skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
He didn't say he needed to be offered all of that, just at least one of the items.
> to a phone number they're not supposed to be using

What do you mean?
"LatinX" doesn't seem to be spreading all that much among Latinos, at least in the US [1].

76% of Latino adults say they haven't even heard of it, 20% have heard of it but do not use it, and 3% use it.

The most usage is by women 18-29, with 7% using it.

The majority say that if you need a non-gendered term of such people use "Hispanic".

[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2020/08/11/about-one-in...
If supply is very limited - yes. Price == max mortgage. So the solution is to build more and build up ... and that's not going to happen.
Peer review really not crowd-sourcable IMO. There is a general argument that an appeal to "free" labour is not sustainable, but it goes beyond that.

At the highest levels of research in your area of specialty there are very few people who can provide useful feedback. These people tend to review each-other's work for the most pertinent facts (yes, somewhat circular but in my experience generally done well with good intention), other reviewers can chime in, but this might only address some of the more general things, like the stats in the method.

Peer review is time-consuming, and you can easily burn-out on it if you accept. A recent journal had the model of "publish for free, just review 2 papers a year". It struggles to make it work.

The only peer review that's relatively easy is when a paper is so terrible you out-right reject it, otherwise it's a lot of work.

Making a stand as a PEER reviewer (I will only review for open-access journals) is not trivial either. At mid-level in your career you have many collaborators, and you're interested in their work, and the work of others in your field, and you want to make contributions. Almost certainly important work will come to you from Elsevier style journals. Almost certainly you'll want to say no, but you'll say yes.
How can I check my own source code for these unicode glyphs with (recursive-)grep?
shell is good enough, when people started to use script language, they just wanted to fill the empty between bash and C, no one want to replace it, so bash and other shell still there
I've noticed that, too.

My guess is that both restaurants and hotels plunged a lot right at the beginning, and now they've recovered about 2/3 of that and that recovery has now stalled. People are still trying to figure out what is sustainable and what isn't, in terms of staffing.

We may not see this industry rebound to pre-covid employment levels ever. For instance, Uber delivery and other services may just be a thing and permanently shift labor away from waiters, and hotels may have permanently ceded market shares to AirBnBs or other lower service offerings. Maybe in the future, daily cleanings will be seen as some kind of odd luxury.

But I think it's all up in the air right now.
I don't know why "we" are. Just use Python. Or whatever language you're using for your main system (I've written "scripts" in Scala, sure it takes a second or two to warm up the JVM but it's honestly fine). Or TCL if you really must have a language that can be used as a login shell.
> Well what do you think the differences in the code are?

JDK-8210483 was a regression bug, you pass javac certain Java code which it handled fine in JDK 10 and earlier, in JDK 11 javac would crash with an assertion failure. Oracle fixed this in JDK 12 then backported it to JDK 11; the backport made it in to Oracle JDK 11.0.3, but missed AdoptOpenJDK 11.0.3 and wasn't in AdoptOpenJDK until 11.0.4.

I suppose this is a relatively rare scenario, but due to that bug we could not compile one of our internal apps with AdoptOpenJDK until 11.0.4 came out, whereas Oracle JDK 11.0.3 would compile it fine.

Even though that was a couple of years ago now, I'm still not going to assume that an Oracle JDK build and a third-party JDK build are going to have the exact same set of bugfixes, even if they have the same version number. This is why I think it is important to thoroughly test any migration between different vendor JDK builds before deploying it to production, even if in theory they are supposed to be identical. And even though that testing may be a relatively small amount of work for any given app/microservice/etc, multiply that across dozens or even hundreds of them and it all starts to add up.
What does a more powerful magnet get you? Finer resolution? Quicker scans?
Are you going to run into extra-legal problems?
You’re correct, the author of the article was confused. Probably got confused because watermelon are related to crops that are culturally considered to be vegetables, like cucumbers. Another thread mentioned the same.
Blocking for not supporting JS isn't illegal nor a violation of the US ADA. You can add requirements for disabled people to access your services as long as it's reasonable, and the prevalence of screen readers that work with JS turned on likely qualifies requiring JS a reasonable request. It'd be like saying "you can't deny someone using a IE8 screen reader by only offering TLS 1.3".
It's a very deep rabbit hole, but apparently, vegetables are eaten as a main course, and fruit as a dessert.

I only even remember this because of an argument I had many years ago regarding whether a tomato was a vegetable or fruit. I chose the veggie side, but had no real evidence. Come to find out, after researching, the Supreme Court agreed.

