skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think people kept it taboo for as long as they could because: people were literally dying due to low vaccination rates, which were caused in large part by such specious conspiracy theories. Fact checkers did not do a 180, it is still widely considered a conspiracy theory, and its very existence harms public health even if there's a remote possibility it's true.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_lab_leak_theory

“Some scientists agree that the possibility of a lab leak should be examined as part of the ongoing investigations into the origin of COVID-19, though they have expressed concerns about the risks of politicization.”
< Goals can be avoided or punted. By calling housing a "right", we elevate it as an imperative, not just something to be shrugged off. It is explicitly the purpose to make the issue more difficult to avoid.

I think your more interested in marketing than reality buddy
I don't know about your SATs, but here in Eastern EU I've been taking advanced math as school leaving exam and I had some money that allowed me to visit tutor like thrice.

I had problems with geometry and decided to get some help with one of its branches. Tutor explained me stuff, gave exercises that I did and so on.

At the real exam there was one task from this geometry branch and I managed to do it. I don't know whether I'd be able to do it without going to those lessons, hard to say.

But at the end of the day it gave me 5 of 50 points at this exam, so I basically in very simplified version I received 10% on hard exam for less than 10% of minimal wage.

Of course it'd be naive to think that it scales like that, but you get the point.
It's not really a debate - anyone with basic EE knowledge knows what this experiment does and what few parameters you need to predict the exact behavior.

Of course if you take it literally - superconducting wires, car battery, 12 V light bulb - then it's very likely that the suggested answer is not even technically correct, because the initial pulse amplitude as seen by the lamp is simply too low to light the bulb up. If you take it less literally and match the "light bulb" impedance more or less to the transmission line impedance (~1 kΩ or so in the experiment with the suggested wire spacing and assuming "reasonably thing" wires), then you're getting much closer to the answer he is suggesting.
This is not how it works.
Courts do not care that it's a beta.
I just bought 2 light seconds of 0000 AWG bare copper for no good reason.

Fortunately Gallifrey Prime has easy returns. ;-)
Here is a chart of the Mastodon conversation as of this moment:

https://www.solipsys.co.uk/Chartodon/107464941539596242.svg

Discussion continues.
I don't think it's possible to detect a 200uA current across the resistor immediately after the switch is turned on. If I understand it correctly, then this would mean that information is being sent faster than the speed of light. Surely this small instant current must be caused by some kind of capacitance or interference.
Exactly. Elite colleges are an intelligence laundering operation. Start with average students from wealthy families. Add in just enough talented students. And out of it they both come out with a status indicator indicating they're "very intelligent", much more intelligent than the legacy students, but less so than if all the talented students defected into their own school.
Here's a summary, but really you should watch the video, it is great.

Take 1km of wire, a resistor lightbulb, and a power source. Connect oscilliscope around power source. Flip switch.

For 1 light-speed delay, you actually see current going across the lightbulb! After the speed of light delay, current starts flowing normally as expected. (Why? How? Is this spooky action at a distance?)

You're actually seeing cross-talk between the wires where the build-up of electrons on the high side actually moves electrons on the (spatially) adjacent side of the loop!

Then to really complete the puzzle, sever the end of the wire. You still see the exact same behavior up to the speed-of-light time! (Which, how could you not! You need to wait a speed-of-light delay to _discover_ that the wire was severed, so you MUST see the exact same behavior.)
If you want more fine-grained control over federation than Mastodon (which already has the basic knobs), Pleroma is more flexible in that regard.

It’s trivial to set up in a way that your content never leaves your server if you want, blanket or per-post.

Note I’m saying that content flows across servers and implementation, not that all of these share federated auth. You can not “sign in” on any other server than the one you registered with.

Some people have multiple accounts on multiple servers, some stick to one. fosstodon.org is a great one for floss and Linux talk if you don’t want to run your own.

BTW, check my HN profile if anyone wants to be friends :)
Yes! Finally the admissions committee can admit exactly who it wants, without any pesky objective criteria to hamper their social justice ideals!
Also here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29599154
I had thought about using postgres as a job queue before, but I couldn't figure out in my head how to make sure two processes didn't both take the same job. The "FOR UPDATE" and "SKIP LOCKED" were the keys to make this work in the article. Essentially, as far as I can tell, "SELECT FOR UPDATE" locks the rows as they're selected (locks are apparently visible outside the transaction), and "SKIP LOCKED" skips over rows for the select that other transactions have locked. Cool stuff.

The below article goes over some downsides to using postgres for a job queue: namely that the data model isn't optimized to find and send new jobs to large numbers of subscribers. Actual messaging systems like Kafka/NATS are better at this.

https://www.2ndquadrant.com/en/blog/what-is-select-skip-lock...

