skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
When I listen through the apple podcast app I get ads that are clearly from 2018 though. Like for events that are long gone and over. Ads that don't match the year of the episode have only ever happened to me in spotify.

Also this is specifically a Spotify feature

https://ads.spotify.com/en-US/news-and-insights/streaming-ad...

> Spotify Podcast Ads are powered by Streaming Ad Insertion (SAI), which leverages streaming to deliver Spotify’s full digital suite of planning, reporting, and measurement capabilities. Spotify Podcast Ads offer the intimacy and quality of traditional podcast ads with the precision and transparency of modern-day digital marketing.

https://www.adexchanger.com/podcast/spotify-snaps-up-podcast...
Well, the aspiration is for most countries citizens' to have the same amenities as the rich.

Who are we to tell developing countries they can't have a TV, computer, phone, lights, washer/dryer, refrigerator, and HVAC in every home?
It’s called the 7 Powers of Business Strategy. Counter-positioning and cornered resources synergize really well.
And quite annoyingly, it's the opposite of how IPFS works. IPFS nodes only cache the content as long as it's actively requested. Depending on the cache policy of the node, this can be as short as 24 hours. Yes, it could still exist on your private node that your running from your laptop, but this is the equivalent of saying that all published content is available forever because it's on your hard drive.

Honestly, I like IPFS as a tech, and blockchain isn't useless, but the entire community just makes me want to puke because it's full of so many extremely ignorant people (at best), but mostly just fraudulent liars (at worse and most common).
Windows 10, iOS 15, Ubuntu, Chrome fall at China’s Tianfu hacking contest
I agree with you in general, but I think the massive failure mode is less about deaths and more about making large swaths of land in the world entirely uninhabitable by humans.

I also agree the probability is way lower now, but the failure mode is huge nonetheless.
The GIL doesn't really help Python code though, because the interpreter may switch threads between any two opcodes.

It only protects the state of the Python interpreter and that of C/Cython extension modules. Though even there, you can have unexpected thread switches, e.g. in Cython `self.obj = None` can result in a thread switch if the value previously stored in `self.obj` had a `__del__` method implemented in Python.

And AFAIK pretty much any Python object allocation can trigger the cycle collector which can trigger `__del__` on (completely unrelated) objects in reference cycles, so it's pretty much impossible to rely on the GIL to keep any non-trivial code block atomic.
Bluetooth WarDriving with the NRF52
And therein lies the problem with content addressable networks: they make no sense in the economic world of the internet, where data transport and storage is not free, they make sense in a world owned by a single corporation.
I wonder how people are incentivized to host content well?

Whether HTTP or IPFS, you want content:

(1) hosted/stored redundantly enough for availability but not over-hosted/stored because that raises costs.

(2) hosted “near” to requesters to make efficient use of the network, which limits costs and increases speed. (Near in terms of the network infrastructure.)

With HTTP I understand how this works (the content publisher figures out a hosting solution balancing what they are willing/able to pay and what kind of availability and speed they want/need).

Not sure with IPFS though. If people are choosing what to host, wouldn’t the hosting be uneven, with some content under-hosted (or not hosted at all) and some popular content greatly over-hosted? …leading to an inefficient system? Under—hosted content would be slow to retrieve or simply unavailable. Over-hosted content is wasting resources, making the system more costly than it needs to be (somebody is paying for the storage and servers to make that storage available).

I realize this a alpha/experimental, but without a strong answer to this, I don’t see how the system can work at scale.
Note I don't say "intentionally hide it." I suggest leaving it to the dog (person) to notice the absence of approval, and also that he showed a better action.
Back in the days when one did "paste-up", I removed my X-Acto knife from the work with a flourish, and it stopped in my thigh. There was no significant damage, but I was more cautious after that.
Just gonna be that guy on this thread who is not convinced anthropogenic climate change is a thing, or that if it is a thing that it is more significant than natural variations of climate. The economic and political consequences of the proposed solutions to this alleged crisis (enrich these corporations and these nations at the expense of these corporations and these nations) are too glaringly one sided to suggest empirical impartiality.

It also continues to astound me that proponents of the “climate crisis” narrative never make any mention whatsoever of the fact that the most valuable energy company/car company in the world makes solar panels, batteries, and electric cars. Instead climate crisis actors demonize Tesla for not being unionized (eg, Tesla excluded from the White House American Electric Car Summit) and are lining up at the piggie trough for exclusive Biden bucks that will fund infrastructure investments that will help Ford and GM catch up to Tesla.

To wit: our best bet to speed the transition to sustainable energy is to get out of the way of the capitalists who have already solved this problem with superior transportation and energy products.
> the more reasonable choice would be to just ban backticks in HTML templates, but that would break backward compat.

