skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think one issue is that many people seem to conflate believing the opposite with being skeptical of the positive. They are not the same thing.

Being skeptical that a vaccine is safe enough for mass use is not the same as believing that a vaccine is not safe enough for mass use.

Being skeptical that climate change is primarily caused by man is not the same as believing that climate change is not caused by man.

Skepticism is fine. Belief in an opposite without evidence is not fine.
> and would need to be automated somehow

Or Google, one of the wealthiest companies on the face of the planet, could hire some staff to handle this.
There's always been a large performative aspect to all things space related. Even the original space race was basically an odd performance, similar to a sports performance (hence the "race"). What it showed us is that these types of performances are deeply satisfying to the public, which gives hope to those who refuse to view human beings as purely caring about their own material situation or personal comfort. A lot of national treasure and even some blood was spent on that "race", and still it is quite popular.
Again the problem was the convolution of "lab leak" incorrectly meaning "lab made and leaked" exclusively which is different to poor quality control of wild specimens held on site...
Ah, all I meant was just that since Esendex got pretty huge (e:g IIRC they did bulk texting for the Obama campaign), given that its the same founder, perhaps Cronofy could end up big too. I guess my angle was simply, this is potentially a large company, his previous one was (and apparently a decent place to work according to people I know) and its a great shame if such a good tech business is driven to moving to a different country . BTW it wasn't me that downvoted you, it was a fair argument :)
Okay I've been watching your back and forths for a while now and you guys seem to deadlock. I'll add some verifiable data.

Exhibit 1: "From Yao To Mao" by Kenneth James Hammond, history professor at New Mexico State University
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VMEFNcbR0o&t=8m30s
This history lecture states that The Great Leap Forward actually achieved many of its goals. One famous failure was the famine. But you better listen to his very interesting explanation of that instead of reading a summary by me.

Exhibit 2: life expectancy from 1850 to 2020. https://twitter.com/CarlZha/status/1439608272940519430?t=4-p...
You see a couple of interesting things. From 1949 onwards, there was a steep gain. Even the famine only managed to slow the gain rather than reversing it. That same thread also refers to the Barefoot Doctor system which was a major contributor to raising life expectancy.

Exhibit 3: Kevin Tellier, a very good China watcher (corroborated by another HN user in this submission), discusses the nature of Xi's power centralization. https://twitter.com/kevtellier/status/1441774309652025346
Rather than grabbing power for the sake of power, Xi's power centralization served a real purpose that is in the interest of the nation, namely removing entrenched interests that keep the country back. The problem of entrenched interests influencing policy is unfortunately an unsolved problem in many democracies.
The author addresses that in the last two paragraphs:

> Why does this matter? Can’t this just be chalked up to lack of media sophistication, and pop psychology misunderstanding the nuance? In fact, when people such as Simon Sinek, the author and consultant whose viral video blames dopamine for millennial's problems bring up neuroscience, they are using a clever strategy to manipulate us. Mr. Sinek is not a neuroscientist, and has not studied or researched the complexity of this aspect of our brain. But, he knows something you don’t: mentioning neuroscience is a great way to convince people you are more knowledgeable about something, and to make your arguments more convincing. This effect was recently demonstrated by researchers from the University of Pennsylvania, who showed that use of irrelevant references to brain science was an effective way to lure people into thinking that complex phenomena are simple, and easily explained by, well, the brain.