Also, there are things that the dedicated messaging systems give you that postgres won't, such as transparent error handling and retry logic. If your worker grabs a job from postgres and fails (in some kind of transient way such that the task should be retried), you'll have to implement the retry logic yourself. A streaming platform like Kafka or NATS will notice that you haven't acknowledged the message and deliver it to someone else.

This is something you could pretty easily implement yourself with something like a process that just scans over the "processing" jobs and looks for timeouts, resetting them as it goes. But there are probably a few of these little papercuts that Kafka-like (…Kafkaesque?) systems would handle for you.

So, I guess if you already have postgres set up in a reliable way, and there's no one around whose job it is to set up new production systems like Kafka, and you don't already have something like Kafka, and you only need basic job queue requirements or you're okay with implementing whatever you need on top of postgres yourself, and your incoming job rate is fewer than maybe a thousand per second, and you have fewer than maybe tens of consumers… postgres is probably a decent job queue.

The above paragraph seems snide but it probably does describe many people's environments.
I'm not wrong about my own awareness.

I think I recall threads on HN about such things existing.

But I'm not aware of how to use them or that my organization is using them.

It wouldn't shock me if they were, but my prior is no more than 50%.

I observe that people around me usually don't use 99.9% or more of Microsoft software features.
Yeah, the assumption that Derek is 3 steps ahead might be wrong and he might just be wrong.

Well played though that the world thinks he knew his wrongness would spur debate.

Speaks to his earned credibility, but not to his infallibility.
it literally is

with proton you need: proton, wine, dxvk, and bunch of libraries

that already is 10x the size of the game itself

there is also a setup time cost, it's not good for the user having to wait ;)
Same goes for MySQL. I like to try new and different things, so I'm always trying to find reasons to use things like redis or other pub/sub or caching options. But I usually tend to end up sticking with tried and true relational DBs. Obviously, there is a scale at which those other options will be necessary, but I haven't hit that yet.

Many times even when I do use something like Redis, I run into limitations.

For example, I have been using it for caching calculated data that users need, but now we need to be able to query the cached data by date which puts us back to needing to store the cached data in the relational database.
This is how it fails:

Turn the system on, keep a finger touching the steering wheel, then close your eyes. Boom.
It is not within the limits of GPLv2.
If you go the "written offer" route, you have to actually make the offer, and it must be valid to anyone for 3 years.

Tiktok has not done that.

You also can't do it post-facto :)
@hellbannedguy:

Yes from what I know, you technically do not need to get a will notarized. But getting it notarized makes it a "self proving will", which will be easily accepted by a court. If you don't do the notarization at the time, your poor executor will likely need to hunt down the witnesses and get them to sign affidavits.
Please please be careful when reasoning from cherry picked data. You can go to http://reddit.com/r/idiotsincars and see much worse, every day.

All I can say to comments like this is "call a friend and get a ride". There are ~23k cars on US roads with this system now. They're not hard to find. And it's really pretty mind blowing. For sure the most fun I've had behind the wheel in 25 years of licensed driving.
Maybe, maybe not, but your comment doesn't really make a case for either in earnest.
I think you mean canon rather than cannon. Either works I guess.
I hear people every so often saying that Seattle or SF or {insert prosperous liberal city} is going to be the next Detroit. It's hard to express how preposterous that assertion is. Detroit filed for bankruptcy. It's major industries needed massive government subsidies in order to survive.

To think anything like that would happen to SF anytime in the next 50 years is absolutely absurd.
Controversial is fine to the extent the controversy shows people struggling toward clearer understanding and better explanations, and as long as all parties are operating in good faith (i.e. not being deliberately misleading).

Let me highly recommend Mehdi Sadaghdar’s (ElectroBOOM) excellent response video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iph500cPK28 which does a great job of empirically investigating and theoretically explaining the subtleties involved, in a polite, respectful, and entertaining way.

I have similarly enjoyed the exchange between Sadaghdar and Steve Mould about the physics of the “chain fountain”.

These kinds of friendly scientific “debates” show viewers (e.g. kids) a bit of how the scientific process and scientific discourse works, in a form that is more accessible and digestible than technical journal papers or history books.

Having a discussion back and forth helps to improve both viewers’ specific knowledge and viewers’ processes for comprehending and interrogating new information, so long as the median viewer actually sees some of the responses. (Someone who only ever saw the first Veritasium video probably ends up with a somewhat wrong mental model.)
A sublime landscape: New model explains Pluto’s lumpy plains
Ask HN: Best way to learn UX Design?
As a college student interested in HCI, what is the best way to learn UX design along with tools like figma?
Yeah he’s great, I recently binged his videos and he’s criminally underrated. He’s a really smart dude who’s great at explaining things without dumbing it down too much, and also very entertaining. Plus his excitement and enthusiasm is infectious, he really loves what he’s doing.
This is totally wrong.
It must be an explicit offer for source.

