skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If one wants to read more and willing to try few ideas, here are few that works for me and our family.

- Have physical books always around — at your desk, bookshelf, bedside table, etc. My current ratio is roughly 1:4 of physical against Kindle.

- Read multiple books at a time.

- If you get bored, don’t feel like finishing a book; let it go. May be you can come back to it later.

- Always try to carry your Kindle or other readers with you on your Uber/Lift/Ola rides, Train/Metro/Planes, etc.

- Or buy at-least one copy at the start of your flight, and try books that you can finish off in that leg of the flight. Personally, I try to give it to a random stranger on the way out, “It was a good/awesome book. I have finished reading it, please go ahead and read it.”

- I don’t care who read my blog but I try to publish/write few lines about the books I read on my blog. Have been doing it for a few years now.

## Kids Rule;

- There is no limit to how much books (digital or physical) my daughter can ask me to buy as long as she finish reading the last one.

- If she can't or don’t want to finish the last book, wait for one week to pass.

- She gets ₹100 for every book she finishes regardless of genres but ₹500 for any non-fiction documentary-ish like a biography of a great person.

Of course, there is nothing entertaining/social on my phone.
> I think you really just wanted to make the case that the city's policies spurred crime, which is fine, but you should then do that directly instead of making kind of nonsensical snarky quips.

You are correct in my case. My entire comment was three sentences. It was perhaps just a hair snarky, admittedly, but I don't think it was full of quips or nonsensical.
> If someone were to make a self-exploding car, they'd be out of carmaking very fast.

I fully agree with the rest of what you're saying, but that's simply not true.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/08/04/tesla-f...

https://www.inquirer.com/business/cars-battery-fires-fear-la...
> The game changer will be when some University figures out how to become the Apple of higher education.

You think it hasn't been tried?

First, there's a chicken-or-egg problem. By virtue of being one of the oldest universities in America, Harvard was originally an elite institution that was powered by the tuition paid for by the children of elite parents. To start a new "Harvard-but-bigger", you need to figure out where the "elite" part comes from. In the absence of a pre-existing elite alumni body, you need to enforce rigorous academic standards on your early graduating classes and let your reputation grow from there. But, you also need to deliver the rigorous academic standards at scale.

MOOCs were one attempt, but it's impossible to defend against cheating online. It's hard enough to stop cheating in real-world exam rooms, letting people go through examinations at home makes it impossible.

If you require people to show up in-person, then you reach physical limits to scale very quickly. Even if you try to combine MOOC-style lectures with building out a network of controlled examination centers in the real world, the attempts to expand American standardized testing abroad show that you begin to run into problems of corrupt test center administrators. It's like the fast food franchise model, where the restaurant corporate headquarters finds it increasingly difficult to maintain the same standards across all of their franchised locations, except that with examinations, your day-to-day users want your standards to be compromised.
And there’s also multi word expressions (MWE), where the meaning of the whole is different than that of the sum of its parts. E.g. “out of the blue”, “bite the bullet”.
They're made of thermoplastic, practically everything plastic burns except for the few things around which are regulated to be impregnated with fire retardants (children's clothes, furniture, etc). Unless what you're holding is made entirely of metal or ceramic, you can be pretty sure that it is some degree of fire risk, if it contains a battery or not.
The vast majority of students from China in western countries pay out of their own pockets, i.e. their parents saved up or their family are wealthy.

Don't get confused with the CSC who mainly give scholarships (tuition, accommodation, stipend) to non Chinese nationals to study in China.
I mean probably. In 1,000,000 such cases of devices causing injury in general, how many are caused by space particles and how many are caused by human fallibility? Whether it's a design issue, qa failure, supply chain issue with unexpected material in the device, or deliberate malice, the company is responsible for the product it sells, and the customer has a reasonable expectation that it won't explode.

The cosmic particle idea isn't completely outlandish, but it's impossible to prove, and it's statistically far more likely that it was a human failure. Given the rarity of spontaneously exploding batteries, I'd bet dollars to donuts that the particles are responsible for less than 1 in a million incidents, so yeah, the company should be liable. That's the cost of business, and on a humanistic note, making things better for the guy would just be the good thing to do.
Cattle are big, meat eating fish that sustain several other animals?

Cattle in their current form are a “crop” that sort of sustains humans and their pets. It is likely that this is not an efficient way to sustain humans, but it’s easy and profitable.
I'm reading Red Mars at the moment, written in the 1990s and set in the 2030s, and a cluttered lab is described as having piles of floppy disks lying around. So, yeah.
Golden Gate Bridge officials have detailed the plan to stop its humming
Ranked choice is not that simple, and the math doesn't mean what the words say because you don't have to rank your choices honestly.

Say you have one guy you want most, A, a second much less, B, and a third abhorrent, C.

You can rank the abhorrent guy above B in order to lower B's rank even more, with the assumption that most people aren't going to rank C high.

People in A and B camps can both try this strategy and C, who only a small minority actually wants as first choice ends up winning.
Again, how rights are defined on paper is different from how the real world is.