> People’s problems are never simple. And when a person does a thing over and over, even when the behavior is causing problems, there are a great many complex reasons behind that behavior. When we offer the reductively simple answer of “because dopamine,” it distracts us from the person. It is the person who learns, and dopamine is merely a factor, one factor among many, in the learning. When we encourage people who are watching too much porn, using the cell phone while driving, or looking at Facebook every two minutes, to blame their problems on dopamine, we teach them to externalize the problem, and blame it on dopamine. Instead, if we focus on the learning, and the salience aspects of these process, it helps us to draw people’s attention back to their own behaviors, their own motivations, and the meaning that they (and their religious or social background) have given to this behavior or experience. It helps us to put people back in the driver’s seat of their life. So please, let’s start talking about people, rather than irrelevant neurochemicals.
Maybe just one card with multiple ports in it would solve that problem. I get the design decision but using one usb c port to a singular function does feel wasteful, when you can plug a dock in that has three USB 3.0 A ports, USB C passthough, ethernet, HDMI, SD card reader all into a singular USB C port (looking at my $40 laptop dock on my desk currently for how many ports they squeezed into it!)
I'm pretty sure it means the percentage of each group.

70% of group A, 56% of group B, etc.

The percent signs are used for the same numbers later in the article.
I feel like there are plenty of other e-retailers which allow you to sell your product on their platform, which are not in the business of selling competing products that they manufacture themselves. Ebay obviously comes to mind, followed by outfits like Etsy, etc.
Vivaldi's built on top of Chromium, but they've written an inhouse UI layer, built-in ad blocker and tracking protection and run their own sync services. (Some other Chromium derivatives do, too: Brave and Edge being the most prominent ones)

Brave and Vivaldi default to privacy friendly search engines, try their damndest not to track you, have built-in adblockers and run their own sync services. Easily the best options for Chromium-based browsers.

Edge is also excellent if you don't care about privacy, but their sync service doesn't even include end to end encryption for all classes of synced data.
I'm glad someone here is thinking about the lives of the billionaires.
He struck me as a man nearing the end of his life that is struggling with mortality and had an experience that upended everything. Really personal, life changing experience that many don't get to see happen to others. Definitely made me want to go to space. Could just be that Shatner was the moment and Bezos interrupted it. I probably should not judge him for it after all he made it happen.
Why is that a shakedown? Shouldn't competitors be able to advertise their products? Any users who are actually looking for Williams Sonoma will find it. Any who are open to having their minds changed, or are interested in competing products, will be interested in competitors ads.
What year was this? I remember a time in the mid 90s (c. 1996?) when Novel had just upgraded to "intranetware" and all the computers had fancy "web browsers" which was fun, there was a 64k ISDN for the computer suite (we actually had two, but the other was RM Nimbus machines which could just about run netwars). This was in the UK

I changed the homepage to a webpage which redirected to file://c:/con/con (which for those who don't know caused a windows BSOD at the time).

IT teacher thought it was hilarious, used it as part of the lesson about how computers can be broken into, and told everyone "ok we've seen that, don't do it again".

Another time I remember writing a simple program, probably in qbasic, which captured passwords to a file. It only wrote a the first 4 or so letters to the file - showed what we could do, had a little fun, tricked the teacher into logging in, and then told him "ha ha".

As long as you came up with creative things (not just copying others, which is tedious), which didn't cause too much disruption (no deleting files), and stopped doing it once you proved it could be done, you were fine.

Networked IT was new and exciting then though, to the students and the teachers. A few years earlier and it was all BBC Micros, a few years later and everyone was on the internet and trying to install backorifice, but for a brief moment well meaning harmless (for a teenager) curiosity was rewarded.
Lets ask this question in the other direction. How is it in most modern economies you are able to have good healthcare, a robust safety net, pretty decent infrastructure, the opportunity to further yourself via education without breaking the bank and still keep those economies trucking along while the US: the richest country on the planet can't seem to get this done? There is obviously some disconnect.
In the US, 44% of the population remains unvaccinated, including virtually all school-aged children... but because the same anti-vax people are also really bad at math, they think that infection rates are proof that they're right when factually the virus is much more widespread than this time last year due to their lack of care.

Meanwhile, the most vocal vaccine skeptics are catching and dying from the virus with such frequency that there are multiple subreddits devoted to their stories.
This reminds me of a speech by the astronaut Russell Schweikart, which was partially featured (and where I first learned of it) in the video game The Witness.

