skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I have aphantasia, although to a lesser degree to the author. Like you I can visualise 3d models in my head, but if I try to recall an image of someone it lacks detail. I can "fill in" detail by recalling facts about that person (hair/eye colour, wrinkles etc) but the image is blurry and details fade quickly.

> I don't dream very much, though a few times a year I will have a very vivid dream (basically like a video in my head with lots of detail). This makes it very apparent that my normal imagination is lacking detail. It feels a bit like it's a different area of the brain that I don't typically use, and makes me wonder if I could use it more with practice.

Interesting! I relate quite heavily to first part; I also can visualize abstract things but have a lot of trouble with faces. I'm sometimes not able to recognize whether two photos are of the same person or different people, and I always seem to think that other people don't look similar when others do think they do, and think people look similar that no one else seems to. However, I dream _very_ vividly almost every night, and I find it so engrossing that it interferes with my ability to get up in the morning sometimes because in my half-awake state I'm convinced that the "story" in my dream is interesting enough that I need to see where it goes. By the time I'm fully awake, it generally turns out that the dream didn't make much sense, but often it contained enough absurdity that telling my friends or family about it is entertaining for them.
Indeed. I had to get a USB ground loop eliminator in order to run my Line6 Helix connected to the computer. Now with USB-C-only computers, it's Helix -> cable -> ground loop eliminator -> adapter -> computer. Without the need for it, I'd have just replaced the USB-A cable with a USB-C one and connect directly to the computer.
I don't think you'd believe anything they would have to say, would you? Either way, if you are a public health official you have to be held to a higher standard than a guy with Facebook account.
> I have an unsupported use-case which will never be supported

Can you please elaborate?
I got something different out of both of your examples.

Its not that many people talk about the expense of marriage, its that people would invalidate the people who talk about the financial intertwining and folly of marriage as both a cultural institution or contract.

Just like you pointed out that only people in the religion of anti-religion are the ones who talk ad nauseum about it, instead of just being non-religious people.
I wonder, why nobody is mentioning two-finger scrolling (also inertial scrolling or kinetic scrolling).

Interesting fact: Ubuntu and Fedora have a fully working implementation for this - although scrolling is way too fast, while other distros don't have this. KDE distros also don't have this, even if KDE Wayland is used.

Can anyone tell my, why on Ubuntu and Fedora this works for EVERY app, whereas in other distros using GNOME 40 or 41 (e.g. Arch) it is only working on SOME or NONE of the apps...? Is there a patch for libinput or MUTTER, that is not in the official GNOME repos?
OK, perhaps I should have said "rarely." I've had direct reports who were like that and happily gave them the max rating on Performance Reviews and recommended promotions.

That said, it definitely gets rarer the higher up you go.
The reason why people use ORM mappers with their migration functionality is that you get rid of a lot of repetitive stuff and get an okay result for 95%.

I have the feeling, if you don’t have a lot of different tables and migrations, writing them by hand probably saves you time compared to learning the intricacies of an ORM mapper (they are usually very leaky abstractions, so you have to read their source code to understand what’s going on).
If you already know an ORM-mapper then it’s usually not worth it.
The real trap seems to be to believe that ORM mappers will abstract the database away and that you don’t need to understand your database anymore.
What I'm curious about is if the "leaky" vaccines are actually the cause for the amount of mutation we've seen in Covid in 2 years. Variants seemed to accelerate after vaccine rollout began but, I'm not remotely qualified to say they're related.
It's a lot more important with a 2 party system. If one party's administration gets almost 20% of the total primary votes, that's a pretty heavy thumb on the scale. We typically only get 2 real choices: red or blue.
The difference isn't as minor as I think you're suggesting. Compared to 95% efficacy, 90% efficacy means twice as many vaccinated people get sick and 75% efficacy means five times as many get sick. I don't see how eradication programs would work with such a differential, and (relatedly) I don't know of any experts who think it's feasible to eradicate Covid with current technology.
You could have said the same thing but change "without government" to "with electricity" in like 1830 and be right. History doesn't suggest anything, people suggest things, and "it didn't happen yet so it will never happen" is useless as a historical argument.

History suggests what the stable state of something is as much as reading tea leafs suggests it.
Perhaps look into Australia. We have much tighter regulations than the US or UK when it comes to lending, and we've largely avoided recessions, including in 2008.

COVID got us, but that did have a physical reason behind it.
That article strikes me as largely playing a semantic game. From the article:

>The classic tale of sterilizing immunity unfolds something like this: A pathogen attempts to infiltrate a body; antibodies, lurking in the vicinity thanks to vaccination or a previous infection, instantly zap it out of existence, so speedily that the microbe can’t even reproduce. No symptoms manifest, and most of the body’s immune cells never get involved, a bit like an intruder smacking up against an electric fence around a building, leaving the security guards inside none the wiser.

and

>This is a very neat story. And it is “almost impossible to prove,” Mark Slifka, an immunologist and vaccine expert at Oregon Health & Science University, told me. To show sterilizing immunity, researchers have to demonstrate that an infection never occurred—a big ask, considering that microbiologists can’t even agree on what an infection actually is.