Given script tags are allowed, this seems like the least reasonable choice. What other arbitrary JS features should be disallowed because the parser isn’t spec compliant?
Oh, I didn't know about this! "Get past chapter four of any textbook on quantum field theory" has been on my to-do list for quite a while.
"Did you misunderstand the text segment you quoted? Nowhere does it say, 'I am ironic'; therefore, you have no right to find irony in it. You, you, too-freely-associating nitwit, you."
Good luck transmitting it to where you need it, though...

The waste heat is also a significant limiting factor for nuclear, currently. In the US, we only have a limited amount of water heat sinks that we can use to dissipate waste heat, and there's limited heating allowed before we destroy those ecosystems. The figure that I heard recently was about ~500GW across the nation. After that, we will need to find other solutions, which bar often more expensive that using natural water. There's a nuclear plant in Arizona that uses water water from Phoenix, for example. But after that we will need some innovation in water heat management to overcome the natural limitations of thermal generators like nuclear, at least while on planet earth.
Hydro has other issues associated with it.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonbruner/2011/10/20/the-high-s...

Things like "there's more potential available in the spring than in the fall (or winter).

> Those margins are doubly difficult to master given the temperamental pulse of a river whose volume increases by a factor of five every spring as snow melts in the Rockies. Within the river’s seasonal changes come manmade fluctuations: every morning its dams awaken the Columbia with surges of water to satisfy the Northwest’s demand for electricity, and every evening the dams tighten their gates to put the river back to sleep. And every other second, an automated system assesses the supply of electricity against demand and makes tiny adjustments to the volume of water moving through each dam’s turbines.

Things like drought will also change that capacity of generation. https://www.hcn.org/articles/the-21st-centurys-hoover-dam

Regarding base load - https://www.e-education.psu.edu/eme807/node/667 - table 9.1 has the capacity factor.

> In the table above, the lower the capacity factor, the more susceptible the system to potential interruptions or drops in performance. We can see that solar and wind technologies, which are notoriously weather-dependent have the lowest CF numbers. At the same time, nuclear power and coal systems are most advantageous when operated continuously and at full load.

Nuclear has a capacity factor of 90.3. Hydro is 39.8. Concentrating solar is 33, wind is 20-40 range depending on geography and photovoltaic solar is 15-19.

More on that concept - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_factor

Hydro is the best of the renewable non-fossil fuel base load sources, but it still is poor compared to nuclear and fossil fuel energy generation for base load.
I'd go further and say that computers are supposed to be used by programming them.
The problem is that power from wind is random. To match supply=demand, a regulating/controllable power-source like coal/gas/hydro is needed. Because Europe is closing their coal/nuclear plants and hoping to replace them with wind, they end up using Scandinavian hydro-power to match supply/demand.

This is currently a catastrophe for Scandinavian prices.
Why did you add this comment to parent instead of GP, which started this whole thing with a similarly unsourced claim?
Related: Symmetric Multi-Processor primer for Android, https://developer.android.com/training/articles/smp (although for Android/ARM, it makes for a pretty good read on the topic).
Then I guess we're effed then. After all, if we can't trust non-government entities like Equifax with private records, why even go as far as trusting some other non-government entities to handle nuclear reactors?

We're all to die then, if we're to believe that letting climate change take its course is better than the occasional nuclear meltdown.

> Governments and corporations have not responded to climate change adequately so far and there is no evidence that this is about to change.

How else are they to fill their pockets with wealth taxed via inflation if there are no crises? There must always be a crisis looming to get people to part with their wealth.

> Even with the high profile accidents, nuclear power is something we know we can actually do, and has produced fewer excess deaths than coal.

Leadership knows full well that this is a fact. Think about that.
I failed a philosophy college course because I expressed these same views in light of Decartes.
Some comment I read ages ago convinced me that the real Ultimate Question is “pick a number, any number.” The two bits of evidence for this are paraphrased below.

Marvin talking to the mattress: “I’m roughly a billion times smarter than you. For example, pick a number. Any number.” Mattress: “Ummmm…seven?” Marvin: “Wrong. You see?”

Arthur, while aboard the Heart of Gold, says, “I’m disappointed we never figured out that Ultimate Question business.” Eddie the ship’s computer immediately after says, “Pick a number, any number!”

Given the abilities of each of those characters, it’s a plausible theory. It’s also how the author chose the Answer, so at least at a meta level it is true.
Any memory of where you found this data?
In my experience after applying to a few dozen jobs in my quest to switch from IT to SWE, not a single one has taken a serious look at my GitHub projects.
I do exactly that. git init and git push and you’re done.

