skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm really interested in how time-restricted eating and extended fasting affects people who are very fit or don't have much weight to lose.

Many people say "low-calorie diets" extend lifespan, but I highly doubt, because once you reach a low enough bodyfat you actually experience lots of negative effects (which are actually similar to a high bodyfat). Maybe it's correlation, because the people who eat lower-calories have a lower natural metabolism which makes them age slower? But fasting isn't the same as low-calorie.

Anecdotally in my experience fasting really does help short-term: I have more energy and better mood and feel "lighter". Maybe because my body doesn't have to spend energy digesting food.

But if I fast too long or often I start to "crash". And once I start eating I usually also "crash". The latter is probably because I usually eat a big meal, but if I don't eat a big meal I would continue dropping too much weight and cause the former. Fasting also screws up my digestion, because when my digestive system restarts it starts slow and gets backed up more easily - the same meal breaking a fast leaves me bloated and lethargic, which I handle fine after a while of eating regularly.
I'm upvoting you because I think you make a good argument, using sarcasm, for anonymity. If you were indeed serious, please let me know, and I'll remove the upvote. Thanks.
ES10 Adds Encapsulation with JavaScript
Having this skill probably helps with all sorts of situations. For example, showing people an incomplete product either as potential users or investors. If you're afraid of looking stupid .. you will probably lack the courage to get your product out there even though it's not yet complete.
Whenever new people join the team, I always say, "Please ask stupid questions. I mean questions so stupid that you might think we would question why we hired you, because you think we think you should already know. Ask those types of really stupid basic questions. It will educated you, make us think, and I'm certain at least one other person already on the team doesn't know either."
This is a "no such thing as bad publicity" political tact. If the case doesn't go forward because, you know, the actual 1st amendment, then the next response will be how he is being cancelled by the liberal media. This is mostly signaling to his base that he is out there fighting for them but the other side isn't playing fair.
thiseyeballdoesnotexist.com – just in case someone wants to earn some free crypto...
Supposedly Eisenhower said that the three tools that the US Army could not have done without in North Africa were the C-47, the bulldozer, and the 5-ton truck.
All teas are herbal.

I'm not (just) being facetious - I don't think it can be well answered, because you're obviously thinking of something specific, and someone's going to answer with their own probably different specific 'herbal' tea in mind.
I look forward to the ACLU handing him his ass.

Does he care though? It is all about outrage, diverting attention from actual issues, hogging TV time. We are talking about it, Twitter is talking about it... Mission accomplished for him, no?
Google Switzerland pays the same as the main campus in California.
Does it? I'm pretty sure he coined it.
Journalists are supposed to leave their "respect" for the person they are reporting on at the door. That's the problem.
This is less than 1 person's salary in SV
There are 2 points:

1- a big percentage of threads are just mediocre blog posts

2- what is good about twitter threads? they are written for humans. as opposed to articles and blog posts that are written for search engines.
I'd be very surprised that the PAC he helped create is doing something he isn't good with.
My new startup, Coherence, also is committed to giving back to the open-source we all build companies on. We're going to divide our budget up per-engineer, and give individual devs discretion on what projects they want to support.

Feel free to check us out, we're hiring: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_artqGMblKQKwWMf_IZmUHJC...
OOSU10 covers most of my needs
I can't remember where, but I've heard the mathematical research process being described as (paraphrasing):

"Once in a while we get a giant that makes huge strides in many fields. What is left for the rest of us is to walk in their wake and clean up and tighten up the theory based on the ideas that they provided".

Graham's point about how being intelligent and having new ideas are two different things is interesting, but I'm not convinced that one is better than the other. I'm not sure a world full of giants is better - you need people who spend time tightening and working on the existing theory as well.
Because these are maintainers that are working on projects that Sentry depends on for their product, and they can’t write their rent checks with “well intended someday funds”. I mean imagine your boss a work telling you that your not getting a paycheck but not to worry because he invested it and might get around to paying you someday.

Many of these people have kids and mortgages while living off this work.

If they can’t afford to actively continue their work now and go private sector that leaves Sentry holding the bag with abandoned dependencies.

150k direct donation will cover long term investment in the things their company needs to run.
> I think the main problem here is semver.

Maybe it’s ironic that semver (machine-readable versioning) ended up being a liability due to interpretation by people (i.e. we can’t release a 2.0 because it would “send the wrong message”).
Twinkies are baked goods that have a shelf life of 25 days. The "never go bad" thing is a Simpsons' joke, not a reality.
Not how "long term" studies work, you can't take 9 women and produce a baby in 1 month.
Although if they hit Rust version 2.XX.Y this might add some (probably brief) confusion.
One of my wife's rules is a variant of 5, I guess: discard them if they don't thrive.
People spread harmful lies better when they aren't banned from doing so and when the harm they do is attached to a pseudonym not their actual life.

