skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree with this. Relatedly, the media's portrayal of "who trusts the science" (with respect to vaccination rates in particular) has been really interesting. It seems like they're deeply invested in giving the impression that conservatives don't "trust the science", and the coverage seems particularly unsympathetic. But when one digs in further, it seems that poor people don't trust the science, including poor liberals and progressives, which is why even blue cities hardly outperformed the national average for vaccination rates for so long. Of course, when the media broaches that, the reporting becomes sympathetic, e.g., "why is science failing communities of color?" and so on.

And of course, these kind of shenanigans further discredit the media--including the science media--to the poor, minorities, and conservatives thus propagating a cycle of division. It's not enough to have a media that shares our (wealth, predominantly white liberals and progressives) biases, we really need to get back to a media that aspired toward objectivity and neutrality.

EDIT: to put a finer point on it, when we politicize science, we make it harder for people on the outside to trust science. And we have some pretty big problems to tackle right now--covid and climate with the latter being orders of magnitude more serious than the former--and we should want to make it as easy as possible for people to trust the science and do what they can--specifically vote--accordingly. And with respect to climate and covid, it's not liberals who are primarily responsible for distorting the science, but we do distort it on a wide array of social issues and it's hard for lay people to know which science is distorted and which is reliable. If we care about these things, we need to put on our grown-up pants and stop using these issues as political footballs (this means not responding to this comment with some variation of "but the other side is worse than us!" as though it absolves us of our own responsibility). /soapbox
Infinitely better than communism ever did?
I’ve got this sorted out with work, because I feel fully confident that losing my job is more likely to be net good than net bad. To some extent the job is disposable, they lack the leverage to abuse me.

It’s different with family (parents and siblings) who have been absolutely unsupportive to me personally yet continually insist that I do X/Y/Z for them every week. By pushing back and trying to reduce this stressor, they gaslight and victim blame instead of using empathy. But what am I to do? Cut them off and be a pariah from the extended family for the rest of life?
I don't know, reading books to me is very easy, but I find hard to focus on work. I conditioned myself to instinctively alt-tab from my IDE every time a problem gets frustrating to the point I often do this without realizing, meanwhile my "reading workflow" haven't been poisoned yet. So my thesis is that this is less related to losing attention/willpower overall and it's more related to creating distracting habits.
And yet somehow progress is made.

I don't think the gist of your statement makes much sense.
It's that but it's also that their phones are only seeing incremental updates. I bought a iPhone 11 Pro Max almost 2 years ago, when the 12 came out I looked at it and decided to skip the upgrade, my 11 was almost identical. Now that the 13 is out I'm saying the same thing, skip to the next one because there aren't enough changes.

I think the "keep your phone for 2 years" is a thing of the past now. Back in the late 2000's and 2010's I remember when phones made massive leaps every year. The iPhone 3G was awesome until the 3GS came along and blew it out of the water, when the iPhone 4 came out it blew the 3GS out of the water. Back then upgrading to new devices carried some major benefits. The 3GS wasn't just "faster" than the "3G", it was very noticeably faster.

Nowdays thought, I can pick up a iPhone 13 and compare it to my iPhone 11. The 13 has better cameras, better battery life, and is more powerful. But it's not 3G -> 3GS powerful, when I picked up a 3GS for the first time I was blown away how much better it was than my 3G. When I looked at the iPhone 13 the other day I was hard pressed to find areas where it was better than my iPhone 11.
There's tons of factors that go into crime, culture is one of them, disenfranchisement is another. None of them cause all cases, that doesn't mean some of them don't cause some cases.
More like food scientists mastering the process of making something cheaper like palm fat look like butter.
This is a fair point. I suppose I just meant relative to most legislators. It's a very, very low bar - which is partly understandable, given their explicit job is to be the ultimate judge of a vast range of things in none of which they are experts.
This appears to either be a sincere product of a socialist Utopian who doesn't understand basic physical processes and tax concepts, or a cleaver work of satire. I'm unsure which at this time.
The title would have been related to economic news if we were living in the world of Rick and Morty. I get how it can be misleading though.

- and that's how ladies and gents, you fake knowing economics

P.S. the article is not related to economics
> My theory is that rich people save it, and poor people spend it; so here we are.

Supposedly this money is being dumped on conservative investments which are actually worsening the whole economy, such as the massive inflow of institutional investments in real estate which is behind the astronomical real estate prices in some cities.
I was lazy (sic) but here's a quick ddg induced list regarding Flatt(mapp)

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=matthew+flatt+macros&ia=web
> coordinated unauthentic or disingenuous skepticism

We stop trying to ascribe malicious motives to their actions and try to have genuine conversation with them. If they aren't convinced after that then we have more work to do.
We are already limiting access to housing in urban centers by driving up prices. If it is a good idea I don't know, it is what we have and I cant think of an easy replacement. Rent seems to scale to match earnings, toll roads would do the same and compete for the same budget.