I setup a cron job to git add ., git commit, and git push everyday at 3am, so that I don’t have to think about it at all. It works great.
He lost me when he started going on about “what’s wrong with our brains”.

I have not given Alan Kay permission to declare me broken.

His computing skills are legend, but he’s not a god.
I haven't seen any appetite to even consider solutions that break the promises of the GIL and make currently atomic things non-atomic, so that second argument seems weird.
Well, it's not ideal but what is the alternative? To me it is either nuclear or watch how the next generations are going to be the last ones, because there is no other solution (or improvement at least) at sight right now.
This echoes my experience as well, and I (used to) run a pinning service.
If anything, TypeScript is quite deferential to TC-39. Microsoft is part of the standardization process, but certainly not the main/only driver. I don’t know where you got the impression that this is a MS issue, but TS changes because JS changes not the other way around.
>Invest in small-scale, distributed breeder reactors. Store waste (the little amount that there is) in old oil wells/mines.

I believe completely that nuclear power is the way forward for us, but your assumptions here are just bonkers.

Breeder reactors of any kind are a proliferation risk. We also don't need them. Thorium fueled reactors are a better choice, both for the availability of fuel and the lowered risk.

Storing nuclear waste in any location not designed to store waste is just stupid. Oil wells aren't big holes where nothing exists once the oil is gone, putting anything in them probably affects aquifers locally (see fracking). Plus to store waste in a well we'd have to liquify it, making it more likely to leak. We also would have no way to really determine if it's leaking or if it's not, plus no way to deal with it if it does leak.

Mines are about as bad... even placing waste in a very stable, dry mine could leave it prone to escaping and travelling elsewhere.

The problem isn't finding a place to put the stuff that's out of the way, it's building a place to put it that will not allow it to leak/migrate for a significant amount of time. Yucca mountain would have been good, but the NIMBY crowd is too afraid of waste to store it there.

Fortunately, newer reactor designs produce less waste. It's still a concern, though, and not anywhere near as easy to deal with as you're making it.
> have literally heard about those since my childhood and one has actually yet to happen.

What's your point?
I'm not sure it would matter. The general population that compose Facebooks revenue stream don't seem to care. We keep hinting at these ethical conundrums that invisibly regulate massive businesses when they simply don't. It's not just tech, it's big businesses in general. The ethics only matter if a large enough population of the consumer and product base both care and act. Only demand matters and if demand doesn't care or you can manipulate the demand not to care, you can get away with about anything that isn't explicitly illegal.

I suspected Facebook does the work you referenced but I had no idea they actually did and had any flack about it. I'd like to think I'm a fairly tech savvy and an informed consumer (especially around issues like this), maybe I'm not, but if I am, what hope do you have of the general population caring when they aren't even aware as a first hurdle before the other massive hurdles of getting them to care enough to act.

The fact is that this type of work isn't regulated. Funding agencies regulate human subject work for your typical public funded research work and require a lot of informed consent. The leverage they use is that should you violate these terms, you may have current and future funding pulled, may be black listed across multiple agencies, and may find it difficult to pursue any career in research in the future involving human subjects. There are lots of disincentives not do this on the premise of manipulating your resources.

Meanwhile, entities like Facebook have piles of such resources and have a vested interest in all sorts of this questionable work. Pretty much nothing prevents them from doing it since they're self funding. Unless you can remove their self fundability, it will continue. This goes back to problem of needing consumers to vote with their wallet in an effective manner.

The other option is to create the explicit policy protections in law to regulate these activities but as a society, capital has convinced everyone that all regulation is evil and will only hinder consumer/citizen progress. You need not only policy but real enforcement teeth as well that create disincentives that are catastrophic enough not to tempt risk for the potential gains.
What is that constant that you talk about?

It is immoral to think the world would be better with fewer people because what you're really saying is, 3 Billion people or whatever number shouldn't exist. If you think not existing is a good thing then we wouldn't be having this conversation would we?
Why not use solar panels to produce more solar panels, as they are produced?

Nuclear has the same bootstrapping problem as any other power source, but it also has the problem that we don't yet have a way to produce concrete without emissions, and our carbon-free steel methods are still in their infancy, and those are serious inputs to any new nuclear build.
The problem is (perhaps amusingly) with refcounting. As the processes run, they'll each be doing refcount operations on the same module/class/function/etc objects which causes the memory to be unshared.
Spoiler alert:
Try 6 by 9 in base13.
> large swaths of people are against population growth and against progress

Population growth is largely irrelevant unless you're really facing an extinction path (which we're very far from). The standard of living that can be delivered for people is what matters.