It is vastly harder to exclude people spreading harmful lies when they can do it under 27 trivially created and then discarded identities across 12 platform.

It's trivial to argue that people agree to engage with online communities as they agree to engage in in person communities but what is the realistic alternative? Both huddle in your basement AND don't engage online either?

It is unrealistic when your online life is a large part of people's gateway to communication and culture. People deserve to be able to engage in such without also expecting harm.

Furthermore people's online hate touches people's lives with or without their opting for engagement when the festering hate nurtured online gives birth to real world violence, mass murder, coup, collapse of civil society.

It seems trivially true that anonymity enables hate and I support both people's right to voice unpopular but not harmful ideas and consequences for those who call for hate and violence.

You may note my username is simply a plain old name and it's my real name. I cannot any longer support anonymity save for cases where safety demand it.
The label should be at the end of the for block for no confusion. It just looks like the whole thing will be run again.
Specialized extensions using generic type constraints
I don’t mind alienating you; the masters tools will never dismantle the master’s house.

I've never heard this phrase before, but it equally applies to the situation where one thinks only they can wield a weapon. We can't assume that because we are "right," we have nothing to fear from the people who are "wrong" using our worst tactics against us. This is wrong whether it's one side "lying for Jesus," or the other side "censoring for freedom."

In the context of this thread, rising opposition on one side prompts a higher rise on the other side, in a vicious cycle. As parents are often heard to say, "I don't care who started it, I care who finishes it!"

It's a bit cliche to refer to STTNG for life advice, but a minor plot point of this episode influenced me quite a bit when I was a kid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero_Worship_(Star_Trek:_The_N...

All the adults saw a problem, so they kept raising their shields higher and higher, but raising the shields was causing the problem in the first place. It took a kid to notice that the scale of the problem correlated with the scale of the adults' defensiveness. This was, obviously, a metaphor for any human interaction.

It's simply not possible to continually raise your defenses and offenses and end with a win-win, and when it comes to a roughly evenly divided society, win-lose is lose-lose.
Can touch ID or face ID already do most of this with extra hardware? Unless the API's are not open to general use or something.

Serious comments aside, I know one place where this would take off:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/22/world/middleeast/trump-gl...
Re-read "anti-science" (a - relatively - minor collateral) with simply "bestial": refusing the value of a basic grasp of the world, and its function as a limiter. ("Bricks are not edible but that is not a valid reason to avoid eating them, when lower drives call". Very many are embracing the false and the absurd as "legitimate": it is just satanic.)

By the way: «voting [that thing] out» is not enough. That thing having held the office is a very horrible incident, and it must be made very clear to all those who were distracted.
Everything?

It's all very opaque and specific to Spring; and it keeps changing every few months, which means that a lot of information online is not applicable.

I strongly prefer writing my own scaffolding and pulling in specialized libraries for specific tasks.
This short essay is roughly a synospsis of the theme behind Asimov's short story The Profession.
> a PAC Parson created but doesn't give direct input to

That's newspaper-covering-their-ass-speak. No serious person believes there's no coordination, however indirect, between candidates and their PACs.
Tax filing takes me a few hours and ~ $100 each year and I have multiple properties and businesses. For most people it's not that big of a deal but it's easy to jump on the anti-IRS bandwagon
I was taking humans political opinions as the sum of a sum of independent random variables :) still may have been a bit of flourish, I suppose.
More than 100k people have had their eyes scanned for free cryptocurrency
Worth noting that Ivy League costing hundreds of thousands is quite different from college too. Also, the major matters heavily. In something like computer science, you may be able to get by fine without a degree, but good luck becoming a doctor or lawyer with an online education.
Many in the tech community turn exclusively to technology to solve every problem. It doesn’t occur to such people that e.g. sociologists, who study problems of society as a discipline, have any answers whatsoever to our problems as a society. To them, sociology is just another useless liberal arts degree without job prospects.

In my opinion, if we listened to more socieologists instead of the Zuckerbergs and Bezoses of the world, we’d be much better off as a country.
I don’t observe that to be generally true. Each party has its favorite science facts to deny. Republicans tend to invent controversies in climate science and evolution in order to misstate the types of uncertainties that exist in those fields. Democrats, increasingly, like to deny the basic reality of embryonic development and sex in humans, that can be found in any basic biology textbook.
You can run tsbs by yourself. Just check the options here: https://github.com/timescale/tsbs/blob/master/docs/clickhous...

