skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This variant has 32 mutations on the spike protein alone, and people still think we're going to vaccinate our way out of this?

The 'othering' of healthy Western unvaccinated people has been pushed to encourage compliance in populations that are already 80 or 90 +. % vaccinated... Meanwhile South Africa has about 20% vaccination rate, and even that is relatively very high for the continent.

It's abundantly clear that Corona easily travels between countries before being detected, so as long as we're taking two years for a 20% vaccination rate on vaccines that lose a significant amount of effectiveness after a few months, the idea we can vaccinate Corona away is sheer hubris at best.

How far are we from a global system of vaccine delivery that can vaccinate 7 billion people within weeks?

Even if we do that - can we vaccinate all the animals that are spreading the virus? Among others, that's deer, cats, ferrets, hamsters, primates, minks, tree shrews, raccoon dogs, fruit bats, rabbits, etc.

Can we then vaccinate all of those people and animals every six months, and lock them all down? Because that's what's necessary for eradication. Every health professional who tells you otherwise is either ignorant or complicit, far as I can tell.

Isn't it time we start prioritizing the protection of the most vulnerable, not just in our backyard but globally?

And further, can't we prioritize the willing, rather than trying to enforce medical procedures through coercion and threat?

Can't we say at this point that the pharma cunts have acquired enough lucre, and they need to start sharing the health?

Only the EU and US governments have a real chance of forcing these issue, and the conversation around doing so is hopelessly lacking in the most basic common sense or decency right now. It's even contractually suppressed. Media companies and politicians have figured that it's expedient to blame all the failings of health systems on unvaccinated people, and the practical science is almost completely removed from the conversation. We all ought to be angry about that,
But making things completely logical would have been too much for us so we kept quatre-vingt.
Cut Bluetooth then, I'm not talking about Bluetooth. Google Titan also had a Bluetooth version which was also vulnerable I think. And even BLE needs a battery, smartcards (or smart rings) don't.
Learn Ethical Hacking And Save The World: Hacking Benefits: https://www.hackerslist.co/learn-ethical-hacking-and-save-th...
I don't know how Tesla implemented their key, but there's nothing in BT that makes it inherently vulnerable to repeater attacks. Garage doors addressed that problem a long time ago by changing the code after every successful opening.
Also the benchmark do not seem to use the same set of sizes for all benchmarks (nor use a fixed random seed) so repeatability and comparability seem questionable.

I guess if you run it often enough it could still give useful numbers, but I understand the author is picking the best run.

Also I don't see to be any attempt at avoiding compiler optimisations.

Benchmarking is hard
Yup, agreed. But this the standard formula everyone here memorizes, so I thought it might be interesting since it wasn't mentioned anywhere in the article.

I did refer to the "result" rather than the derivation.
I was really hoping for some karma in this story, but it wasn’t there :(
I should have used a more neutral word than punish.

Just think of it in terms of simple economic incentives.

Travel restrictions on SA imposes a massive cost on the economy of SA.

Why should a country spend money on actively looking for new variants, when this is the consequence when a new variant is found?
On most new processors, Intel just suggests using REP STOSB and REP MOVSB for memset and memcpy respectively. That's not in the benchmark as far as I can see.
I was kind of being silly but I do think there's a certain type of film that is particularly enjoyable when hungover. Usually a fairly basic action film that's not too taxing on the brain with plenty of visual stimulus!
Sounds like you agree there is work to be done before it's suitable to buy.
Another issue with zip files on OSX:

> Zip files can encode their file names in two ways: CP437, or unicode.

> Each operating system does it wrong, but in a different way. For instance, Mac OS encodes its zip files as unicode, but doesn't set bit 11 correctly, so Python (correctly) reads them as CP437, and garbles the non-ASCII characters in file names.