"
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
...

b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
"

Note accompany it.

The only exception is this:
"If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not compelled to copy the source along with the object code.
"
I didn't get into this in the blog post, but we use io-ts at Pilot, and we generate most of the codecs based on the type annotations on the Python side. It works reasonably well, although I think the io-ts syntax confuses people who are new to TypeScript.
If effectively enforcing the ban on impaired driving was a viable option that was truly on the table then yes, I would 100% be in favor of requiring this testing to happen privately. Breathalyzer for engine start, eye tracking to prevent phone usage (which Tesla has btw), more frequent vision/driving tests, etc would improve road safety significantly. But that's just never going to happen, it's a completely unrealistic scenario that requires a huge culture shift, and would be incredibly unpopular policy. Not to mention the public transport infrastructure that needs to be built to support all of these folks who suddenly are no longer allowed to drive but live in areas where driving is a necessity of everyday life. The demographics who'd be affected hardest by these kinds of changes are also vocal voters with high turnout.

Given the state of the public roads now, full of dangerously impaired driver's as it is, we've clearly decided as a society that it's worth the risk to allow this behavior to continue. So in that light, I think it's worth allowing these public tests of autonomous systems under some strict set of rules. I agree these rules shouldn't be exclusively self-enforced by Tesla and co., and there should be some more stringent open transparent reporting requirements around how many systems are active, miles driven, incident reports etc. But with the right controls and oversight in place I think it's a worthwhile endeavor to allow the testing to continue in the spirit of accelerating autonomous driving becoming a reality. It's the impaired drivers that _make_ it more urgent for this system to exist in the first place.
> find it frustrating that so much discussion about other countries is based on hearsay and offhand translation

It's frustrating when talking about any subject. The problem is, this is how people digest information. They take in pieces and regurgitate it. Hopefully they are open minded enough to take criticism so that over time the regurgitations get more accurate. The discussion is important for everyone, but not everyone is going to know everything at once.

As far as grouping together entire populations: Totally agree. There is no point in making sweeping generalizations, which is why I pointed out the parents bad argument. Not only was it a pointless point to make, but it was also wrong. 'Westerns' are no more ignorant about the world than 'non-Westerners'.
As much as I love Veritasium, I feel the OP video is better than his. Actually doing the experiment is really good, and it honestly feels like he was fishing for another debate like the faster than wind car by giving only a super theoretical and unintuitive explanation. (I don't have any real evidence of that, but it does /feel/ like it.)

I also wonder what would happen if, instead of a setup like this:

┏───────light────────┓
┕──────battery───────┛

You did something like this:

┏──────────────light─┓
┃ ┃
┃ ┃
┃ ┃
┃ ┃
┃ ┃
┃ ┃
┃ ┃
┃ ┃
┃ ┃
┕─battery────────────┛

That is, battery (and switch) and light at opposite corners of a large square, instead of on the middle of a long double-line. Veritasium video implies the current will start flowing at sqrt(2) * width, instead of at 2 * width. Would these effects really work over longer distances like this?
As far as Nim's dependencies go in this case, it's literally just Karax (no dependencies), Jester (depends on httpbeast which has no dependencies) and treeform's ws library (no dependencies). So the only thing in this chain that isn't transparently being used is httpbeast. Thankfully I've read through that code and contributed a bit to that project, so I can reasonably trust it.

Nim has a smaller community, so the supply chain tends not to be more than one or two levels deep in my experience. This is also because the standard library is fairly large.
The shift keys take up precious thumb cluster space, and their standard location is also useful. IMO the "best of both worlds" option is just worse.
Can just use a cloudwatch rule
Just because something can be used to do something doesn't mean it should. Kafka is specifically designed for this purpose, it is free, and it is easy to learn and use. If "starting with Postgres and then switching out when the time comes" saves money then I can understand. Otherwise use the right tool for the right job, right from the start.
very possible!!!!
In fact, the ground temperatures at the rover landing sites swing up during the day and down again during the night, varying by up to 113 degrees Celsius (or 235 degrees Fahrenheit) per Mars day.
https://mars.nasa.gov/mer/mission/rover/temperature/

Melting (freezing) point 195.42K-77.73°C

https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/ammonia-d_1413.html
Facebook/Meta itself seems to disagree with you - the very article we're discussing says the accounts were reinstated after inquiries from the author of the article, and a Meta company spokesperson said the accounts were "incorrectly removed".