The blog post benchmarks used `--use-case=cpu-only` case for data ingestion. You can see the table definition here: https://github.com/timescale/tsbs/blob/1eb7705ff921fd31784c0... coming from here: https://github.com/timescale/tsbs/blob/master/pkg/targets/cl...
Please elaborate.. Did these people have world views that they didn't wish to have challenged and feel it was detrimental to challenge themselves? Or were they actually taught something detrimental?

What is the nature of this pseudo-science?
also on spotify -> https://open.spotify.com/track/0m3XklXAjsJAnSMgl2Upif?si=391...
I don’t think your logic is based on sound assumptions:

You can’t completely turn off DRAM at idle if it’s to store data - it has to self-refresh continuously. Some power savings are available by running it in a power saving mode, but you can’t get around the leakage of the DRAM cells, so the extra power used to drive the DRAM hard is not the full DRAM power usage, but a fraction of it. (LPDDR5 is nifty in that you can tell it to power down parts of the chip that aren’t currently being used.)

The SSD isn’t being hit by either workload: why would a CPU benchmark hit disk? The SSD is going to remain idle & be part of the 4W that Anandtech assigns to the system idle power drain.

Where does it say that Compute is CPU + GPU? (I’m happy to believe it, but I don’t see it in the article & they already break out the GPU power usage seperately using a different benchmark.)

(It would really help if Anandtech told us what the benchmarks were - some CPU intensive benchmarks don’t hit memory at all, they just hammer a few cache lines. It’s entirely possible for a pure computational benchmark to leave most of the LPDDR5 in deep sleep!)

If by MT Compute they mean specifically the Geekbench 5 compute benchmark then that is a Metal / GPU benchmark, so I will concede this point in that case :)

Even conceding that the Compute benchmark is really a GPU benchmark, it’s still the case comparing a CPU benchmark load against the TDP of another processor isn’t entirely correct, as the TDP is meant to be a power ceiling (although Intel has rather breached this in recent years - AMD TDPs are more honest I’m told.) - if we accept the 22.3W of the average workload benchmark, then the TDP for the chip is still going to be more than that & that’s the appropriate point of comparison.
It’s only becomes luck if you stop learning and stop contributing value.
I know right!

However, I do feel like individuals also have their part to play in this situation.

If a business has to dedicate 1% of revenues to OSS, why shouldn't the individual, who is also an indirect beneficiary?
I live in Austin and took a Megabus to Houston last year. It was exactly the experience I had in college 16 years ago which was identical to what you described here.
So if you lose an eyeball you lose your money?
honestly this could be an onion article
Do you have any recommended readings or search terms to explore this subject?
Its easy to setup such schedules on your home router for different sites. Also Android has a Digitial Wellbeing app for the same thing.
From the stuff that gets pumped into my feed the purpose of most “threads” isn’t so much about sharing information as building an audience and gaining followers. Heck a lot of them just rehash blog posts written by someone else.

Anyway if gaining twitter followers is your real goal then taking them off platform isn’t the way to do it.
>It’s not like the company gets less value out of the former’s work.

There must be some reason why the owners/directors of the companies making the most profit are willing to pay more. While it is possible they are making a mistake, the fact that this pay discrepancy has existed for decades, and the fact the companies are still very profitable, would suggest the probability of that is not very high.

It is also possible that a systemic change like abrupt adoption of work from home across all industries and the country or even world might cause a change in the parameters that made the previous dynamic successful.
> As someone who has only really started using Twitter in the last few months

Seems like a little bit of a self-report right off the bad. The OP is not very familiar with Twitter and the ecosystem and user behaviors of the platform, and is coming with (admittedly biased) perspective as a blogger.

For example:

> someone that I follow re-tweeted Tweet number 47 in this ridiculously long thread.

This is actually highlighting one of the benefits of Twitter threads as a text - chunkable content. Blog posts are great for a long narrative that requires full context of the intro/supporting/conclusion, but Twitter threads excel in areas where the content is more a series statements/points that can stand alone. Think more like "bullet points" of a topic rather than a longer-form narrative.

But then, the OP transitions into the quick assumption that the problem is the difficulty in setting up a blog, which is a big assumption that I think misses the actual benefits of this format vs. traditional blogging.
Hello neighbor!

I had to do the same thing and drive out to Julien. I live in San Diego too.
> Using boiling water will scald the leaves and leave a bitter taste.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samovar
Looking at their website (https://worldcoin.org/how-it-works) their commitment to user privacy is very location-specific: the pictures taken in France have non-participants' faces blurred out. The photos taken everywhere else show everyone's faces.

