skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well said and thank you (speaking as one who also has worked in this area).
This makes no sense. A plateau does not imply decline.
Parsing strings in Powershell is super complicated compared to regular Unix tools
But why not just take the vaccine? That way you reduce the number of bodies the disease can breed in and spread. That’s how you eradicate something.
I think you're underestimating motivated high schoolers.

When I was in high school I was a huge Linux fan and had a side job as a network administrator for small companies in my town. I don't know if I would have gotten the "random ARP load balancing" idea, but overall it seems well within the knowledge admins of the days had about TCP/IP.

When I was between 15 and 17 or so, I wrote small HTTP, DNS servers etc. in C++ for fun (straightforward implementations and not better in any way, so in the end just learning exercises), and I definitely had friends who did similar things.
The current plan is for Git to essentially use SHA-1 hashes as aliases for SHA-256, using a lookup table. This would mean that any given SHA-1 hash would, in a particular repository, map to one and only one SHA-256 hash, which is then used to retrieve the object. Eventually the SHA-1 hashes would be deprecated (via a per-repository mode switch, so every Git user or host would migrate according to their preferences).

https://git-scm.com/docs/hash-function-transition/
> plant failure risk

You don't have to worry as much about major accidents as in fission, but the risk of minor accidents that aren't a public safety risk but are a risk of ruining the plant is arguably much larger. A fusion reactor puts a large, very complicated thing, with many non-redundant parts, into a hot zone where hands on repair is impossible.

The lesson of TMI is that even if the public is unharmed, an accident that destroys a multibillion dollar investment is ruinous for a utility.
How about the death rate from covid being 3:1 in red vs. blue counties?[1]

Is 3:1 big enough to say that there, perhaps, is a problem?

[1]https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/27/briefing/covid-red-states...
Just keeping a majority of an infected but not symptomatic persons spit from traveling around the room would seem like a win even if being in the presence of mask wearers being safer is harder to establish than the effecacy of mask wearing and it won't help if those most likely to spread the disease because they won't be careful aren't wearing them.

Personally I've found n95 mask's with head straps more comfortable than cloth masks with ear straps.
Fun fact: there are very few recorded incidents of a meteorite hitting a person

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylacauga_(meteorite)
> velocity only applies to something in free fall, not to something with a high magnitude inertial vector relative to the Earth (like a meteorite)

It could be conceivably coming at a speed high enough to still be supersonic when it hit the ground. However, were that the case, I doubt there would be still much of a house remaining. Or maybe a block for that matter, depending on how fast it was going.

More likely, it just slowed down due to friction. This is even more likely for a small rock.

> anything with thrust (like a supersonic plane or a bullet).

Plane has thrust, but a bullet doesn't ;)
Airbyte launches a hosted version of its integration platform
> to deal with cryptographic breaks in its chosen cipher suite

Interestingly, this is actually almost doable in the context of a decentralized contract/computing system (with bug bounties to incentivise reporting[1]). You can include in the contract a interface where someone provides a proof[0] that a given cryptographic primitive is broken (eg a pair of colliding messages for a hash function), and the contract self-modifies to no longer trust that hash function.

The other half of the process - adding new primitives - is harder, since you want to prevent the addition of deliberately broken primitives. Obvious ideas include requiring a machine-checkable proof of hardness from some reasonable axioms (eg ZFC + P!=NP + whatever else), although most primitives don't have such proofs, and that doesn't look likely to change. Or requiring a quorum of reliable-seeming cryptographers to vouch for it (refutation: NIST endorsed Dual_EC_DRBG). A escrow period, where a new primitive is accompanied by a deposit that's paid out to anyone who breaks it, might help, but you'd need a seperate mechanism to prevent NOBUS backdoors (again, see Dual_EC_DRBG).

