skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree; it's like all the rollaway accidents that happen now because of electronic shifters: https://www.safetyresearch.net/the-persistence-of-rollaway/

Design matters, and bad designs can literally be deadly. Why auto mfgs feel the need to "innovate" with shifter designs is beyond me. The worst part is how every mfg seems to be implementing a different design of bad electronic shifters, from wheels and touchscreens to one-click-at-a-time joysticks to single-function pushbuttons for some gears with others on a scroll wheel. They've taken something and made it worse with no benefit to the user. At least with those auto-flushing toilets, the intention was good, even if the implementation is still somehow so awful decades later.
Windmills

https://abcbirds.org/blog21/wind-turbine-mortality/

edit: yes cats do too, let's try to talk about it all, cat genocide if you want, windmill improvements too.
Reverse ssh with cronjob does the trick also. Or setup a reverse ssh service:

https://dev.to/bulletmark/create-a-reverse-ssh-tunnel-for-re...
I do share code that way, but the traditional ivory tower standards by which I am judged require "refereed journal publications" in high impact factor traditional journals. I'm trying to fight back against that, largely unsuccessfully.

What would help me is to have the old geezers consider GitHub issues, PRs, and commits as a type of citation and to have a better way of tracking when my code gets used by others that is more detailed than forks.

I also think citations of your work that find errors or correct things should count as a negative citation. Because otherwise you are incentivized to publish something early and wrong. Thus the references at the end of the paper should be split into two sections: stuff that was right and stuff that was wrong.
You mentioned Jetbrains but not worse actors like Adobe, or Microsoft. Seems disingenuous.
Can Twitter Sentiment Predict NFL Matchups? Rams vs. Cardinals, Week 14
You're on to something with Chesterton's fence, but don't mention a few key reasons for these rules. Safety is a major driver in the changes I see being reported. Some parklets go to the corner, which can make it be hard to see oncoming cars when you're trying to cross the street. The wall height thing is about accessibility for emergency responders, as is the roof height thing. The max parking spot coverage thing is probably about parking capacity.

Ultimately, it's a bad situation. It's not being handled well, but I don't really think there's a good outcome that doesn't compromise on either safety, parking or screwing over the restaurant operators.
one of the things I worry about is that with mellanox now being owned by nvidia, they're going to be much more hostile in the future to having real open source full capability drivers for the linux and freebsd kernels.

the drivers you can download from the mellanox website to build them as DKMS modules already have absurd licenses.
While disappointing, this is not exactly a surprise. California's approach to regulation, in general, is onerous and creates substantial headwind to development or change. This is not a statement about the legitimacy of the underlying concerns for why such regulation exists.

The problem is the patchwork of regulation, multi-stage enforcement, and ability for competitors and activists to introduce painful delays and reviews at each stage. Streamlining is desperately needed, and public review should be more limited in scope and timeline.
Pigeons seem to be doing well.
You're using a different definition of "ads" than most people do.
SQLite is not a high throughput database. Trying to work around this with cool tech is not likely to make it better than a boring solution, like using a high throughput database in the first place.
This is sad to watch in real time our planet dying.
The one bird I noticed doing very well this year is black crows. I keep a bag of nuts and throw some out my car window when ever I see a crow. This year it seems as if there are many more around eating from me. But they are a very resilient bird and can use tools and scavenge for food in places other birds can not.
I'm not sure we can match those many $Billions year after year. How about some kind of campaign finance reform? (a longshot, I know in the current political climate, but something that needs to be considered)
This would explain why most Quora answers start off like self-promotional puff pieces you'd find on LinkedIn, about how the answer you're about to read changed someones life.
From an old FAQ page[1] for TauruOS:

> I wrote ToaruOS at a time when I was much more competent at C than C++. I still think that's true. At this point, the effort of rewriting datastructures to make use of C++ functionality would not be a good use of time - and writing userspace code in C++ in ToaruOS-NIH is not yet possible as I have yet to get a C++ standard library set up.