If that is the definition used, yes, you are right. It is also basically useless as a term, as it is 'almost impossible to prove.' If you wish to use another term, we can do that. Instead of sterilizing, I could simply say 'highly effective.' Suffice to say, the mechanisms used by the COVID vaccine and the polio vaccine are very different. At most, the polio vaccine only included 3 strains (or variants)- the Salk vaccine, the first, only targeted type 1, but two more were added later over the course of years.

All of this is to say- the highly effective polio vaccine works because there are very few polio variants and people are immunized against them directly.

The COVID vaccine does not make one immune to the virus, or immune to the spike protein. The presence of the spike protein in the vaccine provokes an autoimmune response in the form of antibodies that will target that spike protein. This is somewhat effective, and a clever 'hack' that allows us a measure of protection. However, different spike proteins can be used by different variant viruses.

I am not antivaccine, and while autoimmune systems can be fairly complex, it is certainly worth discussing. Frankly I find the obfuscation and sloppy, ideological reporting to be frustrating. On all sides I see a lack of rigor and emotional attempts at control.
> sloppy organization.

Or a communication issue? How do the people looking inside the assembled product tell the people who design the product that they made a typo?

A few years back, the company I worked for created a landing page with an image of a beautiful young woman who was happy about our deals. It wasn’t my job, I was looking at the design out of curiosity and I noticed that one eye of her was looking in one direction and the other eye to the other direction. I tried to raise the issue with a few people higher up but they didn’t understand or didn’t care as they were excited for the release or busy with other stuff.

To this day, I wonder, was it intentional? Maybe it was a joke or something I didn’t get. The campaign run fine, no one talked about it. Maybe I don’t get graphic design, maybe the eye situation was a marketing message about how the lady was having eye on the numerous amazing deals of ours.
What Is Web3 and Why Should You Care?
Exactly right. Things like data freshness (live index updates), CRUD operations, metadata filtering, and horizontal scaling are all “extras” that don’t come with Faiss. Hence the need for solutions like Google Matching Engine and Pinecone.io.

And even if you do just want ANN and nothing else, some people just want to make API calls to a live service and not worry about anything else.
Great article. While I only had time to skim the article, I'll still offer my uninformed opinions. :) None of the hw I own is particularly great. I don't even own a decent GPU. But I don't need to because you can train your models for FREE on Google Colab's TPUs and GPUs. PyTorch's TPU support is still not that great while TensorFlow's is maturing. It's obviously a priority for Google to make TensorFlow work well on their own hardware.

So for me the choice is TF 2 because I can train models 5-10x faster using Google's TPUs than if I had used PyTorch. I know the PyTorch developers are working on TPU support but last I checked (this spring) it wasn't there yet and I wasn't able to make it work well on Google Colab.
I'm curious to see if we're going to see some of those serious allegations in court, backed by a video or audio recording.
A bit surprised by:

"The go command now embeds version control information in binaries including the currently checked-out revision, commit time, and a flag indicating whether edited or untracked files are present. Version control information is embedded if the go command is invoked in a directory within a Git, Mercurial, Fossil, or Bazaar repository, and the main package and its containing main module are in the same repository. This information may be omitted using the flag -buildvcs=false."

Curious why this was included.
I'm gonna nitpick on your nitpicking, but for me the self-immolating buddhist did value life/means of existance just like everybody else, it's just that they valued some more complex thing more (that thing being of course extremely rare). I mean i'm pretty sure my view is (at least superficially) consistent (eg i believe i can find alternate interpretations for any counter examples) so we have to look a bit deeper!

About your pick on judging other and building a hierarchy of reasonable values: well that's politics/ethics/moral (i'm no philosopher so i don't fully understand the difference between these concepts)! I'm not here saying there a is a total order between value systems, mostly a partial order based on inclusion/precision. And i'm asserting that whatever the set of living things you're taking, they'll have a non-trivial greatest lower bound (eg there is a common notion of intrinsic value) (but i think you got that).