0: Ideally, you want a semi-zero-knowledge proof such that someone who has the option of putting in a tractable but significant amount of work to prove it (eg hash collision in 2^64 operations) will expect to be able to recoup their losses without getting sniped by front-runners, but once such a proof has been used, it's only a matter of time before front runners recover it and warn every contract.

For hash collisions, probably the easiest design is a two-phase model, where the reporter provides a zero-knowledge proof to commit to a particular hash collision, but then has to provide the actual collision to get the bounty. This can also work for preimages of a Schelling point like all-bits-zero. I'm not sure what a good Schelling point for typical public-key cryptography like curve25519 would be though; zero is almost always algebraicly special.

1: Cryptographic primitives are generally broken incrementally, so this incentivises even malicious parties to report a not-yet-exploitable break immediately (and thereby neuter it), rather than spend time trying to develop a working exploit (and risk both the large and small rewards disappearing out from under them because someone else was either honest or just less patient).
HK = Herb Kelleher, founder and CEO of Southwest Airlines

He stepped down just a few years before his death, in 2019.

A colorful character and legendary driver of the culture at Southwest.
While I generally agree, I will say that the ability to dictate a Schelling point is a form of power.

Imagine a first past the post election, where there is no official list of candidates (one simply writes in a name), but where a particular person has the position that they are always the first person to publicly recommend any candidate, and all voters hear this recommendation.

This would be a powerful position, even if that person was not eligible as a candidate, and even though everyone can vote for whatever candidate they want.

When in a position of significant power, even if this power is only of the form of one’s reputation and/or one’s influence on Schelling points, one has a responsibility to, when exercising this power, to take into account the effect it will have on others.

I don’t mean that he failed to do so. I imagine it must have been a difficult decision! And I do hold Vitalik in high regard.

But if one presents such a fork as being merely the the result of independent choices of each user, I think one is mistakenly omitting the power used by big names which promote one fork or another.

I don’t mean to say that this power being present is a problem that needs to be solved, making this power not present. I don’t think that is possible.

Like I said, I do largely agree with much of the “people are free to choose what fork they use” framing.

But while I think it is probably basically the best that can be achieved, I do think it is best to acknowledge that even without authority from things other than social influence and such, that there is still power through said social influence + Schelling point influence + etc. , and it is possible for this power to be misused (though I don’t claim that it was misused in this particular case).

In addition, I do think it seems prudent and good to avoid exercising this power unless the reason to use it is especially compelling (e.g. either part of an upgrade which basically the whole community has been expecting for a long time, or which has overwhelming support, or to handle something which , if not handled, could have an existential impact on the chain, or things like this) . (And, while I haven’t kept up with his latest writings and actions, I suspect he kind of agrees?)
It is a very short list. I wonder why Lisp has completely failed to be successful given the usual fan claims that it is more powerful, more productive, more everything than any other languages? The usual claim by Lisp fans that only a few blessed people are smart enough to understand and use Lisp is beyond ridiculous. I learned Common Lisp, Scheme and Clojure just for fun, and implemented my own Lisp variations (including macros) in both C++ and Haskell. Lisp languages are easy to learn and use. However I would never use a Lisp for production work. I absolutely could. However I simply prefer languages like C++, Typescript and Haskell. So my guess is that people are different, people’s brains work differently, and for whatever reasons Lisp appeals to certain personality types and not others. And it just happens to be that the personally/brain types that prefer Lisp is a minority. It could have been the other way around of course but it just isn’t. I haven’t been able to come up with any other explanation that seems to be even remotely plausible.
Which page within the 145 (chapter 6)? The section on scopes of identifiers (6.2.1, pgs 35-36) is entirely in the context of the C language.
> You can already accomplish 95% of this now with any dishwasher made within the last 20 years that has a delay timer on it. Just load it up and tell it to run in 6 hours and then go to bed.

With solar PV, sort of the opposite. Just load it up, and tell it to run in 4 hours, while you and most everyone else is at work :)
$181 million revenue

$13.8 million cost of revenue

($36) million operating loss.