1: https://github.com/klange/toaru-nih/wiki/FAQs
Bounty: 2,000 USD for someone I end up having a child with (ie. being a legal parent with them; a sperm donation wouldn’t count)

moral hazard: he may already know he's infertile and have no intention of paying the bounty.
Adult Swim made riffed on a similar concept[0] a few years ago, though it seems like some companies never quite took the message to heart...

[0] Smart Pipe https://youtu.be/DJklHwoYgBQ?t=295
That hinges on the bug being serious and exploitable
I agree that they should ideally come with raw data along with all code that was used to process it to produce the results as presented.

> but contributes none because I’m an amateur

I don't mean to be rude but it seems relevant to point out. Papers aren't written for the benefit of amateurs. They're written for experts who actively work in that specific field. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
You're right about the NYT making the issue visible, at the same time, it's not at all a big deal. Yes, it sucks if it's your handle, but it's not really important at all.
I myself enjoy reading papers.

At least after I transfer them to a single column, 14/16pt tall font with real headers, that is.

The graphic format itself is dated and annoying, yes, but I find the expositional tone and immediately searchable references pretty cool.
To guard against malicious filenames I use `find ... -print0 | xargs -r0...` since posix disallows null bytes (and forward slashes) in filenames. The `-r` flag on xargs means it doesn't execute its command if find matches nothing.

So filenames can contain valid commands delimited with semi-colons that, if not quoted properly, can be unexpectedly run alongside your intended pipeline (say if you're doing the usual and unsafe "for csv in *.csv; do cat $csv; done").

I wish I could've laid my hands on the excellent HN thread from some years back that opened my eyes to this vector, but I'm hopeful someone else will mention it so I can add it to my bash notes file. :P
A library dev is primarily motivated by clout (proof: HN). He needs to appease as many users as possible. Most library users only care about their use case immediateley working and would rather have the library do a bunch of autoconfiguration that so happens to work for their specific (widespread, at the time the library was released) use case than to use their brain for one nanosecond to configure things. Anyone who wants to use a lib for a sane, purposed reason, like logging [1], is out of luck - the library will also do 500 other things "for you". It will also scan your system for features, libs, and activate features based on that. Which shouldn't even be possible, by object capability principles (the only thing OOP got right).

All those popular libs on HN have 1000 testimonials like "wow so easy to use, I don't have to make a struct in my garbage langauge that makes it hard to make structs". Any popular shell thing does all kinds of weird ad-hoc shit to appease the user, like --display-tags-append in mpv.

This is not software engineering. It is mindless consumerism. And this isn't new. UN*X has always been like this (not even just UN*X. basically all software ever was always garbage, created by small monoculture). The people who blame webdevs and new generation for this are part of the problem. UN*X is LITERALLY just this. They extend every command in all kinds of ad-hoc ways, and it leads to critical vulns. Anyone who calls themselve a "hacker" specializes in coming up with ways to abuse their tools which create peripheral problems that add up over time.

This kind of bullshit is why I quit software 10 years ago becuase I was sick of telling my boss he's a moron for using libFlyByNight, libEnterpriseBozoShit, "don't do this stupid hack that i knew how to avoid since i was 12", etc and they are literally dragging down the quality of our products. A job also does not let you actually learn your tools. If it did, you would figure out your tools are shit. Outside work I have written my own various programs and they performs better by 100x (in terms of usabilty, performance) than any other UN*X duct tape ware implementing the same applications.

tl;dr the entire software industry is brainless morons, simply put. anyone who has an ounce of optimism is delusional and cushioned

1. Logging is not a sane thing to do in general but eh. There are many similar vulns to OP not published yet surrounding logging stacks. DAY OF THE SEAL SOON
that is how it works everywhere else and that is how it is used everywhere else
The people writing the standards are also the ones implementing it. That’s the kickback. That’s why every USB 3.whatever device suddenly became USB4 ones.
So in my experience sweaters that need to be worn in offices that care about that sort of thing need to a.) be women's sweaters (because male clothes look 'sloppy') and b.) need to have some level of design/fit thought having gone into it. The reason for this is that women in the workplace can't be over or under sexual, so there's a limited range for how the clothes can interact with your body. (This also varies from person to person: I can wear short skirts and still look professional because my legs are shorter than my sister's, but she can wear tops I can't because my breasts are much larger than hers).

