skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
1. Many people now also don't really place any intrinsic value in human life compared to other animal life or the planet in general. I.e. a lot of people don't believe humans are superior or especially worth being preserved

2. Enough people are still having children that it seems unlikely extinction will occur due to their own decision to not have children
Medication that is past what is considered "large molecule" and in the size and complexity ballpark of proteins. These need to be injected as opposed to taken orally as they're too large to enter the bloodstream otherwise. There is a whole search space out there for medication of this class and we're only just getting started. It's (loosely) like finding out what is possible with a 100MB program vs a 50KB one.
I've had a number of negative experiences with yaml, enough to put me off using it. For example the implicit parsing of 'yes' and 'no' into bools rather than strings (including the NO country code for Norway) <https://hitchdev.com/strictyaml/why/implicit-typing-removed/>, the no-quote rules allowing accidental creation of inline hashes/arrays <https://hitchdev.com/strictyaml/why/flow-style-removed/>, multiline string syntax so complex that it needs a helper tool <http://yaml-multiline.info/>, and powerful extensions that invite your program to be exploited <https://www.sitepoint.com/anatomy-of-an-exploit-an-in-depth-...>

It manages to be both a poor data interchange language compared to JSON, and also a bad human-friendly langage due to the above ambiguities.

Unfortunately it's still the best human-friendly configuration language in wide use, so I use strictyaml (https://hitchdev.com/strictyaml/) instead.
`unsafe { ... }` means "I hope you are convinced by my arguments in the surrounding comments, or better still in my POPL21 paper, that this is correct". Other than that, not much. The keyword itself has essentially zero relationship with the existence of a formal proof. You are talking about proof in a very loose sense.

The narrower point I think you're making is that hopefully attempting to create a safe API around the RCU pattern makes someone think about RCU's correctness even harder. I'm not sure it will produce much, given how much attention RCU has already received in the past 20 years. Any innovation you get from that process will probably be concentrated in describing/encoding the ownership pattern in Rust terms, since that's non-obvious. But the epoch GC implemented in Crossbeam is pretty similar overall to RCU, so it has much to build on in that regard.
Can you explain to me what this “head start” consisted of, exactly?
I think something like this (1-bit-color, might be extremely hard to have Doom not look like mush) might also benefit from a local contrast filter (like the clarity slider in Photoshop). That filter would increase the visibility of line pairs that may have otherwise been rendered as the same color. Maybe you could then not need as much dithering or multiple checkboxes.
I don’t know much about acquisitions, so what is the incentive of the acquisition from the buyer’s side? Apple and Facebook seemed to create clones of the functionality pretty easily, so the main purchase benefit seems risk over implementation timeline. What am I missing?
Nevertheless, human cell culture testing has become a fundamental part of the safe production of many common drugs. FDA regulation and approval extends not just to the chemistry of a drug but also to how it is manufactured, to ensure that the delivered product is safe.
My Extraordinary Messy Analog Note-Taking System
Fearful people have much higher tendency to become bureaucrats. Maybe that's a good thing.
> It is more like providing an "axiom" as the compiler won't be able to check it and instead has to assume that it true.

I don't think one should see this as an axiom, although as you mention one could.

If your unsafe code allows safe Rust to exhibit undefined behavior, Rust makes no guarantees whatsoever about what your program will do.

The convention in the standard library is to provide an actual proof that this won't happen as a comment to each unsafe block.

Right now, there is no tooling to check these proofs, but there is a lot of ongoing research about how to do that, and the standard library already has some tooling to check things about this.

> Normally full machine checking doesn't scale to large projects, but if one had to restrict to writing proofs only for the small subset of unsafe code and let the simpler type/lifetime system handle the rest of the code it might be manageable.

That's the idea.

It is not as simple as just proving each unsafe block independently, but rather all unsafe blocks within a Rust module must be proven together.

From this point-of-view, it would make sense to only implement one unsafe abstraction per module, and keep these modules as small as possible, providing most of the implementation of the abstraction outside the module using only the safe API.

Turns out, this is already how Rust code is written, since this is not only useful for writing proofs (either via assistants or using pencil and paper), but also helps humans reason about the correctness of the unsafe code by keeping all the "fluff" away.
Yeah, who would praise somebody so undeveloped emotionally? What a small, small man.

Then you read about how he treated his family and his employees - he was just a tiny thing of a human being. It's sad - like a self-contained parable about how to not live your life.
Crypto is the only competition that can force financial innovation in TBTF era.
The Great Southwest Airlines Rebellion?
They wouldn’t be so foolish as to reveal their identity would they! But we see their cronies front and centre on the political stage.
Great for people who want to start taking notes - or at least I hope.
What an ignorant comment. Commercial suppliers are fully aware that there are no price gouging laws. They choose not to boost prices when stock runs low because they don't want to burn relationships with long standing customers.