I wonder if their huge marketing spend is a treadmill that they can't afford to get off of, or if they have a stable and returning customer base that they are building.

I have a feeling it's the former, but if it's the latter, this thing is going to print money one day.
Uh, huh, I clearly didn’t test it properly. I had thought I’d validated checking in while offline. Oops: https://github.com/huonw/huonw.github.io/commit/fd19b9d66af7...

Thanks!
I loved bullshitting about this with my friends when I was young. Probably wouldn't be nearly such an eerie and fun movie if I saw it for the first time later in life.
Yes, although for that a list such as this is merely a helper - e.g. it's not like any mention of or even praise for e.g. the neonazi bands is illegal. NetzDG is an incredibly crude, bad law, because it basically forces sites to be overly cautious, is even harder to comply with for small sites, ... - not really what we want, even if you generally think Facebook should ban such things. (And Twitter and Facebook have also gotten in trouble with German courts for "unfair" banning at the same time)
You have it backwards. Fusion will have much lower volumetric power density than fission, for fundamental reasons (one can circulate coolant through the core of a fission reactor, but not a fusion reactor). Fusion reactors will likely be much larger, and therefore much more expensive, than fission reactors.

Look at the power density of ITER (0.05 MW/m^3), of ARC (0.5 MW/m^3), and a PWR reactor vessel (20 MW/m^3).
>Back when that was the debate, Trump was pushing FDA to "accelerate" approval i.e. do it before the studies analysis was done

There are accelerated approvals as part of the FDA process if there is a need. That is how Pfizer is approved now. Pfizer did not complete all the tests and analysis they typically would have had to go through.

>Now we know how those studies went, but at that point nobody did yet (and they might have revealed e.g. a lack of efficiency

Except like I said above we actually don't know since they have not completed all the studies yet.

>so yes, if FDA did issue an approval back then then they should have been treated as corrupt for breaching their own process in a way that can impact the safety

Interesting.

>that is why the concern was (IMHO reasonably) raised by various Democrat leaders.

I didn't see any Democratic leaders complaining when Pfizer was approved with the expedited process. So faster than normal is fine sometimes.

>Heck, Trump was on record asking officials to alter election results,

Trump says stupid stuff that has nothing to do with this. Biden says stupid stuff. Who cares?

>of course he could also try to overrule FDA if he chose to and wasn't loudly opposed.

He didn't though. Biden could do the same with a sugar pill if some company decided it was a cure for covid. Who cares what somebody could do if they don't actually do it.
It is a law of nature that all successful products find themselves not accounting for some predictable problems.
"By holding classes without adequate COVID-19 mitigation measures, the WSD and board are knowingly, needlessly, unreasonably, and recklessly exposing the public to COVID-19, interfering with the general public's right to be free from unnecessary exposure to infectious diseases like COVID-19 and endangering public health,"

Can't we say this about a host of other diseases or issues? It really comes down to one's definitions of things like reasonable or needlessly. For example, one could say that all in-person school creates needless risk since school has been successfully[1] held remotely.

1. This is also a statement dependent on one's interpretation.
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/compact-fusion...

"A reactor small enough to fit on a truck could provide enough power for a small city of up to 100,000 people."
IMHO it was just a stupid call, because in the face of conflicting data, it would have been a better default option to recommend masks. That's easier to walk back than "oops, we were lying because we don't trust you rubes enough not to hoard, even when explicitly instructed not to hoard." In the beginning of the pandemic I, with effectively zero sewing skills, made a cloth mask out of spare clothing. They could have had an infomercial showing people the most effective cloth mask designs they could sew at home. That's easier to walk back to "oh, cloth doesn't work that great, we recommend N95 now" when the supply of those was adequate.

