skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Isn't (important part of) surveillance stuff on the server side?
Hmm, even at my most cynical I would say the difference is the free conference is a much smaller (and thus presumably less effective) bribe. Giving away tickets to a conference which they sell the tickets for costs AMZN very little (sure, there are costs associated with putting it on, but those would have had to be paid anyhow, adding an attendee or two won't change much). So it's a few grand worth of airplane tickets vs. $700K...
>You can get relativistic effects while jogging

and you have to aim a flashlight like a water hose. +1 for the appendix at the end that explains the conceit and lays out the equations used!

One of my favorites, written by John E. Stith.
give it a month or two and we'll see who's right or wrong
In my experience, Facebook is the platform which is most tied to people you actually have interacted with in real life, and that's by a large margin. I know the reddit account of like 1 person I know IRL (I don't even know my wife's account). ...but my facebook friends consist of basically everyone I know that still has a facebook. A lot of that is just the network effect and momentum, but still.
I like seeing raw ambition in these projects, my reading is that this is not "let's make a better IDE" but "let's fundamentally change how software tools interact".

There are numerous projects that I have worked on that would benefit from semantic code storage (and have used LSIF[1], which only goes so far).

I think the demos are neat but really don't hit on the massive productivity increases, this is the stuff that people would throw money at :

- Language-aware-yet-independent and polyglot build systems that don't need new frontends for new languages.

- A CI platform that doesn't need configuration

- Semantic fuzzing

[1] https://lsif.dev/
Yes, these are symptoms. What do we do?
the abundance of real names, the relative absence of juvenile spazzes. my gen X buddies and I and our families can share family-friendly/public-safe info with a great signal-to-noise ratio. Also the Groups are emerging as the most useful part of it.

It's not good for edgy discussion, but consider this: social media platforms are more like: "which platform is good for what type of interaction" vs. "is this a good social media platform or not?" When I want spazzy bullshit I go straight to /b. I avoid twitter, tumbler, and tiktok like that plague because I don't want to be a human garbage filter looking for diamonds in the rough. I go on Instagram sometimes for pretty stuff from people I kind of know.
What about both? I have both past infection and I'm double vaxxed. Based on the data, should I get boosted?

From what I'm reading the answer is yes but does anybody have an estimation of my protection right now?
Is that not the situation we're in now? Facebook does act as if it's giving people a variety of news information, they do censor the things my relatives see, and my relatives do think I'm talking nonsense if I bring up one of the topics the algorithm doesn't allow them to see. We are there already.
I wouldn’t mind a cloud computing offering from Apple that allows you to keep your hands clean of customer data like CloudKit does.
Also, the weather in Oakland is actually suitable for outdoor dining.
Write a TODO list before you go to sleep each day
I would tell them if they want an agent on my laptop, they need to send their own laptop because your privacy is non-negotiable.

Full stop.
It seems to me like there is a twist in this article (actully very, very light on details) but it seems to say that it will fail not because the whole cryptocoin world will fail, but rather because "better" cryptocoins were created and specifically Bitcoin is "inferior" to some alternative ones.
Can I ask if you think Facebook fact checking is as serious as the Spanish Inquisition?
If you assume an unlimited supply of vaccine then the shorter dose interval gets everybody to good level of sterilizing immunity as quickly as possible.
Hate using this preface, but, unpopular opinion follows: The issue in the US is that the word engineer has been in common use to describe technical workers for a very long time. I've had friends who were:

* Engineers (and operated trains)
* Manufacturing Engineers (who were really equipment techs)
* Sanitary Engineers (who were really trash truck drivers)
* UX Engineers (who were really web designers)
* Software engineers (programmers)
* Data Engineers (kind of dba-ish, maybe)
* Culinary Engineer (restaurant kitchen designer)

Genericide has occurred. The boat sailed.

When the real estate industry wanted a word for "licensed seller of property" they had to make up a new word "Realtor" and protect that with a certification mark. The engineering industry really needs to do the same thing instead of harrassing the garbage truck driver, computer programmers and the guy who fixes the conveyor belt.
"Repeat offenders will see their distribution reduced and their ability to monetize and advertised removed." Is the problem, a satire post by a satirical publication has been notified their distribution and monetization could be penalized as a result of their satire, because a 'fact checker' decided to identify the content and treat it like a news piece.
FontLab
Not really, evasion is a continuum rather than a binary distinction. So Omicron seems like it evades immunity acquired from infection with previous variants or vaccines to a certain degree, but from what I have read with vaccine + booster you are still ~60-80% protected from symptomatic infection and almost entirely protected from severe outcomes.
> I wouldn't be surprised if it becomes a social faux pas to criticize CCP in the future

It has been for years. You can find many stories of it, including companies firing employees who are critical of the CCP and CEOs apologizing. Look up stories of Disney, most of Hollywood, the NBA (a firestorm, though I don't know about apologies), etc.
It’s also quite ironic because they seem to claim that because their page is full of tracking cookies (what other reason to cite GDPR?).
>A scant five years ago, a “tech bro” wrote an open letter to San Francisco mayor about street conditions, including being assaulted by a homeless person and pervasive drug use on the streets. He was lambasted in tech and national press, and his letter effectively ended his career. If he had written that letter in pretty much any other city, everyone would have agreed with him. In San Francisco today, everyone now publicly states what he wrote five years ago.

