skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They reference an improved student centered IDE and then jump into what IDEs are good for and finally that in first or second year:

>What they can’t do, unless they’ve figured it out on their own, is operate a computer outside of the confines of the IDE they’ve been taught. In none of the curricula I’ve seen, through personal experience or reading syllabi provided by other students, is there a place for students to get past the myriad of barriers that constitute the use of a computer in the modern day.

I have to unpack this but first of all, the use of a computer in the modern day for many engineers does involve an IDE, so I question whether that is even a true claim, but continuing the things missing from an IDE are:

> First, in a Java-focused curriculum, it insulates the student from the javac command line program, and the command line environment itself. Second, it catches some basic mistakes and allows the student to defer learning about the finnicky language requirements that aren’t deemed core to the curriculum, like imports and file naming requirements.

I don’t know about others but this didn’t fill me with horror. Those are the things that would make a student in an introductory class want to quit, and the number of drops in CS is already very high. If as the author said it takes 2 to 3 years to grasp control structures, why mess with the finicky software engineering headaches when it’s an added load on the students? By the time they graduate they should have a complete view of the system and in my experience things like the stack, logic gates, and compilation are taught in intro CS, the students are just not forced into it when coding which is really another endeavor.

Here I do agree with the author that some more granularity in the department of CS would help, but I’d argue that would lead to more specialization and fewer graduates who understand the entire system.
It is always a pleasure to watch the young ones rediscover the world. :D

Yes, carriers should be more transparent. Yes, even in general IT circles, this is not well known. This is known and not surprising in digital forensics circles. You should have seen the SS7 shenanigans!

I have a special corner in my heart for AT&T. The dark, dank, where all-my-monsters-live corner. Once, I have asked them to send me telco logs, they sent me 30 some CDs with the logs, but only origination details. Then, on further legal nudging they send me the other half, again in 30 some CDs. 60 CDs. They didn't even fill the discs, so the entire DB ended up to be ~17GB.
"Value" is providing a benefit that is greater than the cost.
A small, modular, efficient fusion plant (2015)
> Fundamentally the people like Zuckerberg responsible for its execution do not understand what people want

I agree with the broader point, but Facebook owns three of the most popular apps in the world. They have at least some idea of what people want.
> The low pay isn’t the worst aspect of most McJobs.

It is, though. Being poor is incredibly nerve wracking and expensive, and having more money directly fixes that problem. It's easier to put up with other people's bullshit for $50k/yr vs $25k/yr, all other things being equal.
This totally skipped the fact that some (or most of the world?!?) a while ago started to split applied from theoretical sciences/studies.

So in that circle - they would go into slightly different directions.
Science Publisher Retracts 44 Papers for Being Utter Nonsense
in my mind, keysight is the original HP in the sense that Hewlett and Packard started an electronics test & measurement company, and AFAIK keysight is the only electronics test & measurement company descended from HP. also, all the archives of the company for the first several decades went with keysight. I think HP probably didn’t start doing medical stuff until a few decades after its founding.

but I agree hp was split into a lot of companies, with a lot of good parts scattered widely (except AFAICT no good parts scattered into “HP Inc”)
> Honestly though the big issue is crawling. Not only is it a bandwidth monster many sites are hostile to non google bots, along with cdn’s and cloudflare.

I do my own crawling and don't agree with any of these statements. Bandwidth is not a bottleneck, and blocking is mostly only a problem if your bot is too aggressive.
Highlights:

> Some titles of the farkakte research: “Simulation of sea surface temperature based on non-sampling error and psychological intervention of music education”; “Distribution of earthquake activity in mountain area based on embedded system and physical fitness detection of basketball”; “The stability of rainfall conditions based on sensor networks and the effect of psychological intervention for patients with urban anxiety disorder.”

> As highlighted by the Chronicle of Higher Education in August, when the 400-odd papers in the geosciences journal got expressions of concern attached to them, many suspicious papers appear to have been written by scholars affiliated with Chinese institutions, where researchers are incentivized (sometimes financially) to publish in notable journals and where many doctoral students must publish a paper before graduation. The founder and editor-in-chief of the Arabian Journal of Geosciences told the Chronicle at the time that he reads every paper published in the journal each month (which would mean about 10 papers per day, including weekends), and that he thinks the fabricated research got into the journal through hacking.
There's one fast food restaurant around me that doesn't lack employees and its Chik Fil A... I'm not sure why but it almost feels like they have too many of them.
- Excessive Liquidity: There's money sloshing around the global economy looking for a place to go.

- Crypto Marketability: It's become very easy for people to buy and sell cryptocurrency.