Oh, and at the cheaper places, 60% of stuff is for teenagers or college students. Literally.

So, for example, let's take Target as one of the cheaper brands since I was there earlier. For female clothes here are some examples:

[0]https://www.target.com/p/women-s-cropped-turtleneck-pullover... = sweater that looks great until you pick it up and it's a crop top because that's what the kids are into. This is about 30% of what you find.

[1]https://www.target.com/p/women-s-crafted-chunky-knit-cardiga... = looks decent until you check the fabric content and, like any woman's sweater under 80 dollars, it's all plastic so it won't insulate you for shit.

[2] https://www.target.com/p/women-s-crewneck-pullover-sweater-k... = looks fine, but hover over and check o out the sleeve. Look how thin that is; making thin sweaters saves fabric. And again, this is 100% synthetic (and not fleece or other warm polyester; it's acrylic)

So it's basically all that until you spend at least 80 bucks on a single sweater.

There are cheaper things that keep you warm, but you can't wear them to an office:

[3]https://www.target.com/p/women-s-fleece-quarter-zip-sweatshi...
[4]https://www.target.com/p/women-s-sherpa-longline-1-2-zip-tun...

Does this make sense?
Of course this would be less of a problem if

a) buildings weren't made of wood, and

b) people didn't keep setting fire to them.

(Source: SF resident for a few years - someone even burnt down my hardware store! As I was going there for a screwdriver!)
Imagine when no one can drive their car because AWS is down.
Haskell hacker and worked on Perl6/PUGS

(thanks to Diederich for the correction)
I thought the implicit bug bounty was using any exploit to drain coins yourself
It’s an estimate based on fairly thorough research, which includes attaching collar cameras to outdoor cats. The carnage they wreak is impressive.

Cats belong indoors, period.
spending the effort to learn to have a keyboard driven workflow for common things as been tremendous for me. it effortlessly allows me to recreate my various workspaces (chat, music, email, browsers, work specific things, terminals, production, etc).

For coding I usually always dragged windows to the same setup, w/ i3, it's easy to automate that and control it all via the keyboard.
Pro tip: If your post asks if I would live somewhere that lots of people already live, that’s a clue the place is habitable. Maybe not to your standards, but you don’t define words.

Really blows my mind you’re confusing something like a ‘no entry zone’ where people had to abandon their homes with areas near a coal plant.
Question. We've now had outdoor dining for the past year. What do you think the chances are that this regulation significantly moved the amount of fire damage or number of fire related deaths that occurred?
According to plenty of preppers, the 12V Cummins Diesel trucks were the last great EMP-resistant vehicles https://dieselresource.com/diesel-resources/2nd-generation-5...
From the article:

Personal financial columnists and comedians do not understand the jobs that gift cards do. They are not cash-but-worse-in-every-way. Closed loop cards allow a giver to personalize a gift to the recipient. A Barnes and Noble gift card to a favorite niece tells that niece that you remember she is a reader, unlike those uncreative family members who would just give her cash.

If anyone’s psychology is being manipulated, it is likely the recipient, on a theory very similar to the one that causes many readers’ employers to offer a gym stipend instead of the equivalent amount of salary. You appreciate the money more, not less, because of the story about your relationship it comes with.
Well, there's a lot to quibble about in this rosy portrayal of the COVID clusterfuck, particularly anti-rationality's rearing of anti-Science conspiracy theories and "hesitancy"--but I won't.

