skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
While I agree with you in terms of true unknowns such as dark matter/energy (science does need more diversity of ideas), climate change science is comprehensive and conclusive.

Any other ideas are absurd: we know the human contribution to climate change cause, have measured the anticipated effect, and found irrefutable causality.

Disputing human climate change is like disputing the surface temperature of the sun. These are measured facts, not theories.
i remember not long ago lancet scientists claimed that the lab leak was some kind of ridiculous conspiracy theory.

Scientists can be corrupted too.
Former Navy submarine officer here. This sucks, but it happens. (It happened to a boat I was on.)

It could be hitting the bottom of the ocean (which nearly killed 130+ people on the USS San Francisco years ago - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_San_Francisco_(SSN-711)#Co...), it could be hitting another ship above it (coming to and/or operating at periscope depth is dangerous), or potentially another sub.

Invariably people get fired, and whatever happens becomes a lesson learned that the Navy trains on in the future.
Personal attacks and name calling will get you banned here. No more of this, please.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Yes it is hard to balance, the V's hate episode on Hackernews is the perfect example, a lot was going against the rules and yet "allowed", including personal attacks towards V's author, because it just is the nature of discussions in general, i guess
Ping the world (2015)
Crimes should be investigated by law enforcement, not Cloudflare.

Cloudflare is not Batman.

(Edit to add: yes, I'm aware law enforcement is often useless when it comes to cybercrime. But that's what we need to fix, rather than encouraging private companies to act as vigilantes.)
Personal attacks and name calling will get you banned here. No more of this, please. We've had to ask you this multiple times before.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
The virus is very proinflammatory so it's not surprising that vaccines that simulate parts of the virus are also proinflammatory. There even appears to be a dose dependence: Moderna packs in a lot more than Pfizer-BNT. So there is a rational framework to think about this. What is bizarre is how people could in the same breath show a lot of fear of the vaccine but then brush off the risk from uncontrolled viral reproduction in one's body from an infection.
It seems to come up every time Tether is mentioned, so I will make a top level comment: do not short USDT/USD. You will not win. The only way you might (emphasis on might) short Tether is to be long off shore and short CME (I explain why in a comment further down).
Wow, you really don't understand this at all, do you? You even tell us you thought it was about something else.

I didn't know about MasterClass myself, but I have to admire the marketing genius they've shown here. Of course you can't make much money teaching people a real skill, because that's hard and most people don't want to put in the time.

However, aspiration and status-seeking are things that are much more universal, and they've figured out how to milk those. Good for them.
Unions work well in countries like Germany. I have always wondered why unions failed so badly in the US? I assume corruption was the major problem?
That's a flawed analogy, cloudflare here provides cover for these dodgy sites to hide behind. Cloudflare here is not only the V8 supercar but the getaway driver as well.
This thread just seems to be revealing that Japanese culture is up there with the Taleban and Saudi Arabia when it comes to enlightened attitudes to women.

> A failure of a smooth transition of the husband’s daily lifestyle may also increase his physical demand for his wife’s homemaking tasks
How to Be a Nice Programmer
"properties purchased for the sole intent of knocking down the existing structures to build apartments/condos/etc"

That seems like a particularly cogent example of the Free Market/Capitalism/Invisible Hand at work, at least to me.

The curious thing, again, it seems to me, is the idea that other people who don't have an ownership interest in the "properties purchased" should have a veto in what the purchaser can do with said properties is presented as the Free Market/Capitalism/Invisible Hand just doing its thing.

If the new zoning regulations prohibited building single family housing, well that would be (again, it seems to me) bad too. Do they?
Do it!

I'm 36 and my current gig offers 5 weeks vacation, and I just came back from 3 months (topped up) parental leave.

Life is too beautiful to work 5 days a week
> Science isn't done by YouTube video battles but by debates in scholarly journals.

That's a lot of confidence to have in a very broken system given the replication crisis, ineffective peer review process, excessive and pervasive paywalls, and general high barrier to entry.

Youtube is actually pretty great platform for lots of science and educational channels. I could easily see a scenario where some very poorly done climate study is talked about on Youtube and it becomes demonetized simple because the algorithm believed it was 'climate change denial ism'.

Sure it is Youtube's right to do whatever they want and we are just 'lucky' that Youtube isn't controlled by anti-vax, climate change truthers, etc.
I distinctly remember advertisers saying they would put their ads on demonetised content featuring guns after they banned ads from such so it’s not impossible that some advertisers would be okay with their ads on some controversial content.
YouTube only makes money if ads are shown on the video. YouTube also has an algorithm that chooses what gets promoted and recommended. There is absolutely no way that YouTube does not take into account whether a video is monetized when choosing recommendations. Ie this will most certainly limit the visibility of these kinds of videos.
Some additional information. https://news.usni.org/2021/10/07/breaking-attack-submarine-u...