> I wrote a quick and dirty workaround for Mac OS archives: if the file doesn't exist, encode the name as CP437 and check again. I'll think of something more clever if I ever switch to another OS.

https://nicolasbouliane.com/projects/timeline
I’ve seen it but not over something like docusign. When the price tag is in the millions per year there’s a lot at stake so if things go bad heads roll.
> With the traditional public company - with few exceptions - decisions are made only by the board and the execs.

In a public company, ownership and management are separated, for a good reason. You want to be able to own a company, without necessarily being involved in its management. Otherwise, you're severely limiting the number of companies people can invest in and preventing the owners from having other jobs, or you end up with a bunch of amateurs managing the company in their spare time.
> From the sheer amount of different descriptions of this Aphantasia it should be obvious that most of it will cluster not in "disorder of the brain" or some such, but in "different levels of ability, due to skill".

Yes, though it was a shock to learn of its existence in my 30s, but probably explains why getting into drawing has always felt so hard for me, especially as I've never used reference images. I guess it's perfectly fine not to be good at everything, and it's never impacted me in any way in my life.
Is there any forecast of where the equilibrium happen? Say, if you're in a 1000-people closed society where cryptocurrency is the only thing used to buy stuff, what's the economic calculation for the long-term energy consumption? Seems like there should be papers about that...
He doesn't open them all. He videos the ones he -can- open to shame them.

The Kwikset smart key v3 can't be picked because you get no feedback until all pins are set. You can decode them one pin at a time with expensive specialized tools such as a micro camera put into the cylinder but they will keep someone out for a while so they do their job. You still need to cut a custom key to get in even when you decode it so it is time consuming.

A Medeco will keep out even an experienced lockpicker for a while since pins must be in the right rotation and the right heights.

Beyond that there are really good Disk Detainer locks like the Protec 2 that have no feedback until all discs are correct. There are 0 public confirmed defeats of them.

Beyond that you get into hybrid digital keys like the Cliq. Then you can combine an cylinder known to not have any defeats with a second set of pins that can only be engaged after an AES challenge/response between a microcontroller in the key and one in the lock.

These also have never been defeated.

There are also solutions like the Bowley lock that don't expose the tumblers to the outside world and can only be defeated with many hours of work making custom tools for that specific lock.

I could go on and on.

The reason you can't buy good locks at US hardware stores is fully because the uneducated masses rejected high security locks once companies like master lock pumped out $5 locks with 10/10 security ratings in spite of any informed child being able to open them.

I would love to see people like LPL put their lawyer hats on and sue these companies for dangerously deceptive advertising.
Thanks for sharing that. It makes me angry; just hearing this, thirdhand, and a decade later.

I was a manager at a company that paid “competitive” (i.e. “low”) salaries.

A significant part of my job was identifying “diamonds in the rough,” and helping to train and nurture them; then, encourage them to stay.

I feel that I did fairly well, here. When they finally shut down our team, the person with the least seniority had a decade.

These were senior C++ developers. They could have gone anywhere.
I can't speak to this story itself, but I wonder about the general principal underneath these sorts of objections.

That is: we should just be naively encouraging of people to pursue whatever they happen to be trying to pursue. This seems born of a boomer-era "be yourself" world view in which "anything is possible". I think this cheats people a great deal.

When physics is demonstrated in schools and TV as some game, it shouldnt take until Masters to figure out it isnt. Programming likewise.

What I see in this culture of "be yourself" is really an admonishment for not "trying to be successful", in the narrowest sense, ie., blindly pursuing programming even though you're not suited to it.

People shouldn't be hoodwinked into careers they arent going to like on the basis they "should like them" because presumably "anyone can be successful" and "everyone needs encouragement". Underneath this ideology is a very narrow notion of success, and a very concerning lack of empathy.