In the USA, law isn't only defined by statute, it's also defined by the courts through case law.

The courts in the USA have some doctrines like "substantive due process" that say at least sometimes the law will look also at real rights that people can actually exercise, and not just paper rights.

> Neither housing nor water are human rights in the US because they, as the commenter stated, require you infringe on someone else's private property (resources, time) to provide them.

And yet as a matter of inevitable biology, every other right derives from access to water. A person without water lacks all other rights and all capacity for exercise of any right (e.g. speech).
and? Here in New Zealand, in Wellington, in 91, we got CityNet - https://downtothewire.co.nz/library-1991/index.html
Another report relying on flimsy data, ignore and wait
I always wondered how AWS/Amazon got away without the strong authentication. It turned out that they don't anymore in my case:

> Your card payment ending in XXXX failed when we attempted to charge it for AWS services on account YYYYYYYYYYYY because it requires additional authentication. To complete the payment, please complete your credit card authentication.

Expect an e-mail with subject "Action required – Your AWS account is past due" if you haven't gone through the authentication process for your card.

Luckily they were pretty noisy about it. I received the first mail about it on Dec 2nd and then reminders on Dec 6th, 9th and 13th. At this point I noticed it and made the payment. They didn't shut down any service meanwhile.
The drug trade seems to be heavily bolstered by crypto. It seems like the US could hamper both the drug trade and the crypto trade just by increasing taxes on crypto. A significant number of ETH nodes are in the US so they could also mess with it a lot just by cracking down on domestic node operators.

>I meant that functionality wouldn't change from under you like they did with the darknet markets

I still don't get why it did, it sounds like they were not using secure tools? Crypto isn't necessary there, just an ordinary E2E encryption scheme.

>In other words, it creates value for people who are not you.

Yes, criminals, who actively decrease value for me when people I know get hit by ransomware attacks, people I know get addicted to drugs purchased online, companies I work with get taken offline with ransomware attacks, government services I need to use get taken down by ransomware attacks, etc. All of this has already happened to me, by the way; I'm not an investor so the only real effect crypto has had on me is loss of money and well being.

>Do you also think that Tor's strong anonymity guarantees protecting pedophiles is an anti-feature too?

Well just like a lot of promises about crypto being faulty, I think this one is also faulty; I've heard a lot of stories of deep web child sex abuse rings being busted up. Tor is not a panacea. But if we say for a moment that it was, I don't think I would be ok with it. Would you be okay with finding sex abuse content on Tor that included your children? What would you do?
They burn quite vigorously.

You get out of the car.

They don’t tend to explode like in an action movie.

Like any of dozens and dozens of things, they might burn down your house albeit quite rarely.

People really need to start accepting that risk is never zero.
I had a similar experience when I joined a team. The architect was highly opinionated and wanted things to be done in certain way.
The problem however wasn't with him.
The management would usually pin all technical debt and issues on this architect. He was supposed to be answerable for anything that goes wrong.
Which made him a control freak. He wanted to know anything and everything in detail.

It's more of a culture problem.

When I realized this, I started sympathizing a bit with him. Made sure he understood what I was trying to achieve and comfortable with the code base. He was reluctant to accept new ideas but I pitched them anyway.

This is the nature of the job I realized. And it brought peace to me. I did however consider new opportunities with more freedom. But the controlling nature of the team did not bother me
> My hope is that sufficiently rich language models obviate the need for a lot of robot-language grounding data.

I feel like this is “missing the trees for the forest.” In my experience, generality only emerges after a critical mass of detailed low-level examples is collected and arranged into a pattern. Humans can’t actually reason about purely abstract ideas very well. Experts always have specifics in mind they are working from.

So I'm not convinced leaving it to the model gets you anything new.
Nice. Much appreciated.
There is over a billion cars in the world, most filled with highly flammable gasoline that actually burns inside them. Yet none are spontaneously exploding.

They absolutely are. 170,000 a year in the US alone. Some are even due to known design faults. A few years ago Ford recalled almost a million pickups due to a fire risk, and then recalled half of them again because the first fix caused another fire risk.

The probability of injury or death from a vehicle fire is probably much higher than the risk of injury from wireless headphones.

https://www.consumernotice.org/personal-injury/vehicle-safet...
Not noxious, just flammable (especially if lithium perchlorate is dissolved in them.)
Yup. Going the other direction is a thing as well.
About the efficacy of masks. They said they were not efficace to avoid hoarding and to reserve the small existing stock for medical professionals.
Okay cool and now the headphones weigh a kilo because of shielding and nobody buys them.
I never touch Bose headphones anymore. Once bought an expensive Bose that fell apart within a year. Learned my lesson.
You weren't around for the Galaxy Note debacle?
Even with the CLMUL trick, CSV parsing does not play nice. It can be made to work for JSON parsing because you can make more assumptions. With CSV, it only works smoothly if you are willing to accept a subset of what most spreadsheet programs accept i.e. to assume your CSV is "well-formed". Considering for example that the following three cells:

AA"A,"AA""A","A"A"A

when opened in Excel will all give you the same value, using CLMUL to normalize will require many repeated additional SIMD operations-- probably at least 8 if not more. At some vector size it will be worth it, but not clear at 256. The irony is, if you are stuck with CSV input, then the fact that you couldn't get a better format/encoding also suggests that you can't assume your CSV is "well-formed"
I never agreed that Facebook took a seat in the chair of fact checking. I’d rather, along with others, would’ve seen that Facebook got hammered with fines into obsolence for fueling the world with controversy and doing everything in their power to keep revenue on top of fact checking.
In regard if facebooks approach, it is laughable what Facebook is doing on their scale. It is barely enough with the amount of persons, and the way they enable people to share as much shit as possible.