About rationality: perhaps we don't understand the same thing by rationality but i believe one cannot be irrational, it's kinda vacuous. One can be in irrational with respect to some value system, but every one is (boundedly) rational with respect to his values (and it's by this axiom that we can infer peoples value systems). My comparison of value systems isn't on qualitative comparison between alternatives (me good you bad), it's a comparison on commonness/shared-base (this specific to me, this specific to you, this common).

on your edit: :) you feel nice to disagree with, send already, but i'm not promising i'll read! Btw i'm not sure i'll actually disagree with such critics, i personally don't really believe in value (as a homogeneous unit) because different things aren't always comparable and even different orders of magnitude of the same thing aren't always comparable (i've got no value for 0.01 house or 100 house, or more precisely it's not 0.01 resp 100 times my value for 1 house).
I was on a team that had a tiny (a few GBs) Ceph cluster because it was the easiest option for high availability of these files that we really wanted to have on premise. There were never any issues so I can believe what you're saying. Still, for the amount of data I work with, the cloud storage usually wins.
> The culture around ARM mobile phones and tablets heavily emphasized bootloader locking

Virtually all of which are user-unlockable. But keep telling me how unopen they are?

(BTW, those of us who actually want secure systems very much appreciate the fact that malware can't overwrite my boot sector without a hardware-level vulnerability.)
That Scenario has always been the case for all of the history of man kind

So what is your position, everyone should always wear masks at all time for the rest of time?

Nope, not going to do that
> the point I am trying to make (granted not very eloquently) starts out from this idea [1] that humans are kind of crazy, and that maybe this crazyness is what makes us so successful; so I put that too much safety may undo this crazyness, it puts it to sleep?

You are blurring the lines between taking a personal risk in one occasion at a specific time and taking the risk of not wearing a mask or washing hands or cooking meat every day all year long.

Craziness for the sake of craziness is just random trial and error.
> Masks don't really protect the wearer unless it's a properly fitted N95. They reduce the aerosol emitted which reduces the chances of transmitting it to other people. They protect a group of people if most wear them by limiting transmission.

Many people seem to respond to this with a line of thought akin to Why would I take on a minor inconvenience merely to help save the lives of other people? Surprisingly few seem to think I'd better get some N95 masks then. They've been in ready supply for months.
the tokenization is the part that exists for speculators

can’t I usen openssl to sign files representing agreements and write programs that only run when an authroized keyholder calls a method without the global supercomputer running at a few thousand TPS? it just seems like the most inefficient approach to utilizing cryptographic signatures

granted, no one else has cracked the UI/UX problem of using these signatures so I’m not a total prohibitionist on blockchains, it just doesn’t feel like the right answer to me
See CalVer. The date is definitely helpful for something with fairly stable APIs where breaking changes aren’t really happening.

Perfect for things like Ubuntu, pytz, and ca-certificates.

Less for something like a library who’s API could change and break your implementation.
I recently needed to contact Microsoft support, and looking at the support engineer's email address I literally felt like I was being targeted by fraudsters, easily the most suspicious company name I can think of.

Shanghai Wicresoft Co.,Ltd
I assume when this happens, that coworker isn't silent. You can strike a conversation and get him to say something on record. Edit: and if you're concerned with running the mic all the time, then yes, you can run it all the time at no cost - see what 30 bucks buys you on Amazon.
Didn't even bother to read the citation for that statement?

> This has now been true for over a century, and as early as 1855 J. S. Mill could say (see my John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor [London and Chicago, 1951], p. 216) that "almost all the projects of social reformers of these days are really liberticide."

> I like the document title, though. "Microsoft Word - Document1". Very classy.

Textbook example of an ad homenim.
Fun fact - I worked for a bit in Japan for Yupo (the company that makes the paper of the same name and used in this notebook) as part of the project team that was overseeing the construction of the Yupo plant in Virginia. I was originally hired through an English language school on contract to help with editing the English translations of their technical documentation but also got to do some things like porting a sheet temperature simulator from MS-DOS to Windows.
I don't see why that wouldn't be possible to implement now that the generics are here.
Here's the archived link, in case don't want to feed the prestigious trolls out there [1]: https://archive.ph/APXsC

[1]: https://i1.wp.com/www.opindia.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01...
Microsoft Patch Tuesday, December 2021 Edition
Maybe people are just scared? There’s no ulterior motives needed about working in the office here. Omicron is scary. Also with something this spectacularly infectious it pays at the community level to work from home and slow the spread. Maybe consider the vulnerable in your community before you force your entire company to catch covid and then infect their grandparents.
Given some of the devices I’ve seen these ICs, the fact that they were fake is a problem, no matter if they work reasonably well.
No need to drive even an hour. Downtown San Jose is certainly a hellhole (I worked downtown on Santa Clara St. for a while) but just a few minutes away there are very nice suburbs like Campbell, Willow Glen etc.
Between mouse and touchpad I know which requires less hand movement away from the keyboard.
https://covidestim.org/ provides estimates of the percentage of previously infected individuals by US state. I happen to be in Massachusetts, for which they estimate around 50% previously infected, with error bars. So a bit lower than South Africa, but not too far in the big scheme of things.

The UK provides some estimates of seroprevalence in blood donors (thus a skewed sample):
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-... (Figure 3). These estimates aren't quite what you are looking for, but one test is sensitive to previous infection and estimates 20% previously infected, whereas another test is sensitive to (infection OR vaccine) and estimates ~100%. Basically, in that population, pretty much everybody has some kind of antibodies.