"Encouragement" isnt a neutral good; it's an instrument to develop people -- often in one's own image. There's a lot of people "encouraged" into career's that depress them.
A New Way To Generate Electricity From Waste Heat Using Antiferromagnets
It's not weird, the problem is you learned to communicate in English and learned another way of vocalizing numbers.
How many Broadway tickets have you bought recently? Not many regular people can afford to go regularly. I'm not broke, but spending 400+ on a pair of tickets, plus other costs ... That is not something I would do every month.
I agree and hope that no one will come here commenting in favour of the uncle&co, what relevant software have they actually written? And how much time has been lost refactoring code from people that mindlessly followed their extremely simplified recommendations and toy examples? Let's forget them please.
The clock issue is an excellent point, but the ethereum PoS have a nano scale PoW mechanism for this exact problem. Look at VFD "Verifiable Delay Functions" [1].

In short:

If you take the pbkdf2 key derivation function: its job is to slow down hashing a thousand fold or so, so that hashing an entire search space becomes impractical. You give your secret in input, and it gives you a hash, let's say, in 1 second. You'll have to spend the time again to recompute the hash. With a faster machine, you can compute in maybe 100ms, but still, there is a limit in how fast you can obtain the result.

Now change the cryptographic properties of pbkdf2, so that you can go back from the output to the input in constant time, so you can find the secret from the hash in O(1). Then, it becomes useless for actual secrets, but you now have an instantly verifiable proof that a certain amount of time (or serial computation) had to pass to get from the input to the output. Plug the input to the previous block hash, and embed the result in the next block, and you have your clock, based on physics and provable historical facts.

[1] https://vdfresearch.org
Ask HN: What may the future interaction technology look like?
I happened to stumble upon a few UI/UX history, it seems that some groups in the past were capable of showing future interactions for example memex machine, mother-of-all-demos, Xerox Star, etc. It was quite extraordinary given their circumstances and will to think. Now, after so much revolution, we are still following the same old methods in the case of web development. Our tech stack has changed, but interactions can still be traced back to the old days.

Even in mobile devices, we can see how these function. Touch-screen has enabled a new form of interaction. However, the fundamentals can still be traced back to what those pioneers did. We are still pressing the button on our phones. We are still scrolling up and down using a finger instead of a mouse. And finally, we type using virtual on-screen keyboards that mimic the physical keyboard.

Slowly there has been a shift to speech recognition systems and audio-based interaction. But our VR technology still makes use of pointing and clicking in some form. Why aren't there any other for of interactions like grasping, pushing, pulling (grasping and pulling the button), pinching (actually pinching and moving things instead of gestures), etc? Instead of creating controllers, why not create a wearable glove that can precisely get the 3D hand position. It can just create new possibilities after that. Why limit to typing when we can actually use hand gestures, grab a pen and write down? (This is entirely fictional)

Is it really that it wasn't thought out or is it more likely that those never took off because we are already used to the old ways? I am quite curious about this and would like to have your opinion about it? I may be naive to ask the question without researching, but it's quite difficult to find these things.
Introducing App Tracking Protection for Android
When I did that, macos dropped it as a .webloc rather than an image.
I will line up as soon as you make sure you got ALL bats vaccinated. Doofus
Repeater attacks can be mitigated by putting a time limit for a response from the device used as the key (e.g. phone). That's how a lot of contactless payment terminals ensure the physical credit card is in proximity of the reader and someone isn't relaying the responses across the country.
In this hypothetical world you’d be paying way more in protection money than you are currently paying in taxes to the local mafia gang who would have long murdered all the other private protection agencies.
It would generate backlash if any laptop manufacturer started locking down laptops from competing OS like they lock down phones.

Overly-complicated and ever-changing boot procedures are a soft form of locking down. They strangle the competition with discouraging roadblocks that generate backlash only among people who know more than they can explain.

Also ROFL @ "they went out of their way"
This is rich coming from the WHO. All they did during the time that this could have been stopped is amplify China's government's talking points. This had the effect of actively preventing others who believed them.

