to find a llegal entity in your country, if you don't live in the US.
https://racket-mode.com/
I feel like the distinction you’re making is not particularly interesting. It grants a pathway to citizenship to likely-Democrat voters who currently don’t have a pathway to citizenship. So sure there is a process, but it doesn’t change the impact of such a policy.
A table-based implementation, aside from the convenience of being declarative, is also natural if not outright necessary for locales support.
I'm sure many of these things are worthwhile, but a climate change is a big enough problem by itself. If you try to do everything at once, you're likely fail them all.
From the article...
>>Once they realized what had happened, they cornered our boss for details, grappled with the consequences of our actions and begrudgingly arrived at the conclusion that the ends had justified the means

I totally applaud the guerrilla methods taken by employees, unbeknownst to the bosses, that are described in this essay. Sometimes you have to just cut out the committee. Getting people to ditch their ancient software so you can move on with features is virtually impossible unless you hold a gun to their head, and that is never something tasteful for the higher brass -- even the ones who demand the features in the first place. They're in the miserable position of keeping every single person satisfied and trying to improve things. That's why it's not terribly surprising that they're happy to have the engineers go rogue every once in awhile.
Video of Tesla emergency braking or avoiding hitting a pedestrian that ran in front of it would go viral instantly. Can you show me a few? maybe one?
They needle down and kill the surrounding weeds with those needles. The shadow of the canopy is much more interlocked and closed. Its dark, dry and dead down there.
Science is about finding the answers to questions, and philosophy is about working out what the right questions are, which can be surprisingly tricky. The two progress hand in hand. Philosophy isn't just 'bad science'.
I mean, you are certainly right that, again, an NFT is just a blockchain ledger entry, and there could be other kinds of ledger entries. Some examples include:

- Paper certificates of ownership of ideas/ingantible works, which have been used for art in the past going back some decades, and maybe somewhat more common now with certain conceptual / digital art pieces.

- A centralized leger, as the folks from Blain|Southern tried to do with seditionart.com.

- Or, maybe you can do something with federation, as you suggest?

That is just a tech argument of whether a blockchain (say Proof of Stake-based to avoid the energy argument) or something else is better, but note: It changes nothing about what the NFT is (and we can still call it that for simplicity). It would seem to do nothing to alleviate the concerns of people who don't understand paying for a pointer to a media file; since that is still what the federated ledger tracks, right?

If people feel a federated system works better for this, they can certainly build it. But Twitter is just Instagram from a purely technical perspective. There is more to product-market fit than the underlying database.

The whole thing came together with blockchains, maybe because you need an easy way to buy that stuff too, because there was a bunch of rich crypto people actually willing to spend money (when no one before was much interested in paying digital artists for their work), maybe cause the tech was there.

In general, I don't see what the argument is about; the ledger works quite well on a blockchain, and would work less well in a federated system from a trust perspective. I.e. your analysis about the trust vectors involved making the chain useless is wrong. Sure, platforms can choose not to show certain NFTs, and OpenSea has some dominance in the space, but when OpenSea kicked off a Cryptopunk Clone project no one lost their tokens, they continued to be traded elsewhere, and the community still chose to value their possessions, even if it maybe inhibited their growth.

There is really nothing centralized at the center of it in the end. Artists publish work on their own websites and their own contracts all the time, and if deafbeef posts on Twitter about his new NFT on this website, I will trust the existing social verification system (my friend telling me about it, his Twitter account being a known-entity).

This is distinct from Twitter avatar verification, which I predict a) will not happen and b) is indeed useless unless Twitter wants to be in the business of deciding which Punk-derivative project is looking too much like the real thing, which I doubt it wants to do.
Whenever I buy woodstain I buy ronseals quick drying woodstain because it does exactly what it says on the tin. This is because I watched tv in the 90s as a teenager and it was ingrained.

The benefits of brainwashing can pay dividend over a lifetime.
The whole address changes, but there's usually a prefix that doesn't change, e.g. /64.

Whitelisting the /64 is then equivalent to whitelisting a single IPv4 address with a NATted network behind it, although since ISPs may use different IPv6 prefix lengths it might not be easy for users to know what they should use.

("ip ad" etc show the current address with prefix.)
>When companies have more resources than whole countries

This is the part that scares me. Not the amount of resources, but the shitty quality that still comes out of those processes.

I suppose scaling up organisations is even harder than scaling up infrastructure.

This example is actually great, because Whatsapp won the market anyway, with a small team against "more resources than whole countries". Facebook ended up buying it.

Remember how Google lost to youtube and had to buy it too?

To me it seems large organisations use anti competitive behavior to be able to compete against smaller entities, because when it comes to quality large organisations just can't compete against smaller ones.

Or why large chain restaurants generally don't win michelin stars.

And even the successful stuff by large companies tend to be small teams. Think Google Maps or Gmail, which were created by small independent teams. If the whole company could mess with those products they would have likely failed.
or another way to put it: https://babylonbee.com/news/thief-assures-victim-the-robbery...
> Next, we just needed a way to slip the code into production without anyone catching on.