- Speculation: Regardless of what problems cryptocurrencies pretend to solve, their actual value so far has only been as a speculative investment. Like traditional equities, cryptocurrency is benefiting from the highly speculative market we live in right now and the FOMO of investors trying to make a quick return.

The situation that you're seeing with cryptocurrency has historical precedent with investment bubbles involving other technologies that were perceived to be "world changing". The bicycle mania
[1] of the late 19th century and the dotcom bubble [2] of the late 20th century being notable examples.

1: https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/revisiting-the-great-british...

2: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot-com_bubble
Ten Cinematographers to Watch
> traditional gratuitous use of object classes for everything

This sort of phrasing is sort of distressingly characteristic of contemporary discussions about object-oriented programming.

I can understand where it comes from - if you look through my comment history, you'll probably find plenty of examples of me running my mouth about Java or the overuse of OOP in Python - but I assure you there is a baby in all of that bathwater, and it doesn't need to be thrown out. That baby is dynamic dispatch, and it does let you do some things that can be a hassle without it.

Unfortunately, it tends to be poorly taught or poorly understood nowadays. This is not a "no true Scotsman" argument. I'm not saying no true hammer would be used to drive screws. I'm just observing that, if a carpenter was never taught about screwdrivers, it's no surprise they'll develop a lot of pent-up frustration about hammers, and perhaps even be a bit confused about what they're really for. It seemed to me that one of the core sections of the essay ikrubner linked above rested on a conflation of dynamic dispatch and dynamic typing. Which is a worrisome thing I've seen many people do. It's no wonder we don't use OOP well, living in an intellectual environment where its only truly distinguishing characteristic rarely even makes it into lists of its key features. So, perhaps it's even worse than just having only been given a hammer. We were only given a hammer, and were also never taught about nails.

Anyway, enough complaining. Let's take Racket's image drawing library as a positive example. It's implemented around an object-oriented interface. What this does is lets you write code against that interface, so that it is able to output graphics to any format that has a suitable implementation of that interface, without needing any special glue code or explicit branching logic to make it happen. I would argue that this is quite useful.

As a contrasting example, Haskell's typeclasses are superficially quite similar, but, since they use static dispatch, adding a new output format does tend to require some glue code - not much, but still more than zero - that's specific to each drawing routine you want to hook up to that new format.

There's a nice essay, https://www.sicpers.info/2018/03/why-inheritance-never-made-... , that serves as an excellent excoriation of the C++/Java/etc lineage of OOP. But one key thing needed to contextualize it is that OOP mechanisms like Racket's or CLOS aren't trying to do OOP in the same way that Java does, and therefore don't run afoul of the same shortcomings. In particular, they're not trying to turn it into a single golden hammer that solves all abstraction problems. Racket gets a lot more mileage out of its module mechanism, for example.
Infections among the vaccinated are like 6x less frequent than the unvaccinated.

It's perfectly compatible with base logic to say that there's a bar for very good that they were above then and are still above now, so that's not really a great argument. If you want to construct an argument about what 'very good' should mean, that's different, but there's no logical contradiction involved.

It's like if you eat the best cake of your life and call it very good, that doesn't mean you are lying if you later also call the second best cake of your life very good.
People that have spent their entire lives in academia consoling themselves for their wasted years with fancy graphics. :)
Allowing cutomers and soiety at large to benefit from such data pools is obviously better than not doing so. The specific cases' details would be required to judge whether a particular collection is worthy or not.

Say racial or sexual preference DBs... good data right? really? long debate to be had there. How about something like Erowid's trip reports [1] but for all prescription medications? Lots easier to see value in that but what about those who interpret the data wrong? Apparently thats reason enough for censorship now.

look into the arguments about the privacy implications of phone books. IIRC there were court cases about the phone company charging extra for "unlisted" numbers.

[1] https://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp_front.shtml
Attic.city was developed and is run with less than one FTE (two part time founders). Definitely boutique — home and fashion products from indie stores in the US — and thereby manageable both in terms of labor and the stack. We’re growing incrementally. Lately the focus has been on internal tooling and progressively automated health/status metrics.

https://attic.city
Unless your phd is in critical race or gender studies and your endeavours actually reduce the totality of human knowledge
Yeah, we'll never have a President that is honest enough to give a State of the Union address where he says "Hey you fatasses! Stop eating McDonald's, and do some air squats every day in your home! Then maybe we wouldn't need to pass 4000-page health insurance laws! Bro, do you even lift?"
There are a few CRMs that do what you describe. Streak (I'm the founder) connects to Gmail's APIs to automatically index the conversation history of contacts you've added. We go one step further and also show you the conversation history between your contacts and anyone on your team, not just you.
> If someone is willing to pay for it, then it has value to that person.

My problem with that definition is that it's a tautology, and therefore holds little actual meaning and provides no insight.