To answer your question, I would say that SA doesn't look particularly unique.
Thanks for your work on this!

Your report says Firefox gestures are working on Wayland, and two finger swiping left/right appears to be configured in the Firefox prefs to go back/forward in history:

browser.gesture.swipe.left = Browser:BackOrBackDuplicate
browser.gesture.swipe.right = Browser:ForwardOrForwardDuplicate

However, Firefox doesn't respond to these gestures. Do you know what's up with that? (I'm on Fedora 35, if that's relevant.) Two finger scrolling up/down works just fine.
> Mac keeps a list of (hashes of) apps that are not allowed to run.

That's the XProtect blocklist, it's been around pretty long and hasn't caused any issues that I'm aware of.

> bug caused it not to cache the list long enough and it started causing problems when it couldn’t phone home

What changed is that since Catalina macOS additionally makes a synchronous check the first time you open an app. For certain things that are not code signed (eg. shell scripts), it checks every time. This can cause multi-second delays when launching apps or executing commands in the shell. (see https://sigpipe.macromates.com/2020/macos-catalina-slow-by-d...)

To my knowledge, this issue has not been fixed and is still a problem in Monterey (first time app launches on my M1 Max sometimes take several seconds).

It's possible to deactivate the check for Terminal (by marking it as a "Developer Tool" using a checkbox that sometimes shows up in System preferences, and sometimes doesn't). I'm not aware of a way to avoid this slowdown in Finder without disconnecting from the internet.
It's the Silicon Valley way, and it has no place in safety critical systems like cars. Ironically, Tesla is the worlds highest valued car company specifically because they pretend to be a software company. In a way they've made their testing an external cost that customers and other members of the public pay for them.

Governments (or EU) should just ban all beta software from public roads. You want to ship a feature to customers? Fine, but you'll have to take responsibility for it first. Make sure it's tested, has well understood failure modes, who's to blame if it malfunctions, etc.
And nobody is disputing that. As said, you want to focus on optimizing audio, optimize your room, your speakers, your headphones etc... there is solid and well understood math behind speaker and room acoustic models.
No. They should be held responsible for their own mistakes. I'm not sure who else but the CEO and board you think have the ability and responsibility to make sure their company is acting appropriately.

> We have functional civil courts, and they are more than capable of remediating wrongs

That's actually a good one. Thanks for the laugh.
Do you really need to check the safety on your gun if you expect that it’s on?
>> "Rewind the clock 20 years, there were all sorts of paid software offerings everywhere on the desktop. You couldn't uncompress a zip without paying (or stealing from) someone."

> Windows XP had built in zip support and was released 20 years and 4 months ago. Before that, from memory pkunzip was free and it was zip which needed payment, but wikipedia links to a review of an early version from a BBS here http://cd.textfiles.com/rbbsv3n1/pool/pkpolicy.zip which states that it was free for noncommercial use, shareware license for commercial use, and that Phil Katz had helped people implement unzip (on deflate algorithm I think) in their own code without charging for his help.

Free as in beer. Not FLOSS.

> You move onto talking about Steam (not open source) which is used as a DRM and payment engine for many closed source games - and that is one of the more popular uses of closed source software (as well as things like Microsoft Office), XBox, Playstation, Nintendo and PC gaming. Having proprietary Steam running a proprietary game after you login to Valve's proprietary online authentication, on a free reimplementation of proprietary Win32, but hooray because there's Linux somewhere inside, doesn't seem very close to the future Stallman was hoping for or the ideals of free software or open source. What would it mean to change the source of an online game? Probably that you can't connect to any servers anymore. What would it mean to move your FIFA team to another game engine?

Stallman about non-free games on linux: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/nonfree-games.html
"webhooks"
Counterfeit chips aren't just a state-level actor problem, companies do it for profit as well. I think the worry is just, if the person who was supposed to be checking for counterfeits missed this, how would they have any chance of catching a more sophisticated counterfeit?
The various software issues my Tesla M3 has are really grating at this point. I don't even have FSD, its just the regular AP software. I get:
- Random decisions about turning windshield wipers on and off. Frequently it just keeps wiping a dry window, or never starts.
- PHANTOM BRAKING, I've had it slam the brakes multiples times. Usually a bunch of times a week. Just for funsies.
- Garbage night AP performance. Car coming in the opposing lane with its lights on? Better slam on the brakes.
- Garbage bad weather performance. Just a bit of rain or snow and even TACC can't go a reasonable speed.

A whole lot of this probably comes down to the lack of radar or other sensors. And the lack of ability for them to get machine learning with only cameras to perform.

Maybe they should just send the engineering team up far north during the winter and force them to dog food their software to get around. Really it's not the individual engineers fault, it's always crap management.