We could also do government housing and pay a standardized fee that reflects building cost but then you would need a different formula to prioritize one case over the other. You would have to tell people to leave which is much less accepted than being unable to afford it any longer.

Roads are for transportation but people use them as a place to live(?!) The street the default place to live for everyone??? Imagine how absurd that is.
Its far more concerning to remember that the US Federal Reserve cannot combat this round of inflation using the prime interest rate, as it never fully abandoned QE or Quantitative Easing from 2008.

since the corporate lending market is now saturated with low or no interest loans, any attempt to raise interest rates at all will likely trigger a massive recession. this is called the corporate debt bubble

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_debt_bubble

EDIT: this is due to the QE taper failure of 2012 as a point of evidence as it alone resulted in a 700 point market crash that forced the fed to reverse course immediately.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing#United_Sta...

the fed is therefore stuck hammering news outlets and the government with hopeful rhetoric about "transient" inflation that will somehow clear up after Covid, despite rising unemployment, underemployment, lingering state debt from the covid crisis, and back-rent payments still due by millions of americans who will likely declare bankruptcy at some point.

EDIT: Generally, bankruptcy is a positive influence on the economy. It allows consumers to find a way out of massive debt so they can once again start engaging in the economy through buying goods, services and large-scale assets such as vehicles and real estate. unfortunately personal bankruptcy stokes a permanent US underclass that are denied rental housing in nearly every market. Bankruptcy is also prohibitively expensive for many americans to formally declare, and so the debt remains in an unserviceable limbo on books (eventually becoming an unseen toxic asset.) Bankruptcy can also factor into your employment screening.

and this doesnt even begin to touch supply chain constraints like the semiconductor shortage and the ongoing international shipping gridlock, ergo most of what we're seeing now is the Fed treading water until a major recession inevitably hits.
> and if you aren't listed there [on Amazon], you'll lose sales.

Those sales were never yours to lose, right?
‘Trust the science’ is something generally said by people trying to get others to abide by their demands. In my experience there’s usually nothing scientific behind what they’re requesting. I see it said constantly where I live when people question the efficacy of some of the harshest COVID restrictions in the world including 9pm-5am curfews. For some it’s as though the utterances of our politicians have become ‘The Science’ in which we must believe.
Austin Powers
https://youtu.be/ARXqNc5DGXU
What about bad-faith skepticism, like cigarettes-cause-cancer skeptics and global warming skeptics?

From what I can see, good faith skepticism makes science sturdier, but in bad faith it seduces the less knowledgable and burns the time of the more knowledgeable.

On the flipside, most flat earthers don't seem to be arguing in bad faith.
The 100 MHz 6502
Not obviously, no. - Just a very high probability. Perhaps that provides noise immunity to some degree. If it does, it is a form of AI.

This admittedly open question presumes a very large fuzzy 'code book' with which it can re-assemble the data. The length of the input in cleartext is valuable metadata that speeds up the search.
There is possibly a form of survivorship bias here - it is likely that the WIV became the world leader in coronavirus research because it met the criteria for a BSL4 lab and is within a one to two day driving distance of places where previous coronavirus outbreaks started. In some ways it is unsurprising that it would be near the epicenter of an outbreak.

I am not stating that it did not escape from the lab, just that there are additional factors to consider and the likelihood it was an escape is less obvious than you are making it out to be.
This is the best, concise write up I have seen on this topic.
How does government benefit from teaching critical thinking in government schools? If there's no good answer to that, it won't happen.
I find the smug self-confidence in their own rationality that some on this site show to be extremely off-putting. Most people are not nearly as objective as they think they are.

Saying that it is better for 3 million people to be alive rather than dead is not an emotional appeal, it's actually quite rational if our goal is to not kill people.
Do you mean people who question the vaccine at all are "something else completely"?

Seems strange to be called "anti-vax" and, presumably, "anti-science" for questioning the logic in mass vaccinating with an experimental vaccine, built with experimental technologies, which since its deployment has been demonstrated through various data to be a spectacular failure in terms of safety and efficacy.

What about just questioning the policies themselves?

What about the fact that from where I'm sitting there's zero "science" supporting the use of cloth masks, yet they're attack vector numero uno when it comes to bifurcating the populace into angels and demons?
Personally I think sideloading on personal computing devices like smartphones should be mandated by law, and then the big brains at Apple can figure out how to make it secure.
This is because of the shale revolution, so you can't go back that far. They're different eras. As for 2014, it was because of the polar vortex. The current high prices are in the summer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2014_North_American_cold...
> Besides, we're past "transient uptick" here anyhow. That was an argument for three months ago.

