skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Having my own domain I tend to just make up email addresses as I need them. Not too anonymous though, given whois. Anonymity has not been a issue for me I suppose.
I thought that. "criminals capitalize on the unprotected back-end" is a bit vague though. An exposé of the actual vulnerability would make this write-up even better, but I imagine the company doesn't want to discuss that for obvious reasons.
Don't you need a new lock anyway? After all, you no longer have the keys.
Under what moral framework?
There was some theory that because the first ten digits in Chinese are very short phonetically that it is easier to keep numbers in your head.
So I’ve thought about this in the years since.

Here’s the thing though: the person in question was already struggling, as a new person in an office of people with experience, without assistance from their manager.

For their boss to tell them some variant of “you’re not cut out for this” in that vulnerable of a position when you have no frame of reference (and when it’s from the same manager that was supposed to have been helping you) is wildly different to hearing that from an impartial peer.
You only are "reached" by bad people online because you want to. You can choose to only allow contact from people you know.

What they want though is to be "reachable" by everyone without the drawback of people actually demonstrating a negative view, very much like removing dislikes from Youtube. They want to remove the dislikes from their online personas but done for everyone so it's less obvious they are hiding their critics. Because at the end of the day they need to be famous to get sponsorships or money whatever way they do it, hence they need to pretend to be "reachable".
I'd really be interested in a good source to develop a better intuitive understanding for statistics (ideally with datasets + jupyter notebooks or something). I use statistics, I can work with statistics (even fairly complicated things) but it always feels a bit "painful" and unnatural. I'd really love to develop a more natural feeling for statistics.
I'm confused, the post you're replying to says that the Google model means you don't have nights OnCall.

> . these on call rotations aren't skills.

Incident response/management is absolutely a skill.
> But a situation where new entrants into the network are uncertain of the 'true' fork is not tenable in the long term.

This is an important point to consider, but it can be mitigated with exit delays. E.g. with Eth2's current settings, if an attacker had 2/3 stake at one point, I believe it would take them 6-7 months to exit all those validators. So while it's true that new entrants must sync from a trusted checkpoint, the checkpoint can be quite old.

Let's say my client has a hardcoded list of checkpoints, with a new one added once a month. The client would only accept forks containing all of those checkpoints in their history.

It seems like there are two ways an attacker with commit access might try to corrupt this checkpoint list. First, they could try to add bad checkpoints over a period of 6-7 months, until they've fully exited and can safely perform a long-fork attack. This seems impractical, since the bad checkpoints would be noticed by existing node operators (who would get stuck after upgrading their clients), and 6-7 months seems like plenty of time to raise the alarm.

Alternatively, an attacker could just delete 6+ good checkpoints, and replace them with 6+ bad ones, all at once. This would violate the convention of adding monthly checkpoints, so it should be easily recognized as a malicious change. One could argue that it might go unnoticed anyway, but sneaking in such a change seems roughly as hard as sneaking in any other clearly-malicious client change.
Agreed! Similarly, the best outcome for the ConstitutionDAO was likely for them to bid but not win. Can you imagine the complexity of actually owning it. High odds it would have ended up intentionally destroyed somehow.
I verified the full chain a couple of weeks ago (But I admit I trusted umbrel to choose the "correct" bitcoin-core software to run), It took less than 3 days to sync on a Rpi4
and collectors
Majority of French speakers say 80 as "4 × 20":

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/quatre-vingts#French
> This will involve designing and selling locks and pointing viewers towards better locks in a commercial way.

Designing and selling his own locks on his own store would not be too different from his current business model of selling lockpicking tools.

Pointing viewers towards better locks on a commercial way is something I cannot ever see him doing. For one, he already points out there are some locks he cannot pick (IIRC some Abloy models). But especially: LPLs authority is directly derived from the fact he's impartial and unmotivated by financial decisions. Taking money for lock recommendations would completely compromise that impartiality. It's similar to amateur nude models on Reddit and the "OnlyFans hate" - in the eyes of many viewers, once the line between "they are doing what they do for fun" and "they are in it only for the money" blurs, the attractivity fades.

What I do can see LPL do in the future - with far better chances of profit for him - is sell consultancy services and reviews to lockmakers. That would both fit his goal of improving the lockmacking business as a whole and net him a hefty chunk of money, without compromising his outward image.
Science Killed the Premise of Dune
If you are going to a gym, I'd recommend classes. You don't have to think much. You just have to do which is good when you don't know anything. You just know you have to be there at 9am; it'll be an hour; and you'll get told what to do.

spin classes
rowing classes
bodypump (light weights)
yoga

These are easy ways to get into the gym and get something done without wondering around the weight room wondering what this thing is for.