In short, they could have pretended that the public is not stupid and just told the damn truth.
At one time I would have recommended theserverside.com, at least for anybody working mainly in Java (or another JVM language) but I kinda feel like their content has gotten pretty watered down. Still, might be worth giving it a look.

https://www.theserverside.com/
It depends how big the missing piece is. First, let me be clear that I know nothing about Flash's internals. Everything I'm saying here is just as an example. But suppose Flash depended on a specific 3rd-party graphics engine, and a lot of Flash's own code was written to adapt and work around bugs in that code. Replacing it might mean either 1) making a clean graphics engine and rewriting a large part of Flash to work with it, or 2) implementing a bug-compatible engine.

May instead of a graphics engine, it's a proprietary video codec, or a bytecode interpreter, or a network stack, or a sound library.

Things like these are a big reason lots of projects aren't released as FOSS. Take something that looks simple on the outside, rip out its guts, and you're left with what exactly?
Trump's own recommendations to his supporters to get vaccinated were not well-received:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/aug/22/donald-trump...

...which makes the politics behind it all the more unusual.
Those crickets are very vindictive.
that sounds like a corollary to Conway's law.
The "both parties are the same" thing is a meme in some more engaged circles, because it's so obviously false to anyone paying attention.

It really shouldn't be surprising that the incumbent party benefits from this attitude, yet I get the same look from likely just as many people.
Absolutely agree. We don't know a LOT about how these things would go together once we get past making energy. If the probability of destroying your plant was such that the lifetime expectancy was shorter than the 20 - 30 years a typical plant is expected to operate then it would definitely raise the effective cost.
Unless your research grant pays for the electricity
Why can't someone outside the EU just respond to the EU presence requirement with "lmao no"
> This new data meant that the flu based studies were not representative.

I don't think it's a huge stretch to say that having some conflicting data on the effectiveness of masks to reduce the spread of flu is not the same as having data on the effectiveness of those same masks to reduce the spread of a novel virus.

Throw in distinctions between types of masks, estimates for how well people will use/handle/fit them, and things get very complicated very quickly. Distinctions like that can seem like splitting hairs, but they matter and it makes messaging difficult. I totally get why they wanted to keep supplies for healthcare workers and how hard it would be educate everyone on all the factors, but they really could have handled it better and been more honest.
I feel similarly. Much worse, I cynically worry sometimes that the criticisms of the 60s/70s "AI Boom" are what got "lost" rather than any major advancements were "gained" since. A lot of 60s/70s optimism indeed got eaten by a general sense of "if we just had more storage and speed and larger datasets" (as we'd suspect from what we saw in recent improvements), but some of it got eaten by "it produces reasonable looking results but here's all the reasons it's a sandcastle of sparkling statistics that falls apart as the training set grows worse". I have a worrying gut feeling sometimes that so much of current ML enthusiasm missed some of those 70s/80s memos on reasons to be concerned about applying some of these "sandcastles" to the "hurricane" of modern data. We may have only massively scaled garbage in, garbage out more than anything else this AI/ML boom.
> It's not 'censorship of factual information' for a private service to choose to put health warnings against or delete fact free claims of HCQ as a miracle cure.

I'm not going to get into the "it isn't censorship if it's a private company" debate. That's a facile argument. Silencing of speech is wrong. Full stop. I'm not debating semantics. If the only way you can rebut an argument is by silencing it, then you lose the debate. Get better at defending your beliefs in the marketplace of ideas.

Regarding "factual information": if 2020-21 should have taught you anything about actual science (vs. The Science (tm)), it is the importance of humility. Today's "scientific fact" is tomorrow's misinformation. We've seen this time and again throughout the pandemic -- except that one side is always less than forthright than the other about the times when their preferred facts are wrong.

AI bots and armies of low-wage employees at Facebook and Twitter are useless as arbiters of scientific truth. And science, as a process, depends on the ability of unpopular opinions to exist and be debated. Because sometimes, they're right.