Building that out into a larger idea, it feels like the operators are trying to make this appealing to people in less-well-off areas that don't have so many regulations. One might even call it exploitative.
The left has its fair share of growing anti-science sentiment. I agree it's quite a bit worse with Republicans but it is growing in both directions, which is a concern. People pick their science a la carte as long as it confirms what they want.

- Denial of the science of sex differences

- Denial of the science of intelligence differences, the relevance of intelligence in life outcomes and how heritable it is

- Belief without evidence that black/white racial differences in outcome are completely due to racism and not partly due to a byproduct of cultural differences

- Anti-nuclear sentiment that wildly exaggerates the risks of nuclear power

- Historical revisionism (e.g 1619 project and NYT begrudgingly making stealth edits)
Maybe it would be interesting to have different platforms that have different levels of anonymity so that we can see what sort of conversations would form differently.

We also have to remember that internationally, the standards for what is acceptable speech is wildly different, so de-anonymization can literally cause people to be imprisoned and/or killed.

In my opinion, highly moderated forums tend to have their conversations reduced to low-value self-reinforcing memes/jokes/self-congratulations/hate-for-the-other-party.

But more importantly, there are certain truths that would go unspoken in a completely de-anonymous internet. ...and as forum providers consolidate ever-closer to governments, that class of illegal words gets larger.
To me, this is fundamentally the difference between science and engineering: Science involves discovering things which are new, while engineering takes those discoveries and makes them practically useful.

In terms of my own work, tarsnap is absolutely a work of engineering -- I very deliberately avoided doing anything new, instead using established and well-tested concepts. The exception to this is scrypt, which I designed -- and proved the security of -- because there was no existing password based key derivation function which met my standards for security. On that one occasion I crossed the line from engineering into science.

Science is great, but there's nothing to be ashamed about in doing engineering work. The world needs good engineers who can take basic scientific discoveries and make useful products out of them!
There are already requirements for most elected officials. Age, citizenship, and residency requirements are common. Thus the slippery slope argument "if we have any requirements at all that's a slippery slope to having arbitrarily bad requirements" already applies equally to the current situation as it would to any proposal to change the requirements.
Muphry's law strikes again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law
Yeah I feel the same way. I never understood the "This may be a stupid question..." framing.

Asking fundamental questions in order to build up to a more complex understanding is the most effective way to learn, I have no hesitation about asking such questions.
It would seem to me that, in theory, it is OK to discover a security flaw by accident, but it’s not OK to be proactively looking for flaws, even out of curiosity, or try to exploit them for any purpose, however innocuous, unless you are a designated security specialist.
Any experience using it with multiple LLCs and/or properties?
Social media is indeed not "democratic" - but the reasons that you gave are completely wrong. "Algorithms designed to maximize profit" are a feature of specific social networks - Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok - not the concept of social networks. For instance: Mastodon/Fediverse. Sure, it's not popular at all - but it's still social media without manipulative profit-maximizing algorithms.

So, if anything, the issue is with those algorithms, or specific platforms.
The reputation graph prevents Sybil attacks (mobs of sock puppets, etc).

The crypto aspect can obscure a series of posts by the same author although I don't think it would protect you from the site owner themselves.
I think you probably want `pure (manipulate x)` at the end of your do block.
This is such garbage. Literally, no good can come from this.
I think the "No True Scottsman" fallacy is confusing here. It's actually really sly.

The "No True Scottsman" statement must be used as the argument. It has to say that they're wrong BECAUSE they are not a true Scottsman.

What OP did was say there is The Left and there is "The Left".
The Left is against rentiers.
"The Left" supports rentiers.
He's dividing the two, but he's not saying one is wrong because they're not true leftists, he's saying one is wrong because they support rentiers.

But then he additionally says they're not true leftists, which is to say that a leftists shouldn't support them because they don't align, which is where the smell comes from.

The main argument is not a Scottsman fallacy. But there's definitely some implied Scottsmanism in the additional use of Left and "Left", which if read by the right person who is already weak to Scottsmanism will materialize as the Scottsman fallacy.

EDIT: I thought you were wrong, but under more analysis, I realized you were right, it was just complicated.
>Although I'd hope someone like the EFF would turn up with some heavy hitter experts to add some friction to the self-serving bad take.

I think having "fact checkers" and "experts" debunk his claims will ultimately gain him support among his constituents. There's a sharp trend towards anti-expert, anti-intellectual sentiment that has assisted him throughout the pandemic, and there's no reason that I can see to believe that it won't serve him equally as well on this issue. We'll see, but I think this movement isn't something that will die out with the pandemic, but something that we will see permeate other areas of discourse.
And for those curious, the TL;DR of the 11c:

> As to the 11¢ offset, we have currency conversion to thank.