It's all rather silly, honestly, but have a read for yourself on the background and decision.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden
As I understand the barrier is quite large requiring coordinated action or the death of many careers.
Was it because your primary key was an unsigned 32-bit integer and that’s not an “issue”.
It isn't end-to-end encryption if you have to trust someone in the middle. Right?
The Benefits and Costs of Writing a POSIX Kernel in a High-Level Language [pdf]
I always thought an MRI worked a bit like a microwave oven that it would jiggle water or the hydrogen molecules in a person. The jiggling made the molecules emit energy, radio emissions. But it's much more precise than that.

nibib.nih.gov has a nice explanation.

>MRIs employ powerful magnets which produce a strong magnetic field that forces protons in the body to align with that field. When a radiofrequency current is then pulsed through the patient, the protons are stimulated, and spin out of equilibrium, straining against the pull of the magnetic field. When the radiofrequency field is turned off, the MRI sensors are able to detect the energy released as the protons realign with the magnetic field. The time it takes for the protons to realign with the magnetic field, as well as the amount of energy released, changes depending on the environment and the chemical nature of the molecules. Physicians are able to tell the difference between various types of tissues based on these magnetic

What's strange is for clarity of images an old-fashioned x-ray/CAT scan is better it's not as fuzzy as 1T or 3T MRI. From what I can gather is the more powerful an MRI is the faster it can capture images and with more detail. The speed is why they are clearer you the patient has less time to squirm around. It's also mean less time for the patient to be in the machine and the machine is less constrictive (bigger hole).
Some notes:

- The syntax highlighting gets it every time. Seeing last word of the comment or half of the function name in different color is pretty clear indicator of shenanigans.

- emacs respects the bidi controls (and thus is vulnerable), vi does not and shows thing as"

if access_level != 'none<202e>⁦':

but homoglyph attack gets them both... unless you set LANG=C.

- "git log" gets them all

+if access_level != 'none<U+202E><U+2066>': # Check if admin <U+2069><U+2066>' and access_level != 'user

- Some linters flag the techniques used. I guess one can also add lint disable comments, but that makes attack more complex and makes code stand out more.

Python/early-return.py:6:4: W0101: Unreachable code (unreachable)
Python/homoglyph-function.py:3:0: C0103: Function name "sayHello" doesn't conform to snake_case naming style (invalid-name)

(the last one is especially powerful.. pylint by default checks all function names against strict regex'es which outright reject all the fancy names http://pylint-messages.wikidot.com/messages:c0103 )

- "less" also shows all the non-printable characters, unicode included. This comes handy when looking at unknown binary files, but apparently it helps with text files, too!
This is a hell of a comparison to try to make. How many people do you think regularly run into this kind of issue in Postgres? How many people do you think regularly run into the Python GIL?

Even if we assume your premise that vacuum is at least as bad as the GIL is correct, this would easily explain it.

Add in the sheer difference in expectations between a programming language and a database... and well, I don't think there's any mystery here at all. There's easily multiple great explanations, even if your premise is correct.
Lie often enough and you'll lose track of your truth, that path leads nowhere worth going.
Negativity is incredibly powerful for me, even though I don't express it. Not in the sense it makes me feel smug, but I tear down everything about a particular thing I am focusing on - go to the fundamentals and find out where they went right and wrong. Put the thing to paces, read the manual, assess its usability and what they said it would do and doesn't. I learn from it. Wearing rosy glasses is a disadvantage for me, I lose a grip on developing a taste and seeking excellence.

There are times when you come across absolute perfection (limit of my cognition) and can't find any faults or negative aspects. I get obsessed by whoever built this thing, and often send them an email how inspiring their creation is.
If it's any consolation the default level of negativity is largely cultural.

I went through your recent comments and to me they appear neutral.
Which part is modest effort? Creating an open access high impact journal, or choosing to take the funding hits associated with lower impact publishing?

Neither strikes me as easy.
If you agree that more risk tends to push prices lower with all else being equal, I don’t see that being indicative of evidence considering investors would presumably be pricing in regulation risk.

But in any event the price at trial is not necessarily indicative of unfair anti-competitive business practices. The trial was not necessarily about the current practices at the time of the trial, but broke the business practices into three distinct periods dating back to 1870.
> They bought lots of stuff, pull funding from development and redirect it to sales. Then they sell it to fit their vision; but nothing integrates cleanly and you'll be spending massive amounts of money on consultants who understand product A & B and how to connect them.

I had the "pleasure" of working with Oracle BPMS 10 at one point. It was a piece of crap they'd acquired (but apparently a better piece of crap that the other ones available at the time that the team had evaluated). It has pretty much zero code reuse features, and the consultants had taught the team to do stuff like cram all kinds of barely-related stuff into one "screen" so parts could be "reused." Getting support for all the bugs in 10 was extremely painful. It seemed like there was one guy who know what he was doing, and the rest just repeatedly asked for more logs. BPMS 11 was a rewrite with no migration path offered (but by the time that came around I'd noped out of that team).