This has been a part of SF culture since Tom Wolfe wrote about City Hall. I really don't understand folks who have lived here for a quarter century and don't know the City's history and culture.
Prediction: SF will be stronger than ever. The locals will continue to extract massive benefits from the resurgence of tech.
Have you seen the tweet? Facebook threatens consequences for "repeated offenders". So the point of fact-checking them is to accumulate enough checks to be able to kick in these consequences.
make it popular enough, it will be throttled like youtube-dl
even my best friends wont tell me their reddit IDs and I don't tell them my alts.
What if it’s one character?
Emacs Slack
> Hooks as more like a DSL for declaring externalities,

That's exactly right in my opinion. Hooks are the place to declare stateful and effectful (aka impure) logic. Using a hook is an equivalent signal to using a Future, or an IO in other languages like Scala.

Often combinations of useState and useEffect are best written as a custom hook to reduce noise in the containing component. An easy example can be seen in something like

const [ name, setName, isValid ] = useValidatedState(state, validationFunction);

Seeing that you can easily imagine how it would be implemented:

const useValidatedState = <T>(initialState: T, validationFunction: (val: T) => boolean) => {

const [state, setState] = useState(initialState);
const [isValid, setIsValid] = useState(validationFunction(initialState);

useEffect(() => { setIsValid(validationFunction(state)) } [state]);

return [state, setState, isValid];

};

Almost always if there's a useState that has an associated useEffect, it should be turned into its own custom hook.
Once you are an MD unless you challenge powerful forces in your association or hospital you are free to practice bad medicine as long as you can stay within some reasonable guidelines around billing and when to order tests. This gets exposed with surgery but is a lot easier with a GI doctor.

They both mean something. You have to dive in to get the real scope regardless. If you just need a title for your commerical MD would carry more weight around diet products and a developer around a new software offering.
> Everything, including your example. The entire point is to discourage people from making claims.

Then you wouldn't have discussion, at least not of this type. It would resemble more a slightly faster version of academic papers as everybody has to read everything and becomes more invested in preventing themselves from being blasted for making an unsupported claim on accident than in contributing.

> This is a good critique, but if one were actually implementing this, you'd also need to implement some way to verify that people are actually reading the sources (which in itself is already a big annoying problem).

Right, but when you say 'we should do thing X' and when somebody says 'we can't do thing X without solving Y' you can't just reply with 'also solve thing Y'. For example, we should go to Alpha Centauri, but I think figuring out FTL travel is sort of necessary first.

> Your other points are also good, but ultimately this thing I'm claiming would be niche due to the friction involved. If it were to not be niche you'd want to put in effort to "validate", or in other words have "trusted" (another problem) members randomly select controversial claims and verify them manually.

I don't believe a fully algorithmic approach, even with "the crowd" can work.

Yeah, it might work in that particular usecase. Perhaps as an adjunct to academic listservs.
I don't think it's unwinnable; we don't want FB to arbitrate between competing scientific opinions, we just want them to blackhole Magic Healing Water and Covid Vaccine 5G Drone Tracker type bullshit.

It may be true that it's hard to draw a clear line between bullshit and almost-bullshit, but it's hard to draw a clear line between porn and almost-porn and they somehow manage to do that okay.

edit because apparently this wasn't clear enough: the way you distinguish science from bullshit is not by evaluating the claims (that's what I am arguing we should not trust Facebook to do). One is a money-making endeavour and the other isn't, and that's the basis on which they are distinguished. Even the worst science is not festooned with ads.

I'll say it again: "Facebook doesn't do a good enough job of evaluating accuracy" is a trap, and it's a trap they desperately want you to fall in to. If we get to the point where we put any value in FB's evaluation of any scientific claim, we're already into dystopian sci-fi territory, no matter how good a job they do.
Maybe they should mark the content more clearly as satire to avoid causing confusion?
Fact checking has only become a PR management tactic that arrived in the 2000's, only as the cost of sharing your mind rapidly became zero. Before the widespread adoption of the internet, you were limited to broadcast and print. You could pay for a license from the FCC, or license a station with cable or go and print and distribute your text. Very little incentive for non-commercial work and certainly no avenue for simply anybody to say anything in a way that can spread easily.
Of course they're operating in bad faith. Those words don't just jump to the screen when they think. It's not like they were just chatting with friends in messaging apps.