"Why is that valuable?" is not a question meaningfully answered by "because people want it". That answer only begs the question. Everything that has value to people only has value because people want it.
I mentioned fragmentation which this is going to make worst.

To reiterate, lets say you are a new Linux user, and you see there's tons of linux DE, there are over 600 links for new linux users about opinions on what the best desktop environment is, you are not just given choice, you are forced into choosing GNOME, MATE, CINNAMON, KDE, LxQT, LXDE, XFCE, i3, i3-gaps, awesomeWM, fluxbox, Deepin, Budgie, Pantheon, Enlighten etc and getting used to their apps and settings. Not only that, the distro with its own package manager will need to support that DE, and you will need to rely on them to update it and fix bugs you will encounter.

You can buy the System76 one you will get their DE and will probably need to stay on their forums for help, so why would you want to switch to linux? Just because you heard it was supposed to be easier to use and in reality even before you used it and did some light research you'd find the deluge of choices overwhelming and not easy.
Sjw dross
> I'd not call it a characterization but a fact.

It's a subjective, unquantified statement. It cannot possibly be called a fact.

In any case the proof is in the pudding: children in the US who are born poor are highly likely to die poor, and we are significantly worse in that respect than other Western countries.
I think most people get sick from smoking at or near retirement age. Early 60’s seems like when lung disease begins to become noticeable.

So these are the years people go from productive to a net societal expense as they collect social security and Medicare.

I guess we don’t really know. But I think it’s probably true that smokers don’t end up costing society anymore than non-smokers overall.

Saying that, smoking is a ridiculous thing and I’ve seen how it not only steals years but makes those final 10 years progressively worse and torturous.
> The advantage of the "one fact – one question" technique is that when a witness "runs", i.e. they try a long non-responsive narrative; the question can be repeated easily again and again.

"Colonel Jessup, did you order the code red?"
Interrogating family and friends in these way is inherently hostile because the goal here is to catch people lying. By doing this, you’re telling the other person you don’t trust them.

As someone on the receiving end of this, it destroyed any trust I had with my parents and teachers. The problem was that I wasn’t lying, but that I couldn’t tell a story in a coherent and linear order on the first attempt.
Sorry, should have linked out the CAT specification instead: https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/102200_102299/102223/14...

The former just refers to the latter for event downloading.
It’s simple really, and most commenters don’t “get” what is going on with all this.

Remote communication tools like video conferencing fail to deliver what academics call “social presence”, which is the feeling of being together in unmediated communication. VR and AR have the necessary capabilities to do so, and deliver social presence on par with face to face. With a fully immersive experience, you can feel like you are standing next to a person talking to them, regardless of their physical location. Body language, eye contact, etc all come through.

That is the core capability that will disrupt all industry, it is more a matter of when not if. The current hardware clearly is not hitting the mark for sudden mass adoption. The hardware will eventually, even if we have to wait until it becomes something like sunglasses or even contact lenses.

From first principles, having computers override what photons you see will have huge effects, but don’t focus so much on the shiny video game world aspects: it’s all about removing the need for physical co-location to communicate, work, and spend time together with full social presence. This is why Zuck bought Oculus, and why he has pivoted his company around the entire thing. It’s not because of “Ready Player One”, but because he feels that hardware/software will modulate most person to person communication soon, and he wants it to be his stack.
Then XI is just like any other Free World leaders?
Last time I checked, all the computers were growing powerful and crypto was relevant neither for latency nor for power consumption on any device capable of joining a network.

It helps that one of the largest factors on choosing crypto algorithms is speed on both general purpose and specialized hardware.

So, count me in the group of people that don't understand why the NIST is doing this. Will they trade any security guarantee for speed? If so, nobody should ever use one of those algorithms. If not, whatever algorithm wins here would also win a new round of general purpose crypto contest.
As an "antivaxxer" (not by any reasonable use of the word, but that seems to be the state of the language right now), I would not deny any rape victim from getting an abortion. I don't think I've observed this overlap you mention, other than being referenced in comments like yours.

(I'm sure there are traditional pre-2020 antivaxxers out there, I just never come across them in real life)

On bodily autonomy, I see a lot of this "I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you!" kind of argument. Sure, technically nobody is using immediate physical force. By some strict literal interpretation, you are correct. I don't think that's what people have in mind when they say bodily autonomy though.
I’m curious if there been any mention of AR/VR in sci-fi or popular culture in general in a positive light? Almost all I can think of is dystopian and does not invoke the positive imagery that Fb seems to be playing at.