But, sure, let's do more of what didn't work last time.
But they actually did!
Septante, huitant/octante and nonante are real French words. Only the French don't want to use them.
But why would it take visualizers longer to just pretend to rotate a shape over a greater angle? I think the best explanation is that something is really being rotated, however inaccurate, simplistic, or vague.
Can we have the correct title here? It’s a question looking for docusign alternatives?
You are right about the corporate tax, but for regular employees Sweden is one of the worst places to be in terms of taxes. Roughly half of the cost to the employer has to be paid in taxes (first withholding tax, then income tax). And then VAT, gas tax, alcohol tax, etc etc.
I have noticed that I somewhat simplified my vocabulary in that regard, previously I would say "half five", but now I just go with "four thirty".
I agree. Certains functions are way more complicated and hard to show value for than others, which is really hard to comprehend for some managers.

Functionalities like undo/redo take a lot of planning, coordination and integration efforts than others like a simple export function, but good luck selling that to any marketing or product owner for xx manndays.

I still think that this subject is way too specific to be generalized like this, but general thumb of rules still apply like good estimation and technical planning.
You don't need to hire lawyers to create the entity and coordinate internally. I've managed a multinational company: it's absolutely crazy the amount of complexity needed to coordinate between legislations, just because states can't efficiently talk with each other. It doesn't make any sense. It's a broken protocol.
It's a fine line: within the org, on chain and no lawyers, only code and everyone must take care of code due diligence. Outside the org (ie. real world), you deal with lawyers as much as needed.
I always like the visual look of D-M-Y in writing; a word bounded by two numbers (1 January 1970).

If it's going to be all numbers, 1970-01-01 seems like the right way to do it. (RFC3339 is the best time format.)
Sure but they conveniently leave this fact out of the narrative.

Despicable reporting.
The "Spanish" flu is still called the Spanish flu to this day, even when clearly wasn't originated in Spain.
> Do you have some kind of cognitive impairment like dyslexia?

Nothing I know about, no. It's not that I don't understand it or that my head explodes. I cope with it. I grew up with this way of saying numbers, and yeah - it's the way it is, it is normal. But I think it requires a tiny little bit more brain activity than it needs to be. For me (as a software developer) I tend to prefer easier and more logical systems. And the way of saying numbers is one thing that is just more logical the way it is in English or other languages.

Similarly, I don't like the way we write dates (28.11.2021) and much more prefer ISO8601 (2021-11-28). But I think this is a format people more agree on globally sooner or later with all its advantages.
>To this day I cringe when I see methods/functions over 20 lines long..

Wait until you have to follow dozens of 5 lines methods for the sake of unrequited abstraction that could have been compacted in an easier to read 30 line method.
Couldnt yout just raise the threshold by tweaking the config with your PR instead?

I do this all the time with other automated checkers (linters, etc.). I don't see why this should be different. If another human agrees it shouldnt be a problem.
Yes, in England we’d typically say “(the) 4th of January, 1970”, in line with D-M-Y. I have no idea if the correlation is causation, or which caused the other.
The marks you’re looking for are on the sides of the pins, where they get jammed against the barrel. The Lishi doesn’t help that much in preventing this damage
It's confusing.

For everyday usage we use a mix of the two; thus, 1998 is read as "a thousand and nine hundred and eight and ninety". So:

1998
>><<

But according to the traditional way (you hear it used in the news for example), it's read as "eight and ninety and nine hundred and a thousand". So:

1998
<<<<

However, this is so rare that many of the younger native Arabic speakers aren't even aware of it.
I didn't see anything on Function Point counts in the article. No advocating it per se but it was, at one time, considered one of the more useful ways to evaluate codebase complexity.
Books have been written on how to read a book.