> When we focus on something, we get it done

Yeah, great. Can we focus on not ruining this planet for the stock market? Climate change, deforestation and plastic pollution are seriously damaging the one planet in the known universe that can sustain human life.
> The real question is why can't people discern the difference between the idiot and the non-idiot?

Societally we solve this through trust organizations. Individually, I have no way to validate the information every expert/idiot I might come across. So is “connect the frombulator to the octanizer but watch out for the ultra convexication that might form” gibberish or just your ignorance of the terminology in use in that problem domain? Most people don’t try to figure out how to navigate each field. Heck, even scientists use shortcuts like “astrology has no scientific basis so it doesn’t matter what so-called SMEs in those fields say”. So you rely on trust in various organizations and peers to help guide you. These structures can often fail you for various reasons but that’s the best we’ve managed to do. That’s why for example “trust the science” is a bad slogan - people aren’t really trusting the science. They’re trusting what other people (some times political leaders) tell them the science is. Add in bad-faith actors exploiting uncertainty and sowing chaos and it’s a mess.

Silencing the idiot is fine as long as your 100% certain you’re silencing someone who’s wrong and not just someone espousing a countervailing opinion (eg Hinton’s deep learning research was poo-pooed by establishment ML for a very long time)
During the 1970s the Club of Rome made "The Limits to Growth" with the World3 model and, whatever it predicts, some scenarios like the Business As Usual (BAU) seems to have tracked quite well for ca. 50 years already.

The latest check-up is by Gaya Branderhorst in 2020, https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/37364868.

Of course, one has to understand that such a model doesn't show you "on the year 2028 the population is size 16.2931 billion". That is not the point. The point is to show how something grows, or shrinks, and the interrelations of the tracked variables. As x goes higher, y starts to diminish and soon after z goes through the roof, that kind of thing.

The collapse of, for example, industrial output levels might be a form of a Seneca cliff. That is, the growth of the industrial output becomes harder and harder to achieve, while the difficulties compound and actually keep on growing long after the growth of industrial output itself has stagnated or started to drop slightly. This will dramatically increase the inhibitory effect, thus creating a growth curve which starts to slow down and then drops fast ("collapse").

Why dismiss the model? The BAU scenario seems to reflect reality for over 50 years now, so is it not rational to try to understand it?

The Limits to Growth is fundamentally a realization that the world has finite resources. It is not illogical to consider this as a truth. At some point there won't be new resources to obtain, and hence growth in systems based on capturing resources will simply slow down (and perhaps even drop fast, "collapse", because difficulties compound). Circular economy and recycling are good but they cannot expand the available resource pool of e.g. raw materials.
I wonder if this, too, is a symptom of near-zero interest rates.

With an interest rate of zero, future cash flows are valued equal to present cash flows. That increases the net present value of recurring payments (approaching infinity, actually). So it becomes increasingly attractive for companies to discount the initial sale price in exchange for a recurring payment.

In a higher interest rate environment, that wouldn't be the case, as recurring payments would discount the further they are in the future, converging to a much smaller sum, while revenue earned today from the initial purchase would be more highly valued.
The ranked list of human-associated stuff that kills birds goes something like windows >> cats >> pollution >> cars >> windmills.
That would be terrible PR for them though. "YouTube banned me just so they could take my money to get help!" "Only rich people can get their YouTube accounts unbanned!" and so on.
maybe the business model should simply be to bill your insurance once it deploys
Your comment violates the site guidelines [0]. Please edit it and remove the personal insult.

> When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
There is nothing in need of explanation. Consciousness is what consciousness does.

Just like a computer can sort numbers, a human brain can produce thoughts and speech, and describe itself to itself, which we call consciousness.

A machine that would both (a) have enought information about the working of the world, and (b) have the right algorithms for predicting how to influence human beings and other conscious animals would, I believe, be able to turn this same predictive ability on itself and come up with what we call "conscious experiences".