If you do take these classes don't expect a lot of coaching. Instead, remember what the exercise was and look it up on Youtube.

BTW, if you want to get into weight lifting, start with bodypump for a few months. You won't learn anything, nada. But that's not important; basic reps are. Then get a 5x5 app like StrongLifts. The nice thing about StrongLifts is you'll have a routine and it tracks you. Again, you aren't aimlessly wondering around the weight room.

Finally, when you can complain about the difference between StrongLifts vs StartingStrength it will be time for you to leave.
They’re owned by China, can’t insult Xi “Pooh” Jinping
Large numbers of people won't wear masks. Source: flown domestic flights in the US recently -- numerous people sitting without masks on, charring to flight attendants who did nothing.
Well said, most interesting thing in this thread. "Show HN" when you get there!
This link directs me to several bullet points and a truncated podcast. It seems like the real podcast is behind a paywall.

I’m not sure what there’s to discuss about the content itself as I can’t listen to it. Am I doing something wrong?
Probably an unpopular opinion, but despite its stupid order, I think M-D-Y makes complete sense for (American) English.

Some languages (or dialects of English) say "twelve/the twelveth (of) January 2022", so 12-01-2022 is the obvious notation. Many English dialects (the majority, given that it's how America does it?) would say "January twelveth, 2022", so 01-12-2022.

It's not that the notation is spun around, some versions of English just pronounce the dates backwards! This is the exact opposite of the question asked about numbers, where English (usually, mostly) follows the "logical" order.

As language is subjective, I don't think there's a right or wrong way to pronounce and order things. The West doesn't use lakh and crore, but there's no reason why the short scale is any better. People just decided to say things one way and stick to it.
Sharp! I'm rejecting the premise that metaphysics should make progress, or that progress is an artifact of anything other than wishful secularism and deception at all. When we do discover new tools in it, the version numbers for metaphysics shouldn't increment, they should go backwards to approach zero. Is that progress? Imo, metaphorically directional, but otherwise no.

The reason someone says, "don't listen to the devil kids" is it's the best tool they can equip a young mind with that it can understand. I'd argue it's distinct from the same kind of noble lies I'm criticising, in that it's a metonym.

Responses like this make risking being very publicly wrong worth it, thank you.
Yes but, given Thanksgiving weekend accounts for a huge percentage of annual retail sales in the US, most companies are reluctant to let anyone touch anything even remotely connected to production that weekend. (My company has been in production freeze for three weeks now.)
For the curious, this is a deep, technical analysis of the latest generations (no pun intended!) of best-of-breed garbage collectors on the JVM.

By best-of-breed, I mean G1, Shenandoah, and ZGC. Honestly, for those of us who grew up on the 90s JVM, seeing millisecond GC pauses is kinda of a miracle.

GC research didn't stop in the 90s, and the JVM has always been on the cutting-edge in putting the latest research into production.
Other people have pushed back about safety, but I want to push back on performance.

Here's the thing, presumably you agree that "It's fast except that it never works" isn't actually fast. So in practice your high performance C ends up compromised by the reality that it must work, at least often, which constrains what you are confident to actually write because you already know you can't write over-complicated code correctly.

Languages like Rust (and C++) enable you to write much more complicated software that you still understand well enough to debug it. An efficient filter that might be a single line of Rust or C++ may take dozens of lines of C, or else several macro invocations that add invisible overhead of lines that are constructed by the pre-processor unseen by the programmer, yet still taint the shared namespace and semantics. As a result, while the Rust or C++ programmer feels free to chain say, six filters the equivalent C looks monstrous and you recoil from it, even though that's the efficient way to solve the problem you had.

The intuition that if it looks simpler it's faster is often wrong, the reason Godbolt (Compiler Explorer) exists is that Matt Godbolt was concerned about whether the C++ for-each loop results in the same fast machine code as a manual loop, or whether you might pay a price for the nicer syntax. You don't, and Matt's continued exploration of this sort of issue, plus his generosity in sharing the result with the world is why the site is there now.

But of course the nicer iterator loop (and there are a lot of examples like this) encourages you to choose more complicated solutions which are faster, because total cognitive load isn't so great as it would be in a less expressive language. As a result even though you could in principle write an equally high performance C program, actual C programmers would not do that.

Now, machines don't fear complexity, so one of the interesting results of WUFFS is that they produce C code which no human would ever write, but which has all the properties they guaranteed (e.g. memory safety but lots more) in their small interest domain, by "simply" using tremendous amounts of complexity. The unexpected effect of this is that WUFFS-the-library is very fast: Since the only possible mistakes are programs that either don't do what is required or don't compile, WUFFS programmers are freed to focus on very fast tight code for the library. Again, you could in theory have written that code in C, but you wouldn't because you're human and you can't handle that.
This is just the etymology. These words are just words, both in Danish and French. It's not like speakers of that language do the maths before saying it.
Spiral Spectrograms and Intonation Illustrations
You think about that when you design it.