They had to do some "research" and then type those opinions word by word, sentence by sentence, and revise it several times, and do the review and proofing before it get published.

Is there any chance, during the whole process, it didn't come to their mind that it's their own opinion, not "facts"?

There is not a single chance. NO.
I'd MUCH prefer that to the alternative mentioned above.
While anecdotal data isn’t very useful, it is good to remember that people actually do get this disease. It seems like it’s always at arms length in online discussions; that someone else will get it surely, probably due to some implied moral failing, but not OP. Thanks for sharing and I hope you get better soon.
It's a real community - there's just significantly less new stuff getting posted than before COVID.

Seems to me like most folks eventually either outgrow the community or give up on side projects in general.
It "costs" that much because that's just the monetary value. The value of the connections required to get that dinner is where the real cost is.
Yeah. My memory's not good enough to not use static types.
> The complaint is that it's come up repeatedly ('Not again. Use search') - agree it's a bit of a brush off, and it's not helpful for anybody (perhaps most of all the maintainers themselves!) that it doesn't link any of the others, or the one that was merged, or the first one with a better explanation for rejection, or whatever.

I love using automation for this. I'm often frustrated that people didn't bother searching, and I don't have enough time in the day to do the searching for them. I configure my repos so that I can just apply the "duplicate" label, and a bot will leave a polite and cheerful message thanking people and asking them to search next time to avoid duplicates.

It successfully fails to evoke my exact mental state at the moment and gives people the exact info and reasons for rejection they need, all without me having to lift a finger.
JPMorgan fined $200M after staff used personal chats for company business
I'm uncertain if you read the entire article, but the point is that even the greatest non-fiction books aren't optimal when the objective is learning.

His expectations aren't unrealistic, the methods he's suggesting have decades of research suggesting to learning that's much more efficient than traditional reading.
Phone of Indian activist jailed on terrorism charges was infected with Pegasus
Barack Obama's 2021 Spotify playlist released
> They've quite literally made the statement that [...]

They've very literally not made that statement.
> I am really struggling with this comparison.

And yet, you have no problems comparing blockchains and crypto to everything successful, world-changing etc.
Even the name is wrong.
Wups, sorry about that, here is a week’s earnings.
Wokeness displaces left wing politics. Wokeness and its counterparts are the results of various elite entities capitalizing on the crisis of neoliberalism by selling empty hope in exchange for marketable virtue. It’s a byproduct of neoliberal ideology that replaces politics with catharsis while everything sacred in public and private life is replaced with so-called free-market solutions. Wokeness doesn’t solve any of the problems it claims to solve, but that doesn’t matter to those who promote it; mostly individuals climbing institutional ladders and brands doing public relations. And, unsurprisingly, it’s less useful for politicians because most people outside liberal elite social circles see right through the farce.
Cool to see someone made a BBS in forth!

I used to dabble in Forth a long time ago and I always thought it would be interesting to see a Forth that people could telnet/ssh into and it would look & act like a MUD or BBS, but the prompt they're on could be the core Forth interpreter/REPL anyways - allowing optional live coding and more.

I originally discovered Forth through a MUD called TinyMUCKS that had a neat scripting language within it called MUF (short for Multi-User Forth). The MUD itself was unfortunately written in C.
Having watched the video last time it was submitted, I doubt the rat has any concept of the game's existence at all, or that its actions are doing anything to influence the mass of flashing colours on the screen in front of it. If you watch it, it doesn't even once look at the screen. I'm sure it's just learned that running on the ball in certain directions produces food. As a headline, "Scientist teaches rat to play Doom" is taking dumbing down to new depths.
The grass often looks greener. I've never had good results with any cloud company's customer support with the only exception of Google, but that was because the individual I was assigned actually put in the effort themselves. Azure/Microsoft for example didn't even call me back when I requested a windows VM quote for a client I was working with.
Accesses can be distinguished too - read and write accesses are different. You can see this in [1] - there are Reader and Writer monads, where Reader is used for effectively unchangeable parameter to a monadic context (for example, socket) and Writer is used, among other things, for logging!
Your doctor is, indeed, simply a fact checker. A real one. Much as I and you, I assume, are fact checkers; we attempt to determine the veracity of information we encounter.

Your doctor is not a "fact checker" in the newspeak meaning of the term, because your doctor is not preventing other people from speaking to you.
Happy to see frame.work spreading its wing to Europe. And was surprised to learn that France requires all hardware to compulsory cite a "repairability rating" - that's a great regulatory idea!
> Write once, run anywhere

Where have I heard this before ....
One of the recurring themes in comment sections around fines for banks and large businesses is that "the fine is not in proportion to the size of the business".