Also as a practical matter the software they're running simply doesn't have the feature to dynamically change prices based on inventory and lead time. So someone would have to manually update all the parts prices, then lower them again later. Not worth the hassle.
> So considering that "people are not defined by group identity", how do you justify "redistributing resources and position based upon group identity" as right?

I doubt it is possible, but I don't discourage people who understand the problems facing a democratic redistribution-intense solution that goes along ethnic lines. However, a requirement for success in a healthy democracy is the acquiescence of the group who lose out. The attempt to end slavery resulted in a war, and Reconstruction gave many blacks a system that was actually worse than what they had before. (Another injustice caused by a political elite too keen to achieve peace).

Generally, as I understood Bernie Sanders pointed out, the attempt to rectify racial injustices by redistribution risks creating racial hatred and new injustices. I am, as I said before, against attempts to impose this kind of solution top-down.

However, something like a wealth tax is far simpler and as it happens, quite a bit of old wealth does derive from slavery and, for instance, if the US were to improve and expand its social programs for the poor to, say, the level here in Germany, that would make a massive difference for the poor communities that have least been able to recover from the effects of slavery.

Such a form of redistribution could be formulated in colour-blind, wealth-based terms. It's still difficult to impose top-down, it's not enough to heal the wounds of slavery, but this measure is much less socially divisive than what you, ignoring things I have previously told you, wrongly guessed I had in mind.

> I think you fell into the trap of CSJ apologists to rely on redefined common terms that sound more moderate to non-believers, but isn’t.

I didn't manage to come up with a plausible guess as to what you might have meant by the motte and bailey in the paragraph before the sentence I highlighted, but I wonder if you still believe that sentence after reading what I wrote above.

My general impression is that you are a devoted foot soldier in the culture wars and have no intention of looking inside yourself and becoming more honest. A shame, since you seem to be not dumb and have a certain persistence. You've learned a few argumentative techniques that have a good chance of improving your effectiveness in the fights you choose to pick, which will do it's bit to make the culture wars even less rational. I think this state of affairs is actually a threat to democracy. However, while I did not enjoy our exchange and have low expectations of what you will go on to do, I do have a certain hope in the redemptive power of logic, and I do not regret the effort I have put into this conversation.
There are many possible explanations. One is that the trial group broke the word record of survival time (for a trial group in this particular category "terminally-ill head and neck [cancer] patients"), but the control group also broke the word record of survival time (for a control group in this particular category "terminally-ill head and neck [cancer] patients"). So in spite they lived more than usual, the difference with the control group is not very big.

Now we need a second explanation: If my possible explanation is correct, why both groups lived more than usual?

Perhaps a similar study started a short time before them and siphoned the worst case so they get only patients that were slightly better than usual?

Perhaps their definition of "terminally-ill" is less strict than in other groups that make a similar treatment and their patients were slightly better than usual?

Perhaps someone added a vitamin as a standard baseline treatment two years ago, and now everyone gets a few more months of survival?

Perhaps during the pandemic the family had more time to take care of them and that increased the visits to the hospital and that increased the survival time?

I can continue making up excuses, but it's very difficult to know without reading the study, all the similar studies and making a very deep research.

The important conclusion is that without a control group, it's very difficult to be sure what is the baseline and if the new drug (combination) made a difference. Preferably a doble blind randomized control group, not an unrelated bunch of guys in another city.
> I’m instead happy that someone with authority is stepping up.

Their authority is just rule by fiat. They are not answerable to the people like an institution in a democracy.

What Mastercard/Visa are doing is not a proper way to run a country, let alone the world.
I've never seen people refrain from engaging in technical debates in the Rust community because they were scared of seeming unkind or impolite. I'm sure that one could argue that other programming language communities have issues with this one way or the other, but the complexity of things that are decided wrt. Rust is such that the way people phrase things just doesn't affect much. There's simply no harm in being kind and polite about this stuff, having good arguments is ultimately what matters.
I can't imagine growing up under constant surveillance today. I assume this limits their ability to develop as adults when they feel that any "unapproved" comment could lead to reprimand, legal issues, etc. Essentially none of the freedom that privacy provides, and the growth that comes from learning how to responsibly use that freedom.
My understanding is that it's the only territory in the UK not under the Crown.

The government is an extension of her majesty, and since the Queen can't even enter without prior permission.... though I believe there's some form of power exerted on the City by parliament.

They are governed by the "City of London Corporation" which is much different from the "Mayor of London".