Why? I am no real economist, but my common sense based armchair economics would think that post-covid-mess inflation peak would take at least a year or two, maybe even more, not a couple of months? There are, after all, real supply (chain) issues to be sorted, which takes time, and which cause increasing prices.
Trust the Science is so silly that it shows the ignorance of those that speak it. Science by definition is an ever changing and refining process and the very process of studying is challenging settled science. Once, Einstein was called a lunatic, so was Hawking, so was ... Insert your favourite scientist here.
Kunihiko Fukushima awarded 2021 Bower Award for the convolutional neural net
Hyperinflation and general subsequent economic destruction was actually a great equalizer, in Europe at least. Many big fortunes were obliterated, but the average worker living paycheck to paycheck was not really much worse off.

Trying to find the source for this, i think it was Piketty in Capital in the 21st century.
You could replace “elite” with “professional class.”
I had written something else entirely and edited it and then forgot to remove the last bit. Apologies for the terribly useless comment.
I respectfully disagree. The process is steeped in the belief that it will give you answers you can accept. It doesn't always, but there is a belief that it will eventually lead to a truth regardless.
You know that? Here’s the tip line: https://coronavirus.house.gov/contact/tip-line
Elite doesn't mean wealthy. It means superior, and when we talk about scientific research we're talking about work being done by people with elite training compared to the layman.

This is why we talk about peer review including the scientific community, not the community of all people. It is an elite group with specific skills.
There are definitely people winging it but that doesn't account for the engineers that designed your iPhone, airliners, rockets that are capable of autonomous landing. Scientists that designed and built mRNA vaccines that use your bodies own infrastructure to synthesis molecules at the target site, managed to replicate fusion ignition on the surface of earth, smashed atoms together at multiple TeV.

Sure. Not everyone in every field is smart but experts are a real thing and they know vastly more about their field than you do.

I think when you achieve mastery in some field then it becomes a lot easier to appreciate this.

Maybe that is part of the problem. The vast majority of people aren't being offered the opportunity to achieve mastery and thus they don't have this critical grounding.
I did not say there was a need to personally verify the results of every experiment. Merely pointing out that the scientific process is not based on trust, but evidence. I would not believe a claim made by a single experimenter/group unless independent evidence corroborates it. Neither should you. Look up the Heidelberg-Moscow experiment, or pentaquarks.
The vendors in stores provide that sales data just like with Amazon’s vendors. The store and Amazon have sales data on everything.
Crucially, they exceeded the gap left by missing wages. Poverty in the U.S. actually fell last year.
No need to insult op. There are plenty of example of what happens when economies are deep in debt. All you need is a basic google search and sticking your head out of the “patriotic” chocolate jar.
For those that do not believe the consumer prices are that bad or have increased that much, take a look at this historical graph from the official BLS.gov website[0]. Over the last 10 years the Consumer Price Index (CPI) has been holding steady at around 2%. This year we've doubled that. How about going back 21 years? Nope, the CPI still fluctuates around 2% give or take. The last time we saw a consumer price index value this high or higher was 30 years ago!

I was a teenager the last time we had a CPI this high so for all of my adult life it has been a fairly consistent metric to factor into my household budgeting. Now I'm forced to make conscious decisions on how to prioritize my family's spending. To me personally, this is a big issue.

So, while I appreciate the perspective people have that try to look at the bright side of these numbers, we must admit - regardless of one's political leaning or optimistic outlook - consumer prices have risen to the highest amounts in three decades.

[0] https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUUR0000SA0L1E?output_view=p...
> The only time it really stops working is if people start treating it as doctrine, and demanding that you accept it on faith, and take any questions as evidence that you are an enemy of science. If anything destroys science, it is this line of reasoning.

There is another point when "skepticism" as a principle fails, and that is when it is being weaponized by political and/or financial interests. Climate change is the most obvious example with oil companies funding all sorts of quackery, derailments and misinformation (such as BP did by inventing the "individual carbon footprint" in the 70s, see https://mashable.com/feature/carbon-footprint-pr-campaign-sh...), but also the tobacco and alcohol industry - and in the last two years, COVID deniers who branded themselves "skepticists" only to renounce the most basic bits of societal solidarity such as wearing masks and getting a recommended vaccination.

Skepticism should always, always come with at least some provable (!) claims - for example, with COVID vaccines, the issues regarding AstraZeneca and blood clots. These claims can then be investigated and validated or disproven. The problem is that modern and/or "alternative" media simply takes skepticist claims and reports them as gospel either because they don't have journalists with a science background any more or (as is the case with OAN/Newsmax/Fox/Murdoch/Axel Springer) they follow their own/their owners' agenda.