I used to work on trading systems which were managed in real time by a rotating team of traders (i.e. mathematically oriented people as opposed to software engineers).

You design the system so that if it breaks there are at least workarounds that anyone can employ without needing to write code. For example, a big stop button, manual adjustments, manual trading, etc.

Maybe it stops printing money overnight and you take an opportunity cost loss. That's fine, post mortem at work, fix it.

In the worst case if you're not available then someone with ownership steps in like a CTO/founder level (who are of course always on call almost by definition, though they generally have the executive power to say - sod this, we'll just leave it down for a while).
Can we stop having moral judgements as comments on HN and acknowledge everyone has their own morality. The stock market could dip for a number of reasons. I don't particularly think its helpful trying to point out every time someone violates your personal moral lines e.g. don't buy stock when the market crashes for reason x, don't buy stock y etc.

Besides, this interpretation of the ops comment was different for me, if the virus is less deadly and people shouldn't panic sell, fewer people die and loose money, don't they.
I suspect they mis-interpreted that part but admittedly I haven't listened to the whole thing.

The reason there is such a big difference between below average and low is because in the "low" group, there's almost certainly something wrong with that group. A heart/lung condition, cancer, morbidly obese, i.e. issues with major body systems.
If you read the article you'll see the "standard" used to remove speech is much, much broader than "defamatory comments".

>>The new legislation will introduce a complaints mechanism, so that if somebody thinks they are being defamed, bullied or attacked on social media, they will be able to require the platform to take the material down.

If one merely "thinks" they are being bullied or attacked, the law will require the platform to erase that material. Obviously this is completely subjective nonsense.
This is neat! The simulation didn't remain "stable" for me for very long though; biot count pushed over 3000 and I dropped to just a few fps. I'm on a phone and I'm also a bit color blind so I'm probably not the ideal use case.
"But Honda know a lot about making cars. Tesla tried to disrupt the entire process. This is where hubris gets you "

Can you clarify why disrupting the process is hubris? There has been many historical examples of outsiders coming in and improving old processes in many fields. Why is it hubris to disrupt the car manufacturing processes?
It means no one has to trade with you if they don't like what you have to offer in return. If you consider that "bound", then OK, but that language doesn't illuminate, it hides.

It is a painful slap in the face when the market doesn't price what you have to offer as high a you like. I know a friend who was convinced that her calling was to be an artist, but always had a hard time selling her works, and often complained about the unfairness of life. I guess she was "bound" by monetary considerations by not being able to make ends meet as an artist. Eventually she gave up and became a hospital lab tech and is well compensated. So the market was telling her that her skills as a hospital lab tech were much more valuable to society than her skills as an artist, even if her own preferences were otherwise.

At the same time, some other artist can buy an entire oceanside condo for one painting, because the market does value their output very highly.

That's all that we're talking about here. It is "free" but that doesn't mean that you'll be able to get whatever you want in exchange for your own output.
....Really?! I must have repressed that because it was so traumatizing
Forget nuclear war. If Mars was used to test bio-weapons or nanotech weapons then it could leak onto earth by accident.
Bridgeport milling machine.
Of course we all expire at some point, individually and collectively.

However, we almost all make efforts to push that point as far into the future as possible (the main exception being when doom is near and assured, and only increasing misery is foreseen on the way).

So, why would we not try to extend the expiration date, individually and collectively? It's a big universe, so much to explore!
> It sounds like you should find a company that agrees with this opinion. I don’t agree.

I agree that on-call is necessary in certain professions (e.g, doctors). I also agree that if an employee is willing to do on-call and they are compensated accordingly, then the practice is still ethical.

However, to call someone to do work outside work hours is unreasonable. On-call is considered work time, so I am expecting to be contacted during that time. However, if I'm not on-call, then it is not time for me to work, and I shouldn't be contacted by my company and feel pressured to answer the call.
In that way this pandemic is probably providing a treasure trove of data for calibrating models on how past diseases may have progressed.
Seems like "if your shit breaks, you fix it" = on call 24/7... isn't it better to have a specific shift where you know you are responsible and then you aren't the rest of the time.
too many ads, here's the important parts:

> Many people had expected the agency to label the latest variant nu, which comes after mu, a variant designated on Aug. 30.

> Instead, the WHO skipped over nu as well as xi, the next Greek letter in line — a move that many users on social media pointed out, while some questioned whether it was to avoid offending Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

> In a statement provided to the AP, the WHO said it skipped nu for clarity and xi to avoid causing offense generally.