They have their own police force, power stations, elections. Etc;

Unless you have information I don't have.
I think that's crazy too but I'd like to offer a counterpoint.

People with better options (most people with the skills to do it...) won't take those jobs.

But as someone from a "non standard" background (no qualifications on paper but could do the job), low paid jobs demanding relatively high skills were actually really useful for me in terms of building work experience and a network.

The environments tended to be chaotic and high turnover but proved to be a useful stepping stone rather than a dead end.
How to combat electrical grid challenges with artificial intelligence
WoW :D Amazing!
Single KPIs definitely not. Good system come close enough, more often then not I think the issue is the culture that prioritizes one KPI over all others. Or one department's priority.
In practical terms big portion of illicit wealth from say Ukraine is being laundered through and finds safe heaven in Austria. So being or no being part of EU has little to do with it.
Climate change is demonstrably happening and already having drastic effects right now. Nuclear war is a thing that may or may not happen, but there's no sign right now that it would, so it's a distant hypothetical, much like being hit by a random meteor. It's obvious that the thing happening right now, continuously being reported on, would produce more concern.
On the topic of JSON and minefields, what is your experience using JSON5? I'm considered moving to it for configuration files in an application I'm building.
One major difference is that children need new clothes every month, they need new toys, new diapers, etc. There are reasons why caring for a child is more expensive than caring for an adult.

Of course, you can argue that all of these are unnecessary, but it is likely that they are taken into account when discussing average emissions.
One thing my guru always helps remind me is to zoom out, and let go of my egos narrative. It’s been awhile since I’ve been able to attend therapy, and thus reminded to zoom out and take a breather. This comment did the trick, thanks! Mediation is a beautiful thing, and it helps me dig into it when paired with this mindset (or lack thereof).
> we should push forward and try to make a better world with technology and science

I'd argue that technology and science is the problem, not the solution. For instance, fusion reactors would simply give us more energy to destroy ecosystems faster than what we can do now.
Security of PoW depends on continuously using more resources than an adversary can gather. It has to always cancel out any advancements in efficiency, by design. It's unfixable in this aspect.

This is unlike any other activity where resource usage is roughly proportional to the value delivered, rather than maximized on purpose. Even if we had a Dyson Sphere, we'd have to waste more than a half of it on mining.
"less material for clothing etc"

Kids grow out of clothes and shoes, so you need new clothes that fit them. You tend to buy them toys and safety equipment and possibly electronics to entertain them. They break things at a much higher rate than regular adults. They want to go play with their friends, which if you live in the suburbs sometimes means driving.
What about list, dict, set, tuple, range and map then?
I'm reminded of a recent Yglesias essay: https://www.slowboring.com/p/is-quiet-climate-policy-enough:

Most people don’t care much about climate

Huge sums of money have been spent in an effort to will into existence a mass social movement to tackle climate change, and it basically hasn’t worked. You can get people out to a march, but the people who come are all-purpose leftist activists, which is why you have incredible trouble imposing message discipline and preventing people from showing up with “Free Palestine” and “Defund Police” signs.

And you see it in the polling. Reuters did a survey recently that showed 69% of Americans say the United States should take “aggressive” action to combat climate change, but only 34% would be willing to pay $100 more per year in taxes to achieve that goal. A hundred bucks is not a lot of money. People spend that on Halloween decorations. A nice dinner date could cost you more than that. If you’re buying a car, the dealer tries to upsell you on fancy floor mats that cost more than $100.

Years ago, I used to be a real carbon-pricing head. It seemed (and still does) like an elegant, important solution to a major problem. Leftists would yell at me that this was too much of a neoliberal, market-oriented thing. And they’ve completely won the argument over a carbon tax — everyone agrees that imposing a really stiff carbon price is just not in the cards.

There are companies like Project Vesta that accept donations for carbon capture and storage: https://www.projectvesta.org/, but I don't see them overwhelmed with interest. The most popular vehicles sold to individuals in the United States today are pickup trucks. Nuclear energy is spectacular for the climate but politically radioactive. Vegetarianism, or even just meat-consumption reduction, is a very minority pursuit.

It's hard to square many of these facts with true, widespread concern about climate change.

(Note that I'm not arguing that many of the cited trends are good or desirable: but it is important to understand something before critique.)
Citizen Lab researcher disputes claims from NSO Group
Stepping Out of the Firehose
But if Steve wanted to say "you're full of #%^#" and instead said "I admire your conviction", he'd be the liar.
I suppose my point is you are still burning fossil fuels - admittedly less of it - in most cases (for now) so you pay into the shipping of that stuff around too.
What is causing emissions and destruction of the environment? It's likely proportional to number of people x individual consumption.