The root cause at the bottom of weaponized skepticism is the truly horrible state of teaching and the attitude towards science in schools in most Western countries. "Creationism" should not be seen on any curriculum worth its name, the fact that students get ruthlessly bullied as nerds/know-it-alls/autists/<insert whatever label you were bullied with here> without consequences and that such behavior is culturally accepted (e.g. in "teenage movies" and sitcoms, where "nerds" are routinely portrayed in absurd cliches), the total lack of media education (aka what bias is, how it works, and what the pitfalls of modern mass media like clickbait, deceptive ads masked as journalism etc. are)... our societies are rotten from the core.
HN not supporting notifications, I am forced (;-) to link you some names/topics that you might enjoy

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28847236
Standardness notwithstanding, using tput is more readable and memorable. I can type this from memory:

echo "I'm $(tput setaf 4)blue$(tput sgr0)."

but I couldn't get this one right without looking it up:

echo -e "I'm \033[0;34mblue\033[0m."
> Science is anti-fragile. The harder you attack it, the sturdier it becomes.

This is true for the subset of "scientific professionals, devoting significant amounts of time to their field". That's not all of the public. That's not even all of most scientific disciplines.

The scientific method is perfect.

The scientific method as practiced by fallible and irrational humans is subject to starts and stops, groupthink and cargo culting, and politics ad nauseam.

The even more common case of "laypeople, with limited technical background knowledge, devoting limited amounts of time to understanding issues, who want to appear informed and intelligent about issues" is significantly more fraught with danger. And the source of most ineffective outcomes.
'Trusting the Science' isn't a discussion on how to drive progress as a researcher but how to evaluate it as an outsider.
That sounds amazing. It will come to late for me, but I wish it had been available when I was younger.
They said "distrust in science", not "anti-science". Those are two entirely different things.

Speaking as an American, most Americans see "science" in the news media and assume it's 1.) accurate and 2.) actual science, and then it turns out to be fringe, or the media got it entirely wrong and it gets stored in these people's personal caches of "How scientists are always wrong." Eg. the American debate on climate change.
Signal is a perfectly valid word in this context. See the comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28840472. Also https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28842465. And https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28840517.
John C. Lilly
I'm quite sure that eating meat will be considered barbaric in the future, just it's so hard to avoid with the way society is set up. When society makes it easy to do the right thing people generally will, but there's so much terrible stuff going on and so little time that you really need to prioritize .

I'm sure you do a bunch of barbaric things, probably eating meat will be considered among the worst when humanity has more practical alternatives.
Also, some of the recent processors that support everything you've listed are dropped. A hunch at the time of Windows 11 announcement was that https://portswigger.net/daily-swig/bitlocker-sleep-mode-vuln... can only be fully mitigated in the CPUs (or the mitigation caused performance degradation).
Yeah, when I was reading the article I started out thinking "What? It's just simply rewinding the line", and then you mentioned that it's always at the bottom of the window, and I thought "Now that is a good trick, I wonder how it's done".

And then I didn't wonder. Good work.
Social Security cost-of-living adjustment will be 5.9% in 2022
"Highest in five years" didn't have quite the doomsday ring to it, eh?

There's a lot of idle capacity ready to go right now, but the energy companies are enjoying the higher prices. https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/natural-gas-price...
AMD Prefetch Attacks Through Power and Time [pdf]
Great observation. I'd really like to hope it's satire.

>You eliminate homelessness in the United States. Every person living in the US now has the guarantee of a roof over their head.

>This costs you $20 billion, or a trivial 12.8% of your starting net worth. You still have $136,000,540,000.

I really really wish it was that easy.
Even if your results are reproducible and independently verifiable, these results are open to interpretion.

Will you publish "X is associated with Y", or "we observed weak correlation between X and Y in self-selected subgroups from already self-selected population"?

Unfortunely, first approach dominates observational studies.
> Some ovens are teflon coated, and some of those have cleaning modes that effectively kill of pet birds.

it seems unlikely that they have both teflon coat it and a self-cleaning mode (800+F) that burns it off?
Plus a certain lack of self-awareness:

> Language has evolved over centuries through ages of scarcity, superstition, and social insufficiency, and often contains ambiguity and uncertainty when important issues are at stake.

(From https://www.thevenusproject.com/resource-based-economy/human...)
> If anything destroys science

Nothing destroy science, people can always opt to not believing in science, sometimes to their own peril.

> accept it on faith

I accept GNU/Linux on faith, having not analyzed its (public) code or build, because I trust that other people have done their best. And science is honestly an even easier decision.
Yeah, when there's a deadly pandemic, some people will need to be quarantined.

I liked the bit where 3 million people didn't die, whereas 700k people died here.