Looks like 11 sailors were hurt. Very interesting indeed. Some sort of reconnaissance buoy? Or perhaps they were traveling close to the bottom of the South China Sea and hit the bottom? China considers the South China Sea an internal lake, so they would think they’re within their rights to mine it or otherwise defend it with submarine nets or booms. I imagine within the context of a larger conflict the PLAN would enact all sorts of submarine countermeasures in the South China Sea. This is why the lack of clarity/conflict regarding ownership of that body of water is so dangerous for the rest of the world.
>" Set up patreon if you want income making "more CO2 is good, actually" videos..."

What about when Patreon demonetizes the content?
Slowing down on a highway is required by law in many areas, in the presence of emergency vehicles.
Understandable. Debate is nice and all, but self-defense is justifiable.
The people with the money. Obviously.
link to the site ?
Those videos lead to deaths - so that's completely reasonable. America has pretty much plateaued in terms of vaccination rates and that is prolonging a disaster.

If we're going to ban instructional bomb construction videos then I think anti-vax stuff is perfectly acceptable as well. I really don't understand where this miscomprehension that you should be able to say anything you want on private platforms comes from - there have always limits even on public speech, and private platforms have traditionally refused to print or publish items that go too strongly against their corporate beliefs. This even extends into print media and editorial boards.
> The core of science is debate.

The core of science is not debate. It is a cluster of related items such as falsifiability, empiricism, mathematical modeling, reproducibility etc. It is most certainly not debate. You are confusing politics with science, which in many cases is a very deliberate right wing stance.

> There is very little actual consensus in the scientific community about anything... eggs are bad for you

This is also false. Argument by analogy with nutrition science is a cop out, because it is unethical to run controlled experiments on human subjects without appropriate consent. However, nutrition is important for society and we make do with weaker correlational studies on biased samples which can evolve or get overturned in the future.

Climate modeling is very unlike nutritional or social science and can by modeled consistently.
Performative altruism, so hot right now. I used to have this old book by this guy Matthew something or other that talked about good deeds being done for the purposes of being seen. Might have to revisit that one again, personally.
I played it back then. Thank you!
> have people with guns show up [0] to the person with control over it

It is much easier to physically confiscate cash, than it is to confiscate a wallet that you don't have the keys to.

Sorry, but it just is. Yes, an arresting authority can always threaten people, with violence, but that has problem and roadblocks to it. People get mad. Courts come into the picture. And although yes it is possible it is still more difficult to do, with greater negative consequences to doing so.

The point of censorship "resistance" is not to be completely immune from a mind reading mecha-hitler, who will nuke the universe if you don't give up the password to your crypto wallet.

Instead, the point is to make it more difficult to confiscate assets, in more situations, such that it significantly reduces but does not stop completely, the times that assets are confiscated, as opposed to the absurd super hitler with nukes hypothetical.

> that the mechanics the government uses when seizing something are exactly mechanics that would constitute stealing if they weren't backed by law.

Nope. The mechanics that are used and available to the government, in real life actual examples, of how actual governments work, make it easier for those existing governments to confiscate cash as opposed to crypto.

This is not about absurd hypotheticals. This is about existing government laws and implementations of those laws.

Once all the governments in the world, actually change their laws such that they can now threaten to nuke the universe, if you don't give up your keys, then you can start talking about how technical solutions have zero effect on getting around existing government policies.

Or, in other words, the "wrench" solution has significant drawbacks that make it difficult for current governments to implement. So it is stupid to bring that up, as some gotcha counter example, for why you think technical solutions are worthless, when talking about actual real life, as opposed to your sci-fri fantasy novel.
They haven't committed to anything.

Key paragraph:

> As You Sow on Monday agreed to withdraw the shareholder resolution. In exchange, Microsoft promised to “complete a third-party study evaluating the environmental and social impacts associated with increasing consumer access to repair and determine new mechanisms to increase access to repair, including for Surface devices and Xbox consoles, expand the availability of certain parts and repair documentation beyond Microsoft’s Authorized Service Provider network, and initiate new mechanisms to enable and facilitate local repair options for consumers.”

So: "a study", "certain" parts and documentation, and "initiate new mechanisms " -- all vague handwaving. No guarantees that anything will come of that study, no mention of which -- and how many! -- parts, and "initiate new mechanisms" is typical blithering coprporate-speak that actually doesn't say anything at all.

They haven't committed to anything.
> NT kernel is better designed. Async IO

This was true until io_uring, but io_uring is far more useful for far more purposes than overlapped IO.
Once upon a time, cs.utexas.edu ran a well-known email-to-news (i.e. NNTP, Usenet) gateway. After some problems, AOL's admins asked the person who ran it to block AOL email addresses. Yeah, this was years ago.