The time when I need to "slip the code into production without anyone catching on" is the time I know I need to move on from a company.

This isn't an action movie, it's a business, the business has procedures, if you don't like them, either try and change them or leave, you should never go rouge like this because if you don't pull it off flawlessly you will be terminated.

Even if you succeed, it will be recorded in your file and wheeled out if they ever want to turf you for any other reason they feel like in the future because now you have a "history"
You seem to be hung up on SAE definitions and missing my point which I'm going re-iterate, maybe from a different angle.

Moving from supervising the car to not supervising the car isn't a binary flip where suddenly in one software revision, you can take a nap while yesterday you couldn't. It's a spectrum. And that's why SAE levels between 2 and 3 are poorly describing this (not to mention how poorly level 2 itself is defined, as it covers a huge range of functionality, from something a bunch of cheap sensors can achieve with graduate level of CS knowledge to something Tesla AI has achieved with FSD Beta which has required custom computers, millions of miles of driving data and some of the biggest brains in AI world).

Since it's a spectrum, the only variable changing is how likely it is you as the supervisor need to take over control *because* your car either made a mistake or was about to. That's all it's reduced to — how often does you car make a mistake. That's all level 3 and up is. All the descriptions and charts do nothing but fog up this, which is unfortunate. Once you have a car that makes very few mistakes, you don't need to supervise it because the probability of it making mistakes is less than you as a human driver at which point it's a better driver than you anyway.

You can of course argue that reduction in mistakes is itself functionality. Well, I make a distinction between continuous and minor refinements and major enabling technology, like vector reconstruction of 3D space from images of cameras, or AI based route planning, which given more data, can plan better.

As far as I understand from Tesla's progress, they need to merely cover ever more corner cases to go up the levels.

And on the topic of supervision: whether you have to keep your hands on the wheel or otherwise supervise the car has a lot to do with policy and regulation. You can have a car today that is safe enough to drive while you asleep and good luck trying to sell it without telling the customers they must stay alert. This basically makes level 3 as defined in SAE subject not only to actual capabilities of a car but the regulatory environment in which it's sold.
What do you believe about the company in say 5 weeks/months/years... Invest according to those beliefs.

I know that's let's concrete but it's real.
Turnover at Blue Origin is soaring, as a direct reflection on CEO Bob Smith
Fallacy. A step in the right direction is still better than taking no step at all.
> Not all IPv6 routers support DHCP-PD

I my experience, they all did. I'm not even sure how you could possibly deploy IPv6 without it, manually handing out prefixes?

> you could have 2-3-4 levels of routers/firewalls at a business.

It seems just a bad design, but I still don't see how IPv6 would not allow it.

> Why? Not all ISPs give static IPv6 prefixes, not all PCs/servers/devices support DHCP6 for static leases, and then there’s IPv6 privacy addresses

1. you don't need a static prefix to write a firewall rule: you can simply remove the dynamic prefix with a mask and match the EUI-64 suffix. For example with ip6tables it's something like this `::e2ab:8fff:fe12:3b6b/-64`.

2. All IPv6 devices do support SLAAC with a stable address mechanism, either EUI-64 or stable privacy address and you can use that in the firewall rule.

3. IPv6 privacy extensions, when enabled, don't preclude listening and accepting connection on the EUI-64 address. So, an inbound traffic firewall rule will just use the stable address: you shouldn't listen on a privacy address, they are for outbound connections.

> Each has different IPv6 addresses. How do you ensure the right ISP is used at any given point? IPv6 shifts this decision to the client.

I honestly don't understand the difference with IPv4. You can have multiple addresses and do load balancing on the router with both.

> IPv6 shifts this decision to the client. This makes load balancing and policy based traffic routing

I can't comment on this because I never tried it, either on IPv4 or IPv6. On top of my head, I'd say it would be possible by updating the routes priorities with an RA, if you don't want or can't do a NAT66 with a ULA prefix.

> At the cost of not having dedicated unique public IPs but these places simply don’t need them.

Wrong! Everyone needs routable addresses, even if they don't know it because they need VoIP, video calls on webRTC, FTP, p2p file sharing, online games, etc. All of these barely manage to work in a NAT by using workarounds like ALGs, UpnP, NAT-PMP, relay servers and other atrocities that greatly complicate the network design and are a security nightmare.
I have done the linux analysis, it doesn't affect Linux.
Exactly, it does not necessarily means co-data, thank you for reporting it, i will fix it.
Excellent comment. Yes, it's terrifying to think of the social power of one silly banner on a huge website - that the bosses don't even notice! It's also really true, and I see it all the time on HN, that people expect data to make decisions rather than understanding that their own bias is shaping the data. Much of this ML data analysis approach is like shaping a huge statue on tiny legs, each person making it bigger and bigger at the top until it falls over.

The best thing about this story is it reminds you to be a rebel.
What is supposed to be the problem? I can't see mentioned anywhere in the articles or comments what's actually meant to go wrong. Mine didn't crash (after 30 seconds or so) and I couldn't see a problem with the output.