Many uses of Hitler on Facebook would violate their rules against hate speech, so I'm not surprised they have automation looking for that name. But even Facebook now agrees that a play about a real person who was forced to taste Hitler's food before he ate it is not such a violation.
Presidential election is next year and some candidates want to completely get rid of nuclear as fast as possible, so this can change. Not sure these candidates understand this means more CO2, bigger dependency on Russia for gaz and more expensive electricity in the end.
There are anthropologists and sociologists out there. In case someone is interested in a more nuanced perspective than this “warm fuzzies” from a random MIT grad technologist.
> That's not actually a problem. The problem would be if it could be convinced to encrypt CAST5 messages.

I don't disagree, but would add that if the encryption used is believed to be insufficiently secure these days all tools should warn loudly that this is the case when asked to decrypt them.
There's also technical reasons galore:

- NaCL (as I understand it) essentially enshrined a particular version of llvm bytecode as its data format. This made it overcomplicated, and made it very difficult (technically and politically) for other browsers to implement any of it. It was difficult to compile to, and only supported chrome (which was at the time much less dominant than it is now). But webassembly is like NaCL 3.0 anyway. (2.0 was asmjs). Webassembly is NaCL's successor, not its rival.

- Flash was always a firehose of security vulnerabilities, and using it tied the future of the web to an (essentially) proprietary format put out by a single company. Flash never worked well on mobile - when it worked at all it turned your phone into a pocket heater. It didn't help that so many banner ads were distributed via flash. And given how badly flash integrated with the browser's scheduler that meant a background tab turned your computer into a space heater. Ultimately flash was killed by adobe's failure to ship a good enough product.

- Java in the browser had nearly as many security issues as flash did. And it took seconds for the jvm to start up. When it worked at all that is - java applets relied on the user to have a reasonably up-to-date version of the JVM installed (and appropriate browser extensions). Even as a developer it was a pain to get java applets working. And for what benefit? So we could have ugly non-native controls? It could have worked if browser vendors all shipped a properly sandboxed lightweight JVM like they started to do with flash. But nobody used applets anyway because they barely worked on anyone's computers.

Webassembly has taken all of the lessons from this to heart and taken 2 really important steps that no competing system has achieved:

1. Webassembly only runs in a completely sandboxed, bounds checked memory container with a tiny surface area. As a result it is orders of magnitude more secure than flash or java.

2. Webassembly got buy-in from browser vendors. Because the browsers are in charge of their respective wasm virtual machines, they're extremely well integrated with the rest of the browser. Wasm has solid JS APIs, it works everywhere including mobile, it starts up instantly (unlike java), and its tied to browsers' update mechanisms.

Yeah, politics were involved. But the outcome is much better than we would have achieved with flash or java. And I'm very grateful for the outcome. I don't want to need proprietary junk from Adobe and Oracle to make the web work.
> Other than laws barring discrimination against protected classes

You have a point here.

I'm running with the assumtion that most of the ban appeals that are going to end up in small claims court are from legitimate users stuck with an automated false positive. Pretty sure if a human spent 30 seconds looking at the ban, they would overrule it. The issue is getting a human to actually look at it. I doubt users brazenly breaking rules would go through the process of going to small claims court.

Looking at the thread, I see a lot of people with unusual names (for instance asians and native americans) getting banned. I wonder if this couldn't be interpreted as discriminating these people. Of course, we can only assume FB's good faith here, hence why it would not be a problem for them to produce evidence of bad behavior from the people they banned.
I do have external Apple touchpad but dropping it in front of the keyboard sucks hard. It is on lower level than keyboard and ergonomy is much worse than using it with Macbook laptop (I mostly use it for two/three finger swiping). Ideal touchpad would be non-flat and nicely integrated with the curve of ergo keyboard (I know, sounds difficult with split keyboard).
I don't think this is possible. If it were true, then you could add a transistor and an LED on the other side of the 1000M wire, and light up the LED instantly as soon as you press the switch. (Transistors and LEDs only take a few nanoseconds to turn on.) It's not possible to send any kind of signal or information faster than the speed of light.
Colorado truck driver was sentenced to 110 years for a deadly crash
The resistor is next to the switch. So no information is being transmitted faster than light. It still obeys the direct line of sight speed, just not the wire speed.
> It probably wasn't a quick hack that a couple of guys stuck in when nobody was looking.

I mean, that's not what the parent comment said:

> I agree that this is mostly a small number of engineers (with approval) being helpful.

Here's some more details from someone who actually worked on this: https://twitter.com/XenoKovah/status/1339914714055368704
>life and death questions such as "is the vaccine safe"

Is that not a misleading thing to say yourself? Plenty of vaccinated have died. And for those unjabbed but with permanent acquired immunity, the jab may be safe yet at the same time have no material effect to save their life.
Facebook's algorithmic outrage amplification is necessary to prevent an overbearing government from forcibly reverting parasocial norms to a simple chronologically sorted inbox?