Often, it’s some variant of starting with studying the table of contents then doing a fast first pass of the text. That’s usually a pretty good way of figuring out where to start.
I want LPL to tell me once what to buy, not keep telling me what not to buy 1400 times. It's educational, I understand, but man, can you put up one video where you tell us what you use on your own front door?
Ah yep, seems like there is actually one more:

Danish: hundrede femoghalvfjerds (hundred five and seventy)

And the rest I've checked now:

Romanian: o sută șaptezeci și cinci (hundred seventy five)

French: cent soixante quinze (hundred sixty fifteen)

Swedish: hundra sjuttiofem (hundred seventy five)

Finnish: sata seitsemänkymmentäviisi (hundred seventy five)

Norweigan: hundre og syttifem (hundred seventy five)

Spanish: ciento setenta y cinco (hundred seventy five)
The San Francisco Homeless Crisis: What Has Gone Wrong?
There is a video for modified Kwikset that he showed that's what is on his door, AFAICT.
Archived: https://archive.ph/Zkcpv
That seems very unlikely. At least compared to the chance of the drugs having an unmitigated positive effect.
Sorry, but English speaking countries that use DMY simply say "4th of January", and it in no way doesn't make sense.
How the ancient Romans managed their toilets
See how easy it is to get confused? :D
So so so sad news, but it is a constant: products popularized on goodwill, for the great benefit of society, becoming a cash machine business at all cost.

It is like what happened to Mozilla.

Let's hope that the listing will not happen.
Isn't that the reason why you put tape on the glass first?
I would say “[the] 4th of January 1970” in English. I think saying “January 4th” is an Americanism. It feels to me that in some sense 4th is acting as an adjective coming after the noun it modifies, which is unusual in English.
I Don't Want to Be on Call Anymore
I should. I'm not too familiar with the process so far, but I'll find some time for it.

These functions are indeed generally sound (also for `Rc`), as any value that cares would be `!Unpin`, which would still bar access to `&mut T`.
`make_mut_pinned` also shouldn't cause too much confusion, as availability of `Clone` would have to be declared explicitly just about everywhere that's relevant.

They can be implemented as very thin wrappers around their non-pinning equivalents, with only a few `unsafe` operations to make the types fit.
Yes, I read it. As far as I can see, it talks about 'staking', so it doesn't address what happens when the tokens and 'expended' as opposed to 'staked'.
Of course there is voting. Who do you think decides which transactions go in the chain, and in what order? The miner who wins leader election during this round (in Bitcoin anyway) does, and the rest of the nodes decide whether to accept its vote. The other nodes can also choose to reject this vote for a while, as long as after seeing it they don't accept a chain with less hashpower, and still follow the protocol (more or less).

The leader can even opt to put no transactions in the current block, something that has actually happened on many occasions: https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/67928/bitcoin-miners-are.... Obviously, the leader was making a decision here, there were not actually zero transactions to process :)
That argument could even be somehow valid if it were only possible to demonstrate that these intangibles improve life for people, like contributing to food, housing, education or even only entertainment. They do not. We do not have to care for those who are affluent enough to burn electricity just in order to gamble. Those people have the resources to gamble in less harmful ways without raising electricity prices and polluting the air the way they do. Those people could even do something helpful and productive if they chose to. Cryptomining is wasting energy for the sake of wasting energy. You may argue we (the 99.999% who do not cryptomine) are too stupid to see the value of your imaginary intangibles but that's not true. We are the ones who want no part in a pyramid scheme, who do not want to succumb to gambling, and whose time and money are too scarce and too precious to be put on the line. Sure, all activity has its price, its waste, and sure, there are other occupations whose overall usefulness is doubtful and askew with the accompanying resource consumption. Doesn't mean you have too excuse bad behavior just because there are other guys doing no good.

Just as an aside, when you move a newspaper or a magazine from print to only existing as a web page, you certainly have 'dematerialized' it to a degree. However you still need hardware to keep and display the data and energy to move it around and light up the screens. In so far it does not stop being physical. The 'intangible' is somewhat of a red herring. Yes, it is less haptic, but it's still physics, physical all the way down. Other than that, currencies, freedom, equality, education, entertainment—we've been having intangibles all the time, at least from the dawn of human culture onward. Cryptomining does not bring anything genuinely new to the table in this respect. It's not even new in being a fraudulent, volatile scheme that betrays traits of a cult, one that benefits a few and hurts the many.