skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The post does exactly this, calling out Alex Berenson by name - but despite its best efforts, it will have very little impact on the people paying him to receive BS directly from his Substack.

I don't think your opinion is unpopular because it's wrong. It's unpopular because it's empirically impractical. People don't suffer a reputational hit for publishing BS, and saying "But they should" doesn't get us anywhere (as you yourself point out). How do you propose that we actually cause reputational hits for such people?

One way is to teach additional statistical literacy to the general public.

There are probably other proposals worth trying and I'd be interested in hearing your takes on what they are. (One that might be effective - though certainly controversial - is for the government to say that Alex Berenson is actively putting lives in danger with lies and that, if the untruth of his statements can be proven in court, he should be subject to criminal penalties, just like Elizabeth Holmes is on trial for lying about her blood tests. But that seems a lot less good for society as a whole than teaching statistical literacy.)
The merge was going to happen by the end of this year, but miners complained https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26441399 and then it was delayed again. https://www.coinhighlight.com/2021/10/ethereum-eth-devs-look...
My argument is that as the tech side of the organization takes on more and more of the operation of the business, it also needs to be taking on more of the rewards.

For example if the expectation is that a engineering team designs, builds and maintains the machine twenty four hours a day that is responsible for the majority (if not all) of the firms profits then the majority of the rewards must flow there.

One the other hand, traditional methods for doing this have fallen by the wayside. With performance overhangs and other chicanery, what was once a lottery ticket is now a lottery ticket that someone will almost certainly try to steal from you once it becomes worth something. Instead of rewarding engineers who keep the lights on, we make them look for another job every 2 years to keep with the market.

People like to say tech is eating the world, tech is doing virtually all the killing but the hangers on seem to do the bulk of the eating.
Orgdown – A New Lightweight Markup Standard for Text Documents
Come on — in the era of NFTs, $8 for an SVG is a steal.
To be honest that's deserving of ridicule. Reinventing wheels is how you introduce fragility and instability, not prevent it.
If people are using banks at scale, what is the advantage over just using banks currently? I guess international transfers but using blockchain implies all the banks handling most of the digital currencies (or all using the same one) and so I don’t see the appeal above some fast centralised clearing house for transfers.
> But it's a major in modern public discourse, and one for once that I'm quite willing to lay heavily at the feet of the public education system.

Should the general population be better at such things? Yes, of course.

However, in nearly every case such things reach a broader audience via mainstream media. And how many times have we seen those entries confuse correlation with causation? We've seen it so many times that it's safe to assume it's intentional. Surely, after each incident of such negligence a teacher or professor or math savvy citizen reaches out to correct them. Yet? Never a correction or retraction?? Never a spark of "we need to educate our journalists"?

Repeat something often enough and it becomes truth in the minds of the receivers. Toss in confirmation bias and echo chambers and even if your better educated the masses, the media and those "journalists" would mitigate public's understanding.
In order for that to happen, one needs to have Martian populations. Necessity being the mother of invention.
There are different ways of handling on-call and the practices at the companies you mention are very different, as is the on-call load.

There is a world of difference between someone voluntarily accepting on-call as part of their duties in exchange for higher pay or a 4 day work week, and on-call being forced on everyone.
Actually, the "pandemic of the unvaccinated" is also supported by their over-representation in hospital admissions and deaths.

https://lawrence-robinson.medium.com/vaxxed-vs-unvaxxed-hosp...

"A study done by the CDC in New York accounted for the following — “A total of 1,271 new COVID-19 hospitalizations (0.17 per 100,000 person-days) occurred among fully vaccinated adults, compared with 7,308 (2.03 per 100,000 person-days) among unvaccinated adults”."
In one case, the fastest way would be to not have to copy it, just reuse the same file.
Litmus tests are how git has managed to get away with having such an abysmal UX.
Show HN: Typing Faster by Drilling Pairs (non-mobile)
I created a simple typing speed training site that analyzes your typing for transitions you're particularly slow at (ex. like ae in aether or zz in buzzer). It lets you drill words with those letter combinations.

There's a lot of typing tests out there that focus on WPM and single key presses, but typing quickly is also about smooth rhythms. I found this targeted practice more useful than just doing typing tests over and over as it puts the finger movements in context. I grab the most used words that have that letter combinations though not all combinations had enough words for this to be viable (like 'zq' for example).