The audio and transcript can be found here:
https://www.organism.earth/library/document/no-frames-no-bou...
That still doesn't address the ROM/RAM switching done by the C64, which this project doesn't support (at least not in accelerated/turbo mode).
You're explaining why deflation is bad and why growth in money supply is good.

I'd say deflation is okay as long as it is consistent with deflationary expectations. Unexpected deflation is bad, expected inflation is built into borrowing costs.

I don't understand how this is in contradiction with what I'm saying.
When I was a child, we were taught the scientific method multiple times through middle-school and high-school. Is this really no longer the case? I really doubt it is.
> Last time I checked, it was not super transparent which non-FOSS store they used

I'm pretty sure that's deliberately opaque because mirroring APKs from Play store breaks some ToS somewhere and they don't want everyone getting their Google accounts banned.
If I was a reporter there I would have asked WS if the same flight in his youth would have changed him as a Star Trek actor
Sometimes having your own language just fits into the larger ecosystem better than any existing language. Several of the major languages in the last while were about ecosystems more than the language. See C# which is basically Java, but for .NET. Once the decision not to use the Java standard library or VM was made, why try to adapt Java directly? Or see Swift, which meshes with the Apple ecosystem well. Language and compiler level support for reference counting that Apple likes these days. They could have used something like a strict subset of C++ with their own libraries. In fact, they did originally. But it was pretty kludgy as I understand it. And they were using their own compiler already. Might as well use your own language?
Yes, i was thinking similarly. The GP wants links, not ads (specifically), but if the trustworthy domains are saying this particular skillet is low quality then you want that first, rather than an ad.
Pixel 4 running graphene. I'm sure it's fine by android standards, but if you're used to iOS, it is unbearable.

Going back to iPhone as soon as I've got some free time to get everything set up again.

Unrelated, but I'm still very surprised there's no standard way of doing live photos on Android. They really do add a lot to the experience of reviewing old memories and Google has had at least 5 years to catch up.
How Sites Manipulate You into Clicking
Thank you for making my point. That bag doesn’t compete with the Peak design bag in any way other than general shape. It’s poorer in design and quality at every step and the user reviews show this clearly when comparing both products. It’s safe to say that Peak is in no danger from poor quality knockoffs because they actually have a value proposition that customers recognize. Lastly, if you need non-public “analytics” to know that Peak bags are popular…
Sometimes I click on Google ads just because I don't like a brand and feel a little bit of joy knowing I just cost them a dollar.
I don't know; I might be old, but for a lot of _websites_, jQuery is absolutely perfect. I love jQuery for its simplicity :)
> This is not to excuse Musk who has a litany of personality flaws

Geez. Who doesn't have personality flaws?
Oh and here's a 2 hour deep dive into the theory
https://bluejeans.com/playback/s/cyQnC9EZZSB9HlHDjB1Zpu3fs0J...
Reminder that Uber turned off $100M of their ad spend and saw basically no change in conversions: https://twitter.com/nandoodles/status/1345774768746852353. I’m pretty sure they thought they were working initially (through conversion tracking).

As you mentioned: The most important test (that you should be doing every now and then) is to actually pause the ad and see if revenue falls. Anything else is just an approximation and should be treated as such.
+ Edge Webview + Non company accounts only
If you want to make an omelette you have to break some eggs.
For the patient reader/listener, the mentioned book and podcast have several ideas to implement. Obviously, there are no shortcuts but methods that require discipline.

As a quick example, one suggestion is to not reward yourself everytime the same way. Let's say, you really enjoy running with music. Sometimes just toss a coin whether you get to listen to music while running or not. In other words, reward yourself intermittently. It is far more likely to sustain the baseline excitement/dopamine levels over time. If we reward ourselves all the time the same way, the baseline levels tend to drop.