Some time later, a person who had an AOL email account (who some of you might recognize, so I won't name names even though I'm dying to) contacted the sysadmins, complaining that the email-to-news gateway wasn't working. When she learned that AOL addresses were blocked, she threw a tantrum, threatened to contact various newspapers, complained about UT blocking public access to things paid for by public money, and so on. As a result, the mail-to-news gateway was shut down.

That's my AOL story.
Another what if scenario would have been if Apple bought Sun instead of Oracle. We'd have ZFS on Apple devices say 5 years before APFS was rolled out.

As for Blackberry: and Nokia. I know Nokia was not very popular in US (for smartphone), but elsewhere in the world they were. In Europe it is Android which replaced both Nokia and Blackberry.

Android was coming regardless of iPhone. A major thing would be if OSK would be as good as it is on Android if iPhone would not have existed.

But Nokia was ready for the masses with N9 were it not for burning platform memo.

Symbian also had and used capability based security. iOS got it much later, and Android plays catch up on security and privacy with iOS.
We never did, but it can look as if it is moving further away from that goal
You dont need to believe in anything. Science is not a dogma. if Science is correct it can be demonstrated.
Would you please stop posting unsubstantive comments, fulminating, and posting flamewar comments to HN? We ban accounts that do this sort of thing and you do it a lot. That's not cool. I don't want to ban you but we've had to ask you this many times already, and at some point the slack is going to run out. Please read the rules and stick to them: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Just as another point of reference, my (2021) Mazda 3 AEB has only ever activated when another driver stopped short in front of me. I believe it's configurable in settings, though your experience may be worse due to environmental concerns (bugs, rain, dust), different model year, or simply being a bigger vehicle (with a different bumper height or more mass requiring more time to stop).
>They can decide to sell 10 copies, and dictate that if they are resold, the photographer gets a 20% royalty.

Suppose that I want to sell my copy, but do not want to pay the 20% royalty. What stops me from selling it for 1 cent on-chain, but buyer paying me real price off-chain? How can a creator realistically expect to receive their royalty cut?
I was looking for something like this, thanks for sharing!

Can I ask how you are sourcing/populating your data?
Of course. It seems that I missread and this was all about advertisers, not about content creators.
I am completely exhausted by these large private monopolies becoming arbiters of speech. They have too much power and play too big a role in controlling our politics. Democracy isn't just the act of voting - it also involves everything that comes before it, and if you have massive platforms that bias their audiences through algorithmic/policy interference, it ultimately amounts to interference in our democracy. In a world where most of society's speech takes place on these platforms, we need to treat them for the common carriers they are, as UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh put it (https://shapingopinion.com/is-big-tech-a-common-carrier/), and regulate them.

To get more specific, this decision is going to result in Google drawing arbitrary, indefensible lines based on the perspectives their employees and leaders deem allowable. For instance, can a content producer monetize their perspective that the Pacific Northwest heatwave from June was not primarily caused by climate change? There were numerous headlines claiming that this heatwave was "virtually impossible" without climate change, quoting a paper that was not peer-reviewed. But the paper itself admitted that a record breaking heatwave would have taken place even without climate change, and this point was made by others such as Atmospheric Sciences Professor Cliff Mass at the University of Washington (https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2021/07/flawed-heatwave-repor...).

So whose opinion is allowed in that situation? Who gets monetization that biases the world towards that perspective and who gets drowned out? Who gets a fact check or context label that casts doubt on their content and who doesn't? Apparently, the world we've accepted, is one where a small number of Silicon Valley progressive elites decide all of that for the whole world.
My view is no one has a right to “monetization” on someone else's platform.

Admittedly it is has a “chilling effect” but I’m more concerned that we should allow debate instead of being concerned we should be able to make money off of the debate.
"There are two types of programming languages: those everyone complains about, and those nobody uses."
Due to the current chip shortage they've moved to a vision-only system, as they had difficulty getting radar units in the quantity required. Until recently however, all Teslas had radar since ~2014. The high profile crashes are mostly/all radar-enabled vehicles.

The thing about automotive radar, and this isn't just Tesla, is that stationary objects are normally excluded. Otherwise the system brakes for things like overhead signs that have high radar reflectivity. Stopped cars, concrete barriers, etc are all basically invisible to most automotive radar.

Tesla also isn't the only manufacturer taking the vision approach. Subaru, for example, was doing vision-only emergency braking in 2016.
The sign up form could use a confirmation dialog, had to get into the dev console to confirm it had been submitted. Otherwise cool idea, I'd like to help coming to development from a non-traditional background as well.
2022 will finally be the year of the Amiga Desktop! /s
This is an example of old technology (programming language) pronounced dead numerous times.