Modestly fewer people with increased standards of living is a very nice outcome for most nations. Some nations are drastically overpopulated in terms of density for their available space and resources (eg India, China). If you're in a more affluent context, having four or more children is not a blessing for most people. Raising two children well is a quite difficult and life-consuming task, even if one parent stays home full-time. It makes perfect sense that affluent populations would choose to reproduce at a lower rate. It's rational.

That said it's certainly disheartening to see the lack of spirit of seeking progress that used to widely exist in the West. It's still there, faintly, diminished.
> "Powersave" means saving power, it doesn't mean saving energy. Your battery holds a fixed amount of energy, not a fixed amount of power. Energy is what matters.

Ignoring everything else, your battery doesn't hold a fixed amount of energy either. Or, if it does, it doesn't deliver a fixed amount. The energy you get out depends on the load. If you draw enough power that it heats the battery, you'll get less energy out. Of course, if you draw so little energy that self discharge becomes significant, you'll get less energy out.

As with the rest of the discussion, there's clearly a balance to be had, but it's hard to make the optimum choice because the systems usually don't know the load profile of (immiment) future work, and there are many systems that interact, and there may be no part of the system that has enough information to make an overall decision. That said, there's clearly been lots of progress on getting quite good results in most scenarios.
I agree distributed generation and storage behind the meter will grow, especially in places with dysfunctional or incompetent utilities.
> that only made our problem worse.

This is the part of PR that I fail to grasp. At a certain point, couldn't you just post "fuck you" on twitter and disregard the noisy mess? Would 100% of everyones' customer base actually walk away from them if they don't play "the game" on social media just right?
Aristotle's virtue ethics is a helpful lens to view the power dynamic within this story. Virtue is defined as a purpose or reason for being: Alexander is good where he fits his purpose, like how you would judge a tool to use. As a great ruler, he should be able to demonstrate not just his ability to kill and threaten, but positive qualities like providing for his subjects.

When Diogenes asks Alexander to move aside, it demonstrates the limits of this power, and therefore Alexander's virtue as a ruler: someone who doesn't want anything gets exactly as much benefit from this king as from anyone else. If the only thing Alexander can contribute is threats, that would simply make him unvirtuous - and equivalent in power to any armed madman.
France Turned the Humble Roundabout into a Showcase for Art
A follow up question: If $800 Billion investment in solar will provide USA with iŧs current energy needs, why bother with the slower and more polluting process of building nuclear reactors and mine for uranium at all?

The sun will keep shining 10.000 years from now, there is no need to move of the planet to find new fuel sources if we just keep letting the sun shine on us.
O boy, angry rant incoming. I'll say something petulant and overly dramatic, but I don't like the direction in which python is going, and I'm glad there's finally some news about focus on actual innovation instead of tacking on syntactic cruft.

I want the python that Guido promised me, with 2021 performance. I don't want some abhorrent committee-designed piece of middle-of-the-road shitware glue language that I must use because everyone uses it.

I want a language that doesn't spin it's single-threaded wheel in a sea of CPU cores, and I want a language that has one obvious way of doing things without needing to grok and parse dumb """clever""" hacks that will only be abused by midlevel programmers to show off hoe they saved typing a few lines of additional code.

To me, speed + simplicity = ergonomy = joy. I want a new python 4 to focus exclusively and intensely on performance improvements and ergonomy.
I do not believe Facebook as a company would be possible in generating such a thing. And if they could I can only be cynical about it. I rather put my faith in the open source community where people tinker on their own algorithms, and provide their own data. I am sure the first initiatives are already on their way regarding personal recommenders. But I don’t know any. If anyone does, please recommend :)
"Corporate developers, who have taken over Python and other people's work, like unnecessary changes, because they get many billable hours of seemingly complex work that can be done on autopilot."

In my 20+ year career I have never worked with a programmer that matches this description.

Maybe I've got lucky.
I wonder if it could make running a service like archive.org easier. Or if it could allow for a distributed archive.org service where nerds worldwide can contribute x GB storage to the cause?
Only God can read the inputs to /dev/null

yes "Dear $diety please protect this machine and save this lowly process from the OOM killer" > /dev/null

You don't need facebook for that.
> This is my biggest concern as well. However it needs to be balanced against the alternative, which is trusting governments and corporations to deal with climate change in other ways.

Isn't the alternative actually looking into renewable energy sources?

Portraying things as either Nuclear or nothing is a false dillema, specially as we're seeing highly developed and industrialized countries such as Germany where renewables already cover close to half it's energy demands.
Haven't really been down that rabbit hole yet, thanks for reminding me.
I like the concept of immutable content, but HTTP eliminated top down control of information?

Well, we’re all dependent on the Internet which can be shut down at any time by any government, and normally almost completely dependent on FAANG companies.

I applaud the freedom activist spirit but the only exciting technologies in this regard must be P2P and not Internet carried.