This site requires javascript but a screenshot is here if you want to see what it looks like first:
https://www.pairtype.com/screenshot.png
example of the zz words:
https://www.pairtype.com/screenshot2.png

This is designed to improve keyboard typing on computers so it won't really work on mobile. Personally got interested in this problem while watching friend type at 150WPM and thinking about what sorts of things it would take to get there from 100WPM.
Oh come on. Everyone else saying it's an obvious joke and now here you are claiming it's obviously a legitimate claim. Even though you can imagine a way that this information might have been collected, it obviously wasn't.
Did you study the figures in the blog post? On what basis do you believe the concerns are "very valid"?

I do agree with you that mockery is unlikely to win hearts and minds, but the whole problem here is that the concerns are not valid and the people with concerns are not studying the figures and the people they're arguing against are not saying "just do as we say," and yet the concerns persist.
A visa/mastercard that is 2,220 times less efficient: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29079867
It's just survival instinct that is built in our DNA. It operates at the species level too, probably to a lesser extent, since we don't seem equipped to prevent the collapse.

But overall, this is how I make peace with my mind with the announced decline. On the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter, and we're bound to disappear anyway. So maybe Bill Gates is right: having fun burning as much fuel as possible with his jet and super yacht while it lasts, and hoping that something comes up from innovation.
You should also be compensated for the time you spend on-call (which means you can't take on other commitments you otherwise might.) Anything less and it's outright exploitation. "We pay you well" is a non-sequitur.
I recently wanted to use some rust crates from Python and decided to give PyO3 a go and I must say it works really well.

Took about one evening to plug it all together and get it running. The guide at pyo3.rs was really helpful and maturin to build binary packages just works. You pass in python types and they arrive as rust-native types. Makes writing code feel very native.

The result: https://github.com/Grollicus/pyttfwrap takes a string and splits it as it would wrap when rendered with a given TTF font. Most of the code is about keeping a reference to the loaded font as that's an expensive operation.

Was some great fun and I'm sure I'll use it some more.
The binary form is important to understand the implementation details. You even mention underflow. It's difficult for most people to initially understand why you can't store a large number that can be represented by an equivalent size integer as a float accurately.

The binary form handily demonstrates the limitations. Understanding the floating point instructions is kinda optional but still valuable.

Otherwise everyone should just use varint-encoded arbitrary precision numbers.
I think the challenge that organizations run into with on call is that the costs of it are hidden and delayed - reduced productivity and lower retention. I think that because of this, organizations do not invest in keeping their systems in order.

The question is, what do you do about it? At some point things do have to escalate to an engineer, and I don't think it's practical to have a 24/7 engineering team staffed for every service (although having 24/7 non-eng support is very reasonable).

The best solution I've seen is having error budgets and on call compensation commensurate with required response times. Error budgets since they balance maintaining and expanding the service, compensation to respect people's time.

What have you seen that works?
On the contrary, most of the people making the "do your own research" attack on expertise are not "elites" in any sense. They're the same people who say, "I could have been an X except for all the pointless math/science".

The wealthy or semi-wealthy are either riding the wave for their own benefit or don't like what the expertise says.
Not disagreeing that cargo-raze in bazel is awkward, but just wanted to add:

Cargo raze should let you consume libraries you've imported in a rust_binary target, if that's what you're talking about. It's also possible, but slightly more annoying, to vendor the dependency tree if you need to rely on pulling from a local mirror.

I've also used it to import cargo binaries (i.e wasm-bindgen-cli) into a Bazel workspace -- it just makes the resulting target something like @raze_some_bin//:bin
Why do those so called journalists always take out of context quotes like this? It's downright dangerous with an ongoing pandemic. We don't really know the true impact this variant has and it will be a couple of weeks before we can find out more about exactly what this variant is capable of. The biggest issue is whether this variant can escape the current range of vaccines we have or not. A lot depends on this as it will be up to 3 months before vaccines are reformulated and even longer to get it into the arms of those that needs this.

Hopefully this variant has more than enough mutations for a reformulated vaccine to eliminate all possible variants that might evolve in the future.
No news or political organization deals in nuance. If you think CNN or Covid coverage is some exception worth focusing on, you're likely falling for it on everything else.
While the discussion about consensus algorithms is interesting and each side has good points, it should not be confused with the much more pertinent decision about simbolic currency (conceptually similar to fiat) versus proof of burned resources money (conceptually similar to gold).

We should not confuse the two topics. It's entirely possible to have a chain where the consensus is established by PoW, yet the monetary base is created by decree without any wasted resources, for example gifted to some charities or dropped by helicopter to anyone who has a Twitter account.

While the security PoW chains create is proportional to the amount of resources spent, there is absolutely no reason to think the current level of burn in Bitcoin is optimal - and strong reason to think that there is massive waste, that is, Bitcoin protects against double spend to a degree orders of magnitude harder than what a credible attacker might be willing to spend. What results is wasted energy that brings no tangible security to the users of the currency.
> I can't read C#

Not much different than C++...