I can give another example: COBOL.
https://www.makeuseof.com/what-is-cobol/

The idea behind this is that marketing and agenda driven "visions" often paint wrong picture towards an ideal future. And reality always finds a way to strike back.
Is El Salvador really using Bitcoin, or is it just using Bitcoin-denominated local bank accounts? The Bitcoin blockchain has nowhere near enough transaction capacity to handle all those transactions if they actually go out to the blockchain.
> I think by far the biggest improvement newbies can make is just not hanging pieces and blundering, honestly. Literally the majority of games at <1600 lichess level will be decided by mistakes.

This, in fact, exactly what GM Ben Finegold points out. At anything short of Master-level play, blunders define the winner. "Never resign" is something that he drums into his students.

My biggest issue with chess is that playing chess isn't "fun"--it's hard work. There are a lot of games that I would rather play when I'm against a human socially.
I mean, he himself wouldn't necessarily be able to tell the difference of him getting worse or the rest getting better. To him it's just getting harder to beat people. At his level how can you judge yourself unless you played against a fixed-version AI chess program?
We might have a slight misunderstanding. I'm not saying you do not have a right to complain about them doing that. You absolutely do.

I'm just saying that you shouldn't have too many expectations of companies. If they really meant it, they'd put it in writing. Employment contracts in many many places are written to favour the employer in all aspects.

Another example we could use are the notice periods. You will be hard pressed to find a North American company where the notice period in the contract is longer than 2 weeks, if even mentioned explicitly at all. Never mind states that have no minimums by law. Yet there seems to be a weird "social contract" that expects employees to give a longer notice period in many cases. If you want me to give you ample notice, give me a contract that requires the same of you.
Why do you need to have faith ? The scientific method is all about proof.
I agree, but you're edging on strawman there.
Anyone Seen Fort Knox's Trillions?
> but by debates in scholarly journals.

And these debates should be open. It's incredible how hard getting data on clinical studies are vs. here our culture of open source.
If USDT goes, so does AAVE and everything else. And as has been mentioned, the iFinex crew have squeezed USDT to $1,000 before.
> Universities will get whatever the state appropriates to them and then have an obligation to take all comers.

Would that be like current pre-university public schools then? Shudder!
Ohio Legislature is pushing SB 282 … perhaps we can ban cars on streets to avoid cancer if incomprehensible law is passed? We can only think ignorant corrupt legislators without consciences are lining their pockets with something beside radium 226
> So in essence privacy extensions (hiding of internal network) are available, but disabled and unsupported by default

On Ubuntu Server: probably. Why would you want a randomized IP address on a server, anyway? Netplan doesn't seem to be designed for desktop, so I don't think it's a problem in most cases. Perhaps you want to add privacy to a raspberry Pi running a scraper or something, but there aren't many use cases I can think of that require privacy extensions in a headless system.

On user-facing operating systems (Windows, Ubuntu, Manjaro, Android, probably macOS/iOS/ipadOS as well) privacy extensions are enabled by default AFAIK. They're also completely supported. In fact, I can find more posts online about people wanting to _disable_ the feature rather than how to enable it.

> How to do that with ipv6 network?

Any decent router will put a firewall between you and the internet, blocking incoming traffic. Your IP may be publicly routable, but it's not reachable by default in most consumer appliances. You shouldn't need to disable anything.

Many people will confuse NAT with a firewall, but those are two entirely different things! NAT makes devices unreachable by breaking the internet, but there are many NAT loopholes (port knocking, NAT slipstreaming, etc.) that will bypass NAT if you can get a user to install software or even open a website from inside the network. In the IPv4 world the firewall and NAT setup are often combined, leading to a broken firewall in many cases because they automatically add the necessary firewall exceptions to make NAT work.

UPnP generally does two things: it sets up NAT _and_ it adds a firewall exception. Reserving a port on the router's public IP address (NAT) is of little use if you don't accept traffic on that port (firewall), after all. On IPv6 there's no need to bother with NAT, but the firewall exception still needs to be added for a port to be reachable.

Effectively, the difference is that if you have three smart lightbulbs that are all reachable on port 80, you don't need to forward port 80, 81 and 82 to different IP addresses to make them available to the internet; you need to add three firewall rules for port 80 and then just use their real IP addresses instead. That's exactly how IPv4 was always designed to work before the IP address shortage began and NAT became the standard.

For rare exceptions, there are some forms of NAT available on IPv6, but they're only designed in circumstances where your network design is basically flawed (like for those ISPs that hand out a /128 address instead of a /48 or /56 like they're supposed to, forcing routers to do NAT for no good reason).
I (mostly) agree with your definition, but the word 'ultimately' does a lot of work there. Many people who use 'believe in (the) science' are actually asserting that science already revealed the objective truths of the matter in question.