I guess it makes sense to ask then, do we want to have fines that are proportional to the revenue/profit/"X"-value of a business (and how might that get gamed)? Where if a small business is sued for something like this, it will only pay $100 while a larger business for the same infraction will pay $100,000,000? And if we're ok with that, are we ok then also acknowledging that we completely disincentive any sort of legal enforcement of small businesses, from a cost/benefit perspective?

I actually think the inverse is true: if the SEC has decided that the correct penalty for recordkeeping failures is $125M, it is likely a balance of proportionality to the crime, cost of enforcement, and proportion to victimhood of the crime. The question I always wonder around this is, how much of this $125M goes back towards victims (if any) and how much goes towards further agency enablement to pursue criminal activity? Is $125M enough for the SEC to open X more cases (knowing how overcapacity they and every other government agency are)?
Big Pharma mobilized an armies of people and equipment to create vaccines in record time to save lives, but people still like to shit on them.
Curve Light: A highly performing indoor positioning system
Generally the way async Rust works is that you have a Future trait with a poll method, and if you call it the future will attempt to make progress if it can — e.g. if the task is a timer it will check the time and complete the task if so and otherwise return Pending.

However, async Rust includes an additional concept: Wakers. When your runtime (Tokio) calls poll on a future, it gives the future a waker object, and when the future is ready to continue work, something needs to call wake on the waker. Once this happens, Tokio will poll the task again soon, and Tokio wont poll tasks that have not been woken.

For example, for timers, Tokio includes a timer wheel (a sort of priority queue) with all the registered timers, and the timer wheel calls wake on the appropriate waker whenever a timer expires. Similarly with a message passing channel, the sender calls wake on the receiver's waker when a message is sent.
US sanctions drone-maker, DJI
I'm not sure I understand. Which two hooks would be called in this case? In the original example I'm seeing where there's anything atomic involved across multiple hooks.

Are you referring to the usePromise and useAsyncExtendedState? If so, it's okay to use those hooks independently. They work fine without each other, but they also work well together.
How is it "bad" if it's the standard used by the most successful messenger platforms
The same critique applies however also to Reddit and any other site with social comments.
Interesting/implications because of the nightmare of BYOD and general user laziness/UX hurdles that many of you are all too familiar with I'm sure.
>One person's right is always another person's obligation

You are failing to understand the distinction.

All rights and laws depend on governments and courts. That obligation is around interpretation and enforcement, not the provision of the right itself.

My right to free speech does require governments and courts only at the enforcement level. No other person ever has to do anything for me to have that right. In fact I don't have to do anything to have that right. I have it whether I exercise it or not.

The same is not true about housing or food. A court could decide that someone has a right to those things but it's still not going to happen until the resource exists to provide. Someone has to make those things. That's not just enforcement or interpretation. It's buying fertilizer, it's nailing boards together.

>One person's right is always another person's obligation

So no, this fails to hold up to simple scrutiny
Ashley Biden Says She Was Sexually Molested by Her Father Joe Biden
https://engineering.fb.com/2015/06/26/security/fighting-spam...

Every interaction is processed by a Haskell rule engine to check for spam.
As someone who has worked as a sub (copy-editor) in the UK for many years in the past I cannot begin to describe exactly how completely incorrect this is.
look, i know the numbers, it's a big issue, I'm not saying it isn't. But blaming all Saxons an associating them with the far right is similar to blaming people of being criminals based on their ethnic background.

it will result in a growth of the far right in Saxony, because people who are not far right will either move away, or end up in a far right bubble because everyone else is bashing them

Saxony needs help and not disdain
I'm too lazy to even comment on this post.
We couldn't ship software until we cleared every bit of code flagged by a tool that scanned our code for open source. Most of the hits were for projects with a safe license and there were many false positives but all in all it was a great step in our static code analysis. I find it astonishing that a company of any size would skip this step.
Yes, but most center left is not woke. It's particularly American and Bay Area thing, weird to global central left.
It works, just as it does for C. Although I'd say it depends what you want it for, Nim already supports being translated to JS natively.
[dupe] sorry

Discussion over here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29595768
Toronto City Council votes to ban robots on sidewalks, cycle tracks
Sorry for the late reply, but:

1. I'll try doing some profiling and see what happens

2. The latest repository I tried to import has 671,190 revisions
> would you feel the same if the deleted document was a plan for a nuclear weapon

Those two situations aren't even remotely comparable - nuclear weapon plans are straight-up illegal for individuals to own in the US, so by removing one of those, Google would be complying with federal law.

The Christchurch shooting video was not illegal under any law that I'm aware of, so Google was not legally required to delete it, and it was a primary source for a historical event, so Google shouldn't have deleted it, especially not from users' private drives that they weren't sharing (as then you can't even claim that they were spreading extremist material).
People on Facebook aren't actually reading the journal. They're looking at the title and saying "see, the vaccine was unsafe all along." The fact checkers said "Missing context ... Independent fact-checkers say this information could mislead people" which is absolutely true.