While I can't claim it's impossible that there is more to it than that (perhaps only beings imbued with transcendent souls by a god can actually have conscious experience - that is not ultimately disprovable, after all), I also don't see any reason to imagine that there MUST be something like "consciousness" that is apart from complex computation.
Yes. I have a similar mindset and reasoning for using Mate desktop. It's very simple, I'm spared the complexity of kde and the eye candy / novel paradigm of gnome.
Hey - this is massively lame in that it’s a huge spoiler for a series I have been working through.

Honestly - super lame that there was no warning on that. Top comment, too. :( A downvote for you.
>If we approach unfamiliar ideas curiously, we can imagine part of factual reality that is outside our conceptions: people know things we don't and have legitimate motives we haven't considered.

This is an extremely healthy mindset, I'm glad to see it here. I only hope this way of thinking can spread.
Anyone have resources on how to actually use this? I see they provide C code, but I'd greatly prefer some kind of simplified interface or introduction to what is happening (kind of like how litestream has a getting started https://litestream.io/getting-started/ )
Discussed at the time:

Redesigning the Scientific Paper - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16764321 - April 2018 (107 comments)
Apply for a job at FB, contact engineers thru internal email. I actually did that at one large software company, and fixed their crappy docs in the process :)
> pop into neutral

Not doable in most modern cars without the key.
https://archive.md/ccBAz
Some thoughts on writing
This is an option until they require internet.

Also the other side is that these cheap TVs are slow as hell. My Vizio has a 15 second startup time before it responds to commands, while it's "Smart"Cast stuff does what it does. This is before it responds to other commands, ex volume. And this is at each session, not cold boot only.
Another way to say this is "The UX of Scientific Papers is Poor"

It's not hard to imaging a better UX - for the field what are the top 5 questions you want to answer before you start reading?

Eg: Sample size, Funding, etc. Put those at the top of the paper with symbols.
Doesn't seem very surprising, less bugs = less birds.
Maybe this is related to declines in insect populations? I mean, if birds eat insects and there aren't as many insects, you'd expect there to be less birds as well.
It's telling that there are people who have never experienced the result of proper town planning and conclude that town planning is an impossibility.
Please don’t ever use time stamps for synchronization. You will have a bad time.

Clock skew is an insidious problem: things may look like they’re working, but they’re not. Given all of the clock bugs out there it’s sometimes not even safe to rely on the clock on a single machine. Across multiple machines it’s hopeless.

Please note that this doesn’t apply if you have a fancy time source like Google uses in their fancy cloud DB (whose name escapes me at the moment).
That would be nice - but I doubt it will be coming any time soon.

After 6 months Maplibre doesn't appear to have changed that much from the original MapboxGL version - which makes sense, because Mapbox pay a bunch of people a bunch of money to work on it full time.

And the engineering effort to implement this would be significant (probably an understatement, given how much this likely complicates the codebase going forward too). So I don't know where Maplibre will get the resources to do this (although it would be amazing if they did)
Pre-car cities.
> The wall height thing is about accessibility for emergency responders, as is the roof height thing.

Good points. Imagine that we allowed other businesses to build extra structures on the public sidewalk. Does the hardware store just build more retail space? It's a bit absurd from that perspective.

> The max parking spot coverage thing is probably about parking capacity.

Many see reducing parking capacity as a benefit: Parking capcity consumes limited real estate (imagine a dense downtown), driving up all other real estate prices. It's a public subsidy for greenhouse gas producing cars. However, the solution is probably not random takeover of parking spots.
> When we focus on something, we get it done

That's true.

What's also true is that some things simply can't be done. If a species goes extinct, it's over (Jurassic Park fantasies nonwithstanding). It's not like they will respawn if we fix the ecosystem, the damage is permanent.

If we get too far into climate change, it won't get undone in time, no matter what crazy geoengineering efforts we undertake.

In between there's a window where we can act. That is closing.