> Do you generate the sorting network at compile time

No, except for power of two sizes up to 32. I experimented with run-time code generation (and compilation) for given sizes, but... the generated machine code has too long prologue and epilogue for that to be worth-while (though the sorting code itself is well optimized, as if directly compiled from source). That's also mentioned in "Benchmarks" section.

> What's your sorting network template?

See References.

> And probably related: how is vectorization used?

See the code. There's no template, the code is fully "dynamic" and adapts itself to array size. As for vectorization... it compares/swaps 8 ints/floats at once, with some swizzles to rearrange the elements. For sizes that are not power of 2, I use masked loads and stores and some extra logic for deciding which comparisons to skip. (I treat non-existing elements "as if" they were set to intmax or float infinity.)

This file https://github.com/zvrba/SortingNetworks/blob/master/Sorting... has it all.

> this week-end project

Sorry, can't read Rust. (Though it reminds me of days spent coding in Perl.) Most networks are not SIMD-friendly (i.e., they'd need a lot of swizzling to exploit any parallelism) and the code as it's now is the 3rd iteration where I figured out how to best leverage SIMD to exploit the recursiveness and regularity in the network. (Not the least, no random memory accesses: only forward and backward loads and stores.)

Without SIMD, I don't think it'll be worth it, because network will also access the memory randomly (just as "standard" sort), and in addition it has worse algorithmic complexity.
It doesn't make sense yet, because it's currently too profitable to warrant such optimizations. Cheap energy is enough to be competitive.
Yup, it is called establishing a reputation, positive or negative, trustworthy or untrustworthy

This works well naturally in small communities, but once the society becomes too large, BSers, liars, and scammers can just move on to a new gullible crowd.

So we got social media with review & reputation management systems, and these are now, of course, promptly gamed to the max. Moreover, this gaming is being done by the very people who should be most de-amplified, in order to amplify their BS, inlcuding everyone from just trolls to professional RUS dezinformatsiya shops (that'll gather a lot of downvotes).

So yes, a huge part of the solution is to de-amplify the crowd that spews Bs or deliberate lies.

Sure, freedom of speech is a right, but no one has to be required to amplify you on their platform - that takes away the freedom of speech of the platform owner (e.g., if HN were required to amplify everyone, then moderation would become effectively illegal).

Why does this view gain downvotes so frequently? IDK, but it seems to be mostly readers with no nuance who think that freedom of speech requires zero restrictions, so any shadow of moderation or restriction rankles them, and they are not articulate enough to state a reason, but can still hit the down-arrow.
This sounds for the better. Not having code mirrors (as other distribution channels) sounds not just insecure, but borderly malicious.
Sounds like witch hunt.
MIDI is semi-symbolic.
I'm not sure why this sort of thing impresses people, it's obvious the 1984 ghostbuster group skews old.
Haha, That's why you still have to do on call.
Even if you’re okay with that (I’m not) it seems like burying the lede to the point of lying to say “warming is economically positive” without mentioning that, “oh, but only if you live in Canada” (at least in North America).
Really? This was able to be read without a tounge being firmly planted in cheek?
This attitude is very common with software engineers and I find it baffling. Is it some kind of inferiority complex? I doubt Warren Buffett worries that he is overpaid and demands to be woken up in the middle of the night for some self-flagellation. So why do so many software engineers think "I am paid well so I deserve whatever the company throws at me"? You are selling something: your skills, expertise, and time on this planet. These things are limited and valuable. Negotiate the price and terms of the sale!
> The fact that something exists does not justify going to extraordinary lengths to preserve it.

The flaw in your premise is that you're dropping context on the individual. If you pretend humans are a mere non-thinking, non-individual collective, then what you're saying is correct. That's false. Each person will strive to exist, to persist, for their own reasons (with each life being different, literally; with each reasoning pathway being unique, literally).

> As individuals, we all expire at some point. Is there a reason to think that humanity should be any different?

That something ceases to exist, that it expires, doesn't automatically determine whether it has value. By your premise all entities have no value. That I exist and place value on at least one entity acts to prove you wrong (ie you're wrong).

> Uniqueness does not make something useful or worth preserving, either.