The global population is a key aspect of climate change and environmental damage.
The 'I know' vs 'I think' is a red herring.

Steve floated $1/user. In isolation, that's a fine initial consideration.

The OP's reaction - "that means we didn't create any initial value" - is 100% accurate response.

What you do with that epiphany is what's important.

In the end, iTunes Genius Sidebar didn't last long either.
For me it is that climate change could be the trigger of many future conflicts (climate migration, water wars).
Well, that blog post was rather uninspiring. The winning solution basically amounted to a whole bunch of hyperparameter tweaking using tons of GPU compute on a UNet architecture that has existed for many years now. We've definitely reached a plateau of sorts when it comes to vision-based deep learning. There is definitely progress still happening, but a lot of it is very incremental and there hasn't really been any big fundamental overall performance improvements in a while. That being said, there has been a bunch of work on improving efficiency. Which is nice, but it only buys you so much when the only way to "improve" overall performance is to throw in several million more parameters with larger models to eke out another few percent in accuracy or whatever metric you are tracking.
Indeed. While I happened to correct that I was not having a family battle, you may never know and a lawyer is necessary ASAP anyway.

The closest analogous life experience I can think of is trying to sell or purchase a home with a mortgage, except the process can take over a year from the first time you contact a lawyer, they won't tell you when it ends or how frequently you'll need to do things, and it's much crueler as it's obviously not something you wanted to do in the first place.
I suspect you were flagged for seeming to complain that the submission was inappropriate. See the HN guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Posted now because it is still relevant. Previous posting/discussion:

5 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12796556

3 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16897061

2 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20724672
ZTE widens bug bounty to focus on 5G security
> Most of the banks operating in the City of London are European or American anyway

HSBC is neither, and is the second-biggest bank in Europe. Just to name an example. (I guess by "European" you mean "EU-based")
It's not a matter of "belief".

If a new person on the planet is born and goes their whole life without contributing to the cause and carrying on the current status quo of resource exploitation and fossil fuel usage, they will have made the crisis worse.
Software that disregards the users wishes when you run it used to be called malware. An install is not an entitlement to do whatever you want. Software vendors are the ones writing this malware so why should they not be blamed.
In the context of microcontrollers I think the issue with using a heap is not per se that you do not have enough memory, but more that your memory usage becomes unpredictable or very hard to make any guarantees about.
FontOnLake malware infects Linux systems via trojanized utilities
In my opinion, a really huge factor making everything worse and harder to resolve is that there are simply too many people. A degrowth mindset is an important part of pushing forward to make a better world.
I've heard this argument before, but it's incredibly hard for me to buy it. The 50 years since 1970 have brought us the personal computer, the internet, and the mobile phone, each of which has entirely reshaped the world. That's just from the perspective of the average person; there have also been huge leaps in manufacturing, energy, medicine, biotechnology, genetics, and so on.

Many of these problems are political/societal, and not technical: the stagnation of wages in particular. I would argue that instead of a lack of change being the problem, the issue is that society is still trying to desperately adapt to the increased rate of change that's happened during the last century.
Yeah I just watched a video about this actually, about how we all continuously monitor our own actions and motivations based on society much more than before, due to continuous feedback through our phones and computers, both social media and while at work with various continuous metrics. Even small amounts of regular surveillance add up to total continuous self correction and self-shaming. For that matter, I can't even relax on Sundays anymore.
I had a one hour phone interview one of their engineering managers a few years ago and I thought everything was going well but he said to my face that I'm not a suitable candidate for then. I don't know about their work culture.
That advent of tooth decay has long been seen as a marker of a society's transition away from foraging and to agriculture which generally brings a lot more starch into the diet.
Maybe it's the same effect as happens with monoculture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoculture#Risks): more efficient, but more fragile/risky?
I wonder why it's articulated.

Edit: drive shaft wear.

It just seems to be an extra complication and harder to steer if not hydraulic assisted.
Bear Came in the Bedroom Window. The Family's Dilemma Was How to Get It Out
Yup, and it's a manipulation tactic to make you show your belly - which this guy still does, years later.
Do we have the production capacity and technology to eliminate carbon emissions in 5 years? Or will it require lifestyle adjustments? My understanding is that the manufacturing/production sector probably could not handle such a large change so quickly. For example, sourcing materials for vehicle batteries and infrastructure updates to support charging.

We could probably cut back dramatically, maybe even to zero, in 5 years. But it would require more than just the technology today. It would require massive political and lifestyle changes.
Yeah but it scales badly, especially with all the people not solving it contributing to the problem.