Who’s their target market?
IMO the PhD description here isn’t really useful for STEM fields and is too simple/idealized. What you learn in a PhD is how to do science. You learn about: experiment design, getting funding in your field, writing papers in your field, using the tools to understand data, learning who are the people in your field you want to work with/for to achieve your personal research goals etc. It’s not “you make a dent in the universe of knowledge”, its “you learn the stuff you need to know to make a dent in the universe of knowledge”. Actually making the dent is ancillary.
When Einstein met Churchill (1933)
"farkakte" might need to be a new word for the output of poorly prompted AI drivel production engines.
Malmud's General Index: Research Gist, No Slap on the Wrist
Or maybe you're just wrong? Or maybe I'm out there solving business problems while you're dabbling with your tools?
I agree and also feel like Students new to computer programming shouldn't be using Eclipse. They should be learning the fundamental concepts and their implementation, and having to learn a whole very complex IDE as well would just add to that difficulty.
> For a social space, that aspect of permanence is a double-edged sword. It also means that your embarrassing moments are preserved for all posterity, and probably even Googleable.

This is only an issue because we've normalised telling everyone the internet what you look like, what your name is and other info about yourself.

In the ye olden forum days there was just "hemi_dude420" who know every fucking thing about a certain brand of car. You had no idea where he lived, what he did, what his name was or whether he was a he at all. And we didn't care.

Nowadays people want to build their personal brand and insist on plastering their face, name and contact info everywhere.
This one shows some odd results:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.10.26.21265508v...

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/10/26/202...

From this I interpreted that Long COVID feature (any) didn't have significant outcome difference. And that some symptoms oddly happen more within vaccinated.

Hazard ratios for the outcome within 6 months of infection with SARS-CoV-2 between individuals vaccinated vs. unvaccinated against COVID-19. HR lower than 1 indicate outcomes less common among vaccinated individuals. Horizontal bars represent 95% confidence intervals. Each outcome is a composite endpoint with death as a component to address competing risks. The contribution of the outcome of interest to the overall incidence of the composite endpoint is encoded by the colour.

There may be bias in this study of course, maybe unvaccinated and vaccinated behave very differently and the behaviour could be a cause.

Vaccinated may be more anxious folk and therefore end up with more anxiety after covid as well.

I'm missing some other study that I think found around 0-20% reduction for different long term issues. Can't find it right now.
But I already thought spiders were pretty smart. What is it now, they can do calculus too?
Chaining is fine when building up an object, but definitely not something that should be systematically used. That's making the interface more complicated for little gain.
Mirrors another popular quote.

After bachelors, you feel, you know everything. After masters, you feel, you know nothing. After PhD, you feel, noone knows anything.
One of the problems with wokeness is I think it started as perfectly reasonable stuff like you mention, but then the activists / priests of wokeness let power go to their heads and get more concerned with having anyone who criticises them fired than helping the underprivileged.
I had to look it up. I found the best explanation on Urban Dictionary:

> An alternative spelling of the Yiddish word verkakte that can mean either goddamn or crappy - the literal translation is "becrapped".
I like that the focus indicator is separated from the borders of the item, but this raises a problem. CSS doesn't have a way to add outlines separated from the element. This means you have to wrap all focusable elements, and use pseudo-selector :focus-within to create additional border with the wrapper element.

Naturally creating wrapper elements to pass WCAG 2.1 is a pain, that should be solved in CSS itself.
Show HN: Excalideck – Use Excalidraw to make slides
Durov's announcement comments are like Twitch chat. Utter chaos with no rhyme or reason.
If the company was willing to pay me $X for the work I'm doing, then they should continue to pay me at least $X if I change locations. The work has already been valued.

Does the company exist to support the HR department, or does the HR department exist to support the company and employees? At google, we know the answer.
There is a similar story about an office worker not knowing what a photocopy machine is.

The New York Times did an amazing reenactment from transcripts of the legal deposition

https://youtu.be/PZbqAMEwtOE
Yiddish has many blessings yet to be bestowed on English.
And then they just keep saying over and over:

- Spiders are smarter than you think

- Wow are they smart

- Here’s a scientist who says spiders are smart

- A lot of people don’t think spiders are smart but they are

They should just cut everything in the article before the part where they finally start describing some smart things the spiders do.
Must read by everybody, well worth the time.

I link to this everywhere and am quite surprised that the OP did not link to this in his blog post !
Blatant plagiarism by a website that's being used as a sales funnel for immigration attorneys. Kinda gross and exploitative. Maybe change the link to https://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/
The Air Force actually sponsored a CTF at Defcon (a hacker conference in Las Vegas) where the goal was to hack a live satellite:

https://www.wired.com/story/air-force-defcon-satellite-hacki...
Some of this advice is simply how to structure a conversation that helps the other person communicate what they know. If doesn't need to be hostile.
Yeah everyone will compete to be the one who bought Elon’s shares