You've got the premise entirely formulated incorrectly. I'm not asking your permission to exist. I'm not asking to be granted value by you. I exist. I decide if my life has value, you do not (more precisely: your input has essentially zero value in that calculation; my input has enormous consequence/value in the calculation). I decide how great of a value to place on my existence. I decide if I think my life is useful, in other words, and whether it's worth preserving - your input is not necessary and is in fact meaningless. I decide with my own reasoning what purpose my life has, what value my life has, and can change my thinking on the matter at any time I see fit; my thinking on the matter is the extreme primary, and by comparison your thinking on the matter is irrelevant. That is to say, it doesn't matter what you think, when it comes to whether you think my existence is worth preserving or of value. This is a simple demonstration of how you dropped context on value determination as it pertains to the fact that humans are individual actors.

That should all be quite easy to grasp.

Yeah, but why does that matter? It matters because Elon Musk is an individual and has decided to go to Mars. How do you plan to stop him and his SpaceX party of happy Mars bound radicals? You can't, most likely - they're acting on their individual value systems, aligning with other like-minded persons, to achieve something greater than they could accomplish alone. They have decided their goal matters, that it is has value, they're not waiting for the permission of 7.8 billion other people to go; they're not waiting for a billion other people to tell them that what they're doing has value, that their existence matters, they're going regardless of what most people think: they decide if what they're doing with their lives has value or not (and yes, of course, there are some very powerful forces that could potentially stop them, such as the US Government; some amount of permission is usually required for such a considerable undertaking when operating within a society; although to be clear, the government still doesn't dictate whether their goals have value, those people can still value their goals even if denied permission by the government to pursue them).
Well in that case I really don't understand your reasoning. I can't think of any other reason why you cannot see that lines of code is the closest and most measurable representation of the information content of the system's logic. Information content/entropy is the most rigorous way to measure complexity.

IMO, lines of code is even better at measuring complexity than compiled bytecode because it accounts for complexity from the developer's point of view (which is what the question is asking).

While some lines of code require more effort from a typical developer to understand than other lines, it doesn't matter so much once they're averaged out over thousands of lines and thousands of different developers (each with their own slightly different perception of complexity). It's reasonable to factor out individual perception of complexity.
That is very much not the case here, no, nor in most of the world.
Collect (I presume you mean download?) is an easy part and I agree one can download thousands of books in 24h. Skimming is very different from reading is very different from learning. If you want to skim titles/headlines then yes it's a limitation. I'd just argue it's not what books are for.
Using github, period, is not just insecure, but actively malicious.

Stop using NSA/Microsoft.
But if you submit that to scientifical journal it will be published. ;)
Simpson’s paradox is when a trend or correlation is observable in each of the sub-populations, but vanishes when the data is aggregated. For example, a drug that has a strong effect on men and women when analyzed separately, but shows little effect at the population level.

This example is not Simpson’s paradox, it is simply the misuse of statistics. Statistics, being mechanical transformations of data, only have semantics within a causal model. Simply picking variables randomly and then assuming causality when the statistics behave that way is inverting the process of knowledge formation.

EDIT: Thanks for the corrections—the real data that this fictional example is based on does show Simpson’s paradox, as the dependent variable (death rates) appears to show a positive correlation with vaccination status when aggregating the population, but a negative correlation for every age group individually.
> This system is pretty resistant to fraud (you always need to approve the amount in your banking app), while allowing for irreversible payments, which merchants like.

This sounds like a great system, except that irreversible payment part. That’s only a feature for merchants and usually gets used to harm consumers in my experience.
RSS-proxy: create an RSS/ATOM or JSON feed of almost any website
Many programming jobs require on-call and overtime when they shouldn’t. I wouldn’t be able to have a job if that requirement was truly valid. It’s usually not.

I can’t do on-call for medical reasons, nor can I work overtime. Neither of these are considered to be an essential job function for programmers, regardless of job descriptions, under ADA. A company must justify that job requirement. They can’t.

By the way, the “fairness” reason is explicitly excluded by law. It’s the entire reason ADA exists.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FFOIOU3XoAMV1Qm?format=jpg&name=...
I really liked this observation: “Individual freedoms exercised without care for others are not really social freedoms, just micro-forms of domination. That’s the essence of the distinction.” —David Wengrow

https://twitter.com/davidwengrow/status/1456180588298346499?...
Sorry. Lil shell shocked at the moment by the responses.
And thank you for your OSS! I used styled components for years. Looking forward to trying boilerplate.
That sounds to me like a reasonable criticism and discussion to have.

That wasn't the argument Berenson was putting forth. He was saying that some large number of New Zealanders would be detained indefinitely in congregate settings purpose-built by the government.

Again, I wish I could cite the specific things, but I cannot. I was left with the very strong impression that Berenson did not care about facts.
Right, even something awful predates 4chan.
there was a more recent case with image metadata parsing that, when the author tried to report it, the image also broke youtrack