> “`Nu’ is too easily confounded with `new,’ and `Xi’ was not used because it is a common last name,” the WHO said, adding that the agency’s “best practices for naming disease suggest avoiding `causing offence to any cultural, social, national, regional, professional or ethnic groups.”’
I just added a list of the supported solvers to the README. Around 20.
PoW is the optimal strategy for searching physics for the most effective means of transforming energy to electricity. There’s zero waste in this search — it directly converts electricity into money driving pure demand for more electricity which motivates the search for more efficient generation. It’s more efficient than Aluminum production in this regard— the economy can only absorb a certain amount of Aluminum.

A carbon tax would effectively and immediately steer this search away from using fossil fuels for generation.

People who clutch their pearls over PoW are unwitting Malthusians lacking an appreciation for E=mc^2.
Yes. GDscript is fully integrated into the IDE, and once you learn “the Godot way” of scene management, development becomes fluid. Conversely, breaking out into another language to interface with Godot (my own personal experience stems from C# + Godot) while technically feasible, does not hold the same developer experience, and feels kludgy in comparison.
You aren't necessarily locked in AWS just by using it. Less and less so in fact, with the advent of Kubernetes. Even before that, a "classical" app with an autoscaling group or two, load balancer, and managed database aren't something that will take an enormous amount of time to move to another provider. Basically the main complexity would be transferring the data and the cutover, but you get that regardless of provider.
Implementing Rust's borrow checker as a C++ compile-time template metaprogramming exercise seems only a guru and a cloud-based compiler cluster out of reach.
Not the person you are responding to, but I challenge you to find a single COVID related article making the social media rounds that demonstrates a reasonable understanding of conditional probabilities, and presents data in a clear, level-headed, unbiased fashion.

For instance, this article has a silly example of confounding variables (which ghostbusters you watched as a child is correlated to your age, and age is correlated to covid mortality).

It proceeds to present two graphs “debunking” an anti-vax conspiracy. The first graph specifically controls for age, vaccination rates, and size of population.

After preventing strong evidence to the contrary, the article then implies the conspiracy theory made the same mistake as the ghostbusters analysis. It provides an incomprehensible graph as evidence.

So, F’s in Statistics 101 for everyone.
Yep eat healthy, exercise, and get some sun.

So I will continue to not do anything different than I always have. Working out great!
TLDR; People are too stupid to differentiate Greek from any other language.
Seems reasonable to me—imagine being a child in grade school with the same last name as a covid variant.
That's just the etymology. It's a word. French speakers aren't multiplying in their heads...
Regarding DOMS, I find that once I was on a very consistent program, 3-4 days a week, I never got sore with weight training. But if I ever took a week off, I’d have to back off on the volume and weight to avoid getting sore. Longer than a week and you really have to back way way off.
You're not always in a position to fix these issues, nor is it always worth the effort. It may be a complete side-issue that no one cares about. The information may exist somewhere but not in the dataset you're working with.

Having done quite a bit of data integration work in my life, I can tell you that fixing things can range from the unavoidable to the quixotic.
But loads of software engineers don't have oncall. And these jobs don't pay less as a rule. If you aren't at least getting overtime pay, then you are being scammed.
So, can this mythical 24x7 support the code you wrote? Did you write documentation that explains every case that could go wrong?

If your team writes code that doesn’t need to be supported by an engineer, then your team won’t get called.
Tapet for Android is another example of this, and could serve as great inspiration if you need any.
I was curious and found this rationalisation: https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/76007/why-it-eleven-twel...

It's pretty hand-wavey but still interesting speculation.
<soapbox>

> I don't know how to explain this other than movie-caused mortality.

The above sentence alone gets my Skepticism antennae whirling, let alone the majority of the (relatively unassociated) facts.

What the heck is movie-caused mortality?

An exact search[0^] returns this same HN post, no help there.

An inexact search[1^] returns results mainly about deaths that occurred during the filming of a movie or TV show. These deaths are very much not the point the OP is trying to make.

Issue #1): the sentence quoted above is non-sensical, as the OP's purported method for "how to explain this," doesn't explain anything, let alone anything related to the point OP is trying to make.

Issue #2): Even if "movie-caused mortality" was a valid explanation... Not knowing how to explain something doesn't allow one to arrive at any conclusion (other than, "the thing can not be explained," pedantically speaking).

Frankly, it makes as much (as little!) sense as, "I don't know how to explain this other than time-traveling telepathic murder bots."

</soapbox>

[0^]: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22movie-caused+mortality%22
[1^]: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=movie-caused+mortality
I also encountered recently a chart indicating that all causes mortality is higher in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. It was clear to me, but not to the casual theater, that the median vaccinated individual is much older than the unvaccinated individual, and older adults tend to die more frequently than younger adults.