The team eventually re-implemented everything in Activiti before support for BPMS 10 ended. BPMS 12 might have had a migration path (IIRC, a crappy one), but by then Oracle had burned their bridges.
Under the Hood of World’s First 500-Mile EV
Nah. The editorial board of Nature could start their own open-access journal tomorrow, hosted on the arXiv or ResearchOne, and tell everyone that this is the real Nature they should submit to. And if most academics cared about the public having affordable access to research, they'd treat that new journal as the real Nature, impact factor and all. They just don't care. Not their wallets being squeezed.

It's like, could Google change their domain name? Sure, it'd be a bit of a thing, but if they wanted to, they could and most people would follow them to the new domain.

We know this is possible because some math journals where the board is passionate about open access have already done it.
Thanks for the data, that's exactly my point! this is a term constructed by those outside the group, and those within the group don't use it.
> Family, education, connections, lucky breaks, friendly favours

Definitely, good luck is always a factor. But don't discount how hard people in leadership positions have to work. Tech seems to have more variability, but go look at consulting or finance and anyone who is successful is paying a real price for how much they work. I'm not saying it's a good thing, but it takes serious discipline, the same kind that keeps you going in endurance sports.

Surely there are rich people that have a cushy life, but they're not the ones who are endurance athletes.
Roblox Servers Are Turning Back on (Slowly) After 60 Hour Outage
You're kind of missing the point. The whole point of data at rest encryption is: if this drive dies and gets thrown into a dumpster, I don't want some random shmuck to pull it out, put it in a server, run a recovery program against it, and get my customer's SSNs.

Now, I would hope Amazon shreds drives that are declared dead, but I wouldn't want to risk my business on it.

It has almost nothing to do with protection against a targeted attack and everything to do with chain of custody.
zayo will take a hit from this, so much china mobile/unicom gear waiting to spinup.
Biscuit operating system written in Go
>the executive salaries are $0 as far as I know

I have no way of verifying this, but clearly the money is going somewhere and it's not publishing.

>It's basically how publishing would work if academics take control away from commercial publishers

arxiv is closer to how publishing would or should work if academics were entirely in charge. Publishing only entails putting a pdf up. All the peer review process is orthogonal which is done for free by everyone involved.

>Authors generally have the option to keep the copyright of the papers when publishing for ACM, and at least host the papers on their homepages.

You do not retain the copyright, and the only permission you get is to share it for classroom use with some other constraints. Authors posting them on their university websites is a grey area that is likely non compliant but it would be really bad PR for ACM to go after such instances. More recently, ACM has started allowing authors to pay some exorbitant fee to make the paper open access.

>This is a good thing that they dominate CS/EE as they have more reasonable access costs

Actually, there isn't really a big difference between the access costs. For most of the world, it's infinite. It doesn't matter if Elsevier is trying to charge $100 for a paper and ACM is trying to charge $30. Or what deals they make with libraries. It's all infinite for anyone not affiliated with a university in a western country.

>It's not completely free because there are real costs to publishing

The amortized cost of putting a pdf on the internet is close to 0. This is already true with arxiv. And even if you do not want to use arxiv, a static website with s3 or the new cloudflare equivalent will cost pennies per pdf.
I read that book and as I recall, it makes the point that you need to have the intention and motivation to make it work, or else it won't matter. Whereas for me, the reasons I am always considering negative stuff (I just find it important to think in worst-case scenarios for various reasons), completely outweigh any desire I have to be more friendly and likeable.

This has made my marriage difficult at times, and I've realized that I need to change this. What I need is not a how-to book. I need a really really compelling why book. I unfortunately have yet to find one and envy people who naturally care about that stuff.

I also would prefer not to get judgment from people who don't understand why I can't humble myself, as that happens sometimes. I've tried forcing myself to be humble and continue to try every day (I'm married!), but it would be so much nicer if people could convince me about things rationally instead of expecting me to respect their opinions for no reason other than the relationship can become negative otherwise. Of course, we live in reality, not what we wish was reality. So I suppose I will just continue with struggling to figure this out until I hopefully get the answer, knowing full well that it would actually be pretty useful if I could be a more positive and likeable person. I'm actually going for counselling this week for the first time, maybe the professionals can figure it out for me!
Amazon has this feature on at least their Android app. I've tested out the virtual shelf next to the already assembled shelff and it's a pretty good preview of it.
Are you sure nothing came of it?

Figma for example seems to be largely powered by WASM and the core of the product seems to be written in C++

https://www.figma.com/blog/webassembly-cut-figmas-load-time-...

https://www.figma.com/blog/building-a-professional-design-to...

I think the majority of web developers are just slow at catching up with this new things.
> Someone who is taking peer-review but not giving any is being very selfish.

You mean like the publisher that makes you work for free and then comes back selling your work to you for a ton of money?
I came here to write about Tom's book. I consider it Mackay's successor and called it The Science Book of the Decade in my review of it. He wrote it for non-science undergraduates.