I'm explaining it poorly, but Huberman and Sapolsky add a lot more colour to this.
It's all fun and games until someone rewrites it in Brainfuck!
It's a milder position than Tucker Carlson but Hannity also pushed hydrochloroquine.
Science actually progressed in Europe as well during the supposed dark ages. The whole notion that science just laid dormant between the fall of Rome and the renaissance is enlightenment-era propaganda that unfortunately has become part of the western cultural narrative.

Ironically the notion of a Muslim golden age of free thought and science followed by a long dark age of no progress and oppression is also largely imagined.
It's not a problem at all. For example, people do mistakes in calculations all the time but since Math is not faith and/or consensus based nobody flies off the handle and runs a public ostracism campaign on them. You think Bloomberg spent 500M on his campaign so he spent more than if he had given 1M to every citizen of the US? You just look like a fool but there are not going to be 1000 Math professors signing letters to excommunicate you and your bank accounts are not going to be shut down and you still keep your job in New York Times.

If you feel that your science won't stand without harassing heretics, perhaps it is the problem with the soundness of your science and not the folly of the heretics?
He's like Doc Brown. "The way I see it, if you're gonna make a payload out of a car, why not do it with some style?"
Chicken Scheme also makes a good language to embed in other programs. As does Gambit.

They are Schemes though.
> Of course this is highly unpopular with economists. They'll tell you no one would buy anything if things got cheaper.

No, they'll tell you that minor sector-specific disruptions that would, in an inflationary economy, be met with localized temporary real pay cuts via static nominal wages instead (because of the psychological difference between nominal pay cuts and static pay, even if the real pay change is the same) be met instead with massive job losses with ripple effects throughout the economy in a deflationary system making the economy more volatile, with deeper more frequent downturns, and more painful transitions as demand shifts across sectors.

Deferred purchases is more of a concern economists have with transitory deflation than persistent, planned, systemic deflation.
>not-a-woman

given that the character of the show in question is an archetypal secretary arguing it's not a woman is a fairly big stretch. Not only is it a woman, it's a woman embodying a female stereotype, (in line with the purpose of the language, being an easy helper), and the 60s art deco woman's magazine style logo
>Also, nuclear is expensive compared with renewables

As I said above, nuclear is not more expensive than renewables if you are looking at functional grid without coal and natural gas. Solar and wind are both intermittent and variable. They vary greatly, both over an individual 24-hour period, and seasonally throughout the year. In order to build a grid that was able to meet demand consistently and reliably, you would have to massively overbuild renewables so they were able to meet peek demand, and deal with the issue of huge load shedding during times of overproduction. See section 5 and 6 of [1] for a study of what it would take to reach 80% and 100% renewables for California. To reach 0% fossil fuels, a total of about 7GW of nuclear power ( the equivalent of 4 Diablo Canyon plants) would reduce needed solar and wind by 11.5GW (the equivalent of over 5 million turbines) and solar by 5.7GW (the equivalent of 1.8 million rooftop systems). When you only need 40% the capacity, even double the cost is cheaper.

And of course there is the diminishing returns of building turbines in the best locations and solar on the best roofs, and still needing to build millions more. And this is just one state.

>I think you misread my comment

I did. You said "They used to love talking about how expensive and unreliable and unsafe it is." and the "it is" led me to believe you were talking about the singular nuclear and not the multiple renewables.

[1] https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/Comb...
Page seems to not load CSS for me. Anyone else seeing that happening?

Edit: Here’s a snapshot of the page with seemingly no CSS loaded, same as I was seeing https://archive.ph/qe2IW
He's talking about "the public sphere." Among the general non-specialist public (probably 95%+ of the population), virtually nobody can even do things like prove the Pythagorean theorem. The idea that science is substantially different from religion for most people because they "could", in principle, reproduce the studies is laughable.
I like this pedanticism, but I still think you can even argue the "by definition" piece of it. I suppose it ends up being somewhat tautological in the end.