Your desire to "protect people" against information that you deem to be dangerous is only as good as your ability to know what is dangerous. And the masses are finding out about this Dangerous Misinformation anyway, so it's not like the tactics are working. The two major accomplishments of this strategy appear to be:

1) making the censors look like fools on a regular basis, and

2) hardening the opposition and mistrust by the people being censored to the point where you are engaged in all-out war.

So if your goal was destroying trust and confidence in medical authority, and increasing partisan polarization, while hardening ~half the population into rigid ideological positions, mazeltov. The experiment was a success.
Magnesium L-Threonate, also known as “Magtein”
How did your particular group of acquaintances become blessed as the standard group? Do you not understand how presumptuous it is for you assume that your experience is the standard experience and to label everyone else an outlier? Why do you even think there is some sort of dichotomy in this area between what is typical (and coincidently just like your experience) and what is a an outlier?

Here is an interesting article that discusses the misunderstanding of what "average" means in a multi-dimensional context: https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2016/01/16/when-us-air-...

You may actually be right, in the sense that most people don't form long lasting friendships from co-workers, but you can't conclude that just from your personal experience. It was your elevation of your personal experience to universal truth that I was pushing back on. Basically don't use anecdata as evidence of some larger truth.
You mean, it's something for management to decide, and the technical staff has no role on learning the costs and benefits of each option?

If a developer could create it alone, without anybody noticing, the company can replace it again if they learn it's not a good technology.
> high-heat plants like natural gas turbines. The "fuel" was heat going up the stack

if you're burning natural gas to run a gas turbine, a substantial part of the energy has being drawn off by the turbine, so the "waste heat" that you are trying to scavenge has much lowered potential energy to capture.
So no pirates were able to get a hold of it ... sad.
dearth of content? What are you looking for that's not there?

The Quest 2 also doesn't have a noticeable screen door effect since it uses an LCD screen. The trade off is black is washed out. imo the screen door effect is only noticeable on older VR HMDs that use OLED like the first Quest.

Are you sure that you have a Quest 2 headset?
Between waste reprocessing, breeder reactors, and seawater extraction, uranium could power our civilization for billions of years. Uranium would leach into the ocean from the crust faster than we'd need to extract it.
DT fusion reactors are useless for spacecraft. They don't do anything that fission reactors couldn't do better, more cheaply, and much more compactly.

Open Brayton cycle fission reactors would be outstanding on Titan, with all that cold gas to compress and reexpand after warming to quite moderate temperature.
Magnesium Threonate. Seems like it’s specifically meant for cognitive enhancement rather than magnesium deficiency like other forms.
based on http://www.ex-parrot.com/pete/upside-down-ternet.html by chance? or parallel evolution? :D
That is a sweeping generalisation. Covid19 targets a very select group disproportionately, being young and healthy changes the risk dynamics significantly.
If you read the article and think deeply about it you could actually answer this question for yourself.
Simplifying Kubernetes configurations using AWS Lambda
I think it’s possible for two things to be true:

- monorepos are a good way to organise software, especially if there are many internal libraries or dependencies

- It is bad if your dependencies are always churning and breaking and disappearing underneath you

It sounds like the actual problem might be that there are too many dependencies or that they change more frequently. I think the OP was suggesting that the latter of these is the case.
I can vouch for this. I just gave an SDE a bad performance review because he could never recall any code he worked on or how it worked…
I'm not talking about the git wrapper. I'm talking about native "git talks to piper" support, with sparse (read-through) for parts of the tree that aren't checked out. It wouldn't have been a huge undertaking, that was never the case. It's what's documented, but it wasn't actually truth. I worked with the individuals involved at the time the decisions were made and the rationale was much weaker than you think.
Despite the string of non-sequiturs you cited, Germany remains a wet country that doesn't consume 97% of its water.

Refusing to take a longer bath is not going to increase rain in a specific area. Nor is the insistence on letting 97% of the drinking water run into the sea going to save a single tree in Germany.