Here's the review: https://joshuaspodek.com/the-science-book-of-the-decade-ener...
Have you considered using Playwright to automate that instead?
I echo this. I have really good stats but most richer countries are hostile to immigrants. Even if you get past that barrier, many are hostile to Muslims, Muslim lifestyles, or middle eastern people.

I respect people who emigrate. Much of the time you risk being in a worse position, which is why it's usually the hardcore poor who emigrate. A lot of working visas also don't allow the spouse to work or don't allow part time jobs. Many employers expect you to "do the calculations", which is basically they'll pay whatever they do, and you figure out how to live with it.
There’s a burgeoning open access movement. Arguably successful, but let’s not act like people aren’t trying. Not to mention preprint servers and various other “nod and wink” mechanisms scientists use to free their own work.
Could you repeat this in english? It's good for imaging big features but not small features, or high frequency density changes, or takes too long, or what?
And I think that's why so many with similar kinds of work struggle to keep the mindset out of the rest of their lives.

Striving for perfection is one thing, as long as you realize it's not real.

Sounds like gratitude to me, which is always a good thing.
John Carmack: metaverse is a honeypot trap for architecture astronauts [video]
We could also do what Israel does and improve our water infrastructure in California.

I understand climate change is a perpetual issue, but that doesn't mean we can't adjust and even thrive.
In such a collapse, are the houses just all going to be empty?
We are not talking about inter-GPU communication. Only about using a single GPU.
It does have a point - a structured code of conduct would restrict USA more than others because they would at least try to cover up any violations and at least openly try to follow them for internal political reasons, while the potential adversaries do have the practical capability to just flount the restrictions whenever suitable, as internal political battles or budget allocation will not risk exposing such violations like USA did - if they had something like the equivalent of Nixon's Pentagon Papers event, they would just execute everyone involved and it would not get published.

Things like USA-USSR nuclear disarmament treaties only worked because they included mechanisms for strict verification by the other side. For not developing space arms, you would have to rely on trust, and (as the article mentions) international trust is in very short supply.
I know it has been said before, but I think reading that (and I had to stop) as a series of tweets was akin to "Welcome to Hell. Please keep your arms and legs in the Hell vehicle at all times... unless you know, you want more Hell".

Honestly, I thought Doctorow would do a blog or something. It is just too broken up.
See my reply to swsieber.
My less pessimistic (dare I say realistic, ha!) take is that whales will have little of note to say. Complex communication (in contrast to "simple" communication like the evocation of emotions, e.g. fear, anger, sadness, etc.) does seem to require the biological need for it, otherwise the genes that control factors that manifest it ("depth" and richness of sense, proclivity for specific mental models, etc.) do not get reinforced and "bred" into the animal.

The other side to this is that communication is mostly non-verbal. For example, chimpanzees, perhaps the most communicationally-advanced animals, besides us, do have a few different "verbal" signals they use. But there is also a richness of non-verbal communication (body language, facial expression, using their hands, etc.). And then these signals have to be also interpreted by other chimpanzees, thus training them to develop new mental models about these signals (and leading way to complex communication).

Whereas all whales really have are clicks, whistles, and "pulsed calls." Along with a tail with much less dexterity than a hand (but is still used in communicating amongst themselves). The richness of their communication is much less than the chimp, so so far it seems they can only use it for rudimentary purposes (mating, hunting/intelligent organization and navigation, and figuring out who is part of the "tribe"/pod).

But in that vein, they're still closer to a chimp than they are to us. Humans have evolved such complex mental models for the world and other humans within it, that all animals are basically on the same, much lower level in comparison.

On a less relevant topic, whales are social animals that stick together, make close bonds with family, and do have a certain "culture" that gets passed down, and is constantly morphing a la "whale songs." It almost pains me to think about what emotions a whale would feel (if it even does) about friends and family that have been hunted to death.
> the publisher that makes you work for free

They don't make you do anything. I don't even understand under what mechanism you think publishers are making people do things?

And you aren't working for the publisher - you're working for the community, paid by your employer.

> selling your work to you

They don't sell my reviews or my papers to me.
But they don't really coincide...

Seeing as Germany itself has a Protestant-Catholic split, nevermind the rest of Central Europe, Catholicism is probably not it. Neither Latin script, nor the extent of the historical German population, unless you consider the Baltics Central Europe.

It seems there is indeed more than one way to look at it. For some, it is about not being in the same category with Russia, for some it's their Austro-Hungarian history. For some it's Germanic languages. Is the German North Sea coast any more Central than, say, Belgium? How about Slovenia? Is Südtirol Central Europe?

Where exactly the line is tends to depend on the context. In my experience, people from the region don't care much about the Iron Curtain line, unlike Anglos or the French.
Basketballer Aaron Gordon and his mother want to bring diversity to tech