If you really like Skillet X, and I ask you which skillet I should buy, and you tell me, "Skillet X," then it is not an ad.

If you really like Skillet X, then somebody gives you $5 to recommend it if anybody asks you what skillet to buy, and then when I ask, you tell me, "Skillet X...I mean you should know that somebody gave me $5 to say that to you but honestly I was going to say that anyway" then is it an ad?

It kinda intuitively feels to me like if it doesn't alter the result, it's not an ad, it's just somebody taking advantage of another person's willingness to hand them money and doing nothing in return.
> I should make clear that I don't think Musk is good or anything

Why are you concerned others might think you think Musk is good?

I think Musk is good.
I do the same, but 99% of people do not, so it's really a drop in the bucket.

I do wish there were some regulation such that if a user is searching for a trademarked or copyrighted term, that the best organic search result for that term should be required to show up first. I'm fine with showing competitor ads, but I don't think they should be able to show up above the trademark owner's ads.
A book could probably be written on the topic of latency-hiding schedule design alone, and I am not aware of a canonical resource that gives it a thorough treatment. The case of regular hardware/software parallelism is trivial, but it becomes interesting and very complex once you introduce irregular hardware parallelism (e.g. heterogeneous compute elements) or irregular software parallelism (e.g. variable and unpredictable task concurrency -- graph analysis often has this characteristic). The optimal number of tasks any scheduler deals with always falls in a bounded range; trying to keep the number of immediate tasks within that range when the tasks are generated unpredictably and non-locally is non-trivial.

It isn't enough that the task scheduler is adaptive to irregular hardware and software parallelism, in HPC you are effectively running a lot of task schedulers in parallel, each managing their local compute environment and interacting with each other. You sort of need a "meta-scheduler" to schedule the dynamic behavior across all the schedulers so they don't adversely affect each other, which is not scalable. An alternative approach I've often seen is adding a game theoretic context to task schedulers, each tacitly modeling the expected dynamic behavior of other schedulers they interact with. This doesn't require schedulers to explicitly coordinate their state, a big win for scalability, in order to optimize their aggregate behavior. In the HPC context a robust and nearly optimal equilibrium can sometimes be achieved. In the ideal case you can prove the resource requirements for an individual scheduler that can guarantee well-bounded worst case behaviors.

In HPC the topology of the schedulers is essentially fixed (i.e. you know what hardware you are working with) but there is an even more difficult flavor of the same latency-hiding task scheduling problem when the execution environment can have a variable topology i.e. nodes appear and disappear in random places.

There is still a lot opportunity for interesting research on this topic.
So they compromise everyone's privacy for nothing?
> Of course the true perpetrators at the DEA don't face any such repercussions.

It amazes me that an LEO agency sets medical policy for an entire nation - instead of an actual medical body. No one questions this from what I can tell.
> The problem for me, perhaps like many, is that there are just too many things that I can easily find on Amazon that are much harder to find elsewhere.

Like what? Ebay, Alibaba, Etsy, Newegg, Abebooks...these seemingly cover most use-cases...
Yeah, but my point is not everyone thinks the same.

You might think that way, and consciousness about the greater effects of technology on the world are coming into focus, but there are still plenty of people who don't see it that way at all. Or they don't care so much and just want a paycheck.

It's harder to get young liberals in oil, finance and defense, yet those industries still have plenty of talented people working for them.
I wonder if the Overview Effect influenced Shuttleworth to create Ubuntu.
Why Was 900 Years of European History Called ‘The Dark Ages’?
> I like to call these effectively the "Google Tax" because publishers/retailers are forced to pay Google for the traffic they would have already received had the ad not been there.

Isn't this just the usual problem with advertising? You have to do it because the other players are doing it. If nobody did it, it would still be the same cake to be shared.

This case is more on the nose, but only because of some fairness assumption that "Williams Sonoma Cast Iron Skillet" _ought_ to be traffic for Williams Sonoma.