So in short Facebook is doing way too little and doing it wrong too. But it does seem like the cheapest option for them to keep the lawmakers at bay.
No, you're right, I missed that feature.
yes? products should be designed so that they do not kill anyone?
Last time I checked, the energy densities of modern batteries were approaching that of TNT. Which is insanely worrying to me.
TL;DR: Take the emergency exit ramp or face a 100-year jail time.

The law made an excellent example of him, whether it was intended or not.

He probably can go the habeas corpus route now.
IRB's emerged as mandated bodies governing the intersection of research & humans in the wake of the 1974 NRA and subsequent Belmont Report. That report explicitly states that it is more that just biomedical, but also behavioral research that is covered. "do something to people to see how they act" fits pretty well within the domain of "behavior".

If you are doing research with an institution governed by an IRB then you cannot do anything involving a human being without it getting reviewed by the IRB. There are criteria whereby the IRB may exempt the research from a full review, but only the IRB can make that determination.

Perhaps the #1 absolute goal of the IRB is to assess potential adverse impacts of the research on any humans involved. It should be clear from the comments here, and if you read through any of the links to twitter threads, that people were adversely impacted by this study either through anxiety, time spent unecessarily, and perhaps money. I might understand (though disagree) with a point of view that said these adverse results were not foreseeable, but review of the study itself under an IRB for its involvement of humans was absolutely required.
As best we can tell, no one has "permanent acquired immunity". 36% of those infected never develop antibodies. Of the remaining 64% that do, most lose their antibodies in less than a year.
Thank you, filed.
So basically you are saying your side is the best even though they sometimes make implementation errors (unintended side effects) while the other side is total evil ?
Read again what you wrote. We are not living in a movie.
I agree.

Or put another way a set (or sets) of concrete examples grounds every abstract idea (including words as abstract objects). And it's turtles all the way down (or up depending).
> there is a limit to what independent fact checking can accomplish

I am fine with that. But they shouldn't call it a "fact-check" when the only thing they can connect the dots with are opinions, not facts.

> and why news is separated out from opinion-editorial pages... even if it is in style to add opinions

The problem I have with so-called "fact checkers" is that when it comes down to put the money where their mouth is, that is in court, they argue that they are not factual but rather opinion pieces, as Facebook recently argued in court: https://nypost.com/2021/12/14/facebook-admits-the-truth-fact... (I couldn't find a more politically neutral source, sorry)
Fact-checking is a means to “neutrally” validating a specific narrative, typically the modal elite narrative. Most of what is being fact-checked isn’t trivially binary, nor do the midwits that do this understand anything quantitative. Quite a joke, much like modern American discourse.
Ask HN: How to build solid-state battery, or simpler basic, fab plant
How do we feasibly build solid-state battery, or just the simplest, more basic similar, fab plant as a private cooperating together with its government ?
It didn’t stop them in the first place.

And one’s ability to pass the SAT proves only that one can pass the SAT. It just proves they were privileged enough to have some one teach them “the tricks and tactics to pass the test” - not understanding, not potential, and not intelligence.
Or rent it for a lot less at a traditional hosting company.
> If any trolls try it, all they get is GPL compliance, so they have no incentive to try it.

Not necessarily. The Conservancy chose not to ask for monetary damages, but that doesn't mean their legal theory inherently precludes asking for them; a troll could still do so. Though (IANAL) it seems like it might be hard as a TV buyer to prove that you were damaged in any significant monetary amount.
But in the "age binary replaced" threat scenario, isn't just gameover even with hardware keys? Eg. the same exact age code with an extra call after the print password to stdout that uploads it somewhere?
I want to believe the same thing, but you can't really judge whether there's a defect when the number of incidents is so small. That only works if you're talking about the defect of a known single point of failure.

Imagine there are N = 3 safeguards in the product design (note: I have no idea how many there are in reality), and imagine 1 of them is defective across the whole line. That means the other 2 remaining ones would still prevent almost every incident, and you'd indeed need to be unlucky for all 3 to fail. When you observe the first failure, the only thing you can conclude is that, in your particular case, all the safeguards failed. You cannot conclude (with any useful degree of confidence) that there was no common defect across the entire product line, given there are 2 other safeguards to prevent disasters. To figure that out the only practical way (without risking more incidents) is to actually examine the product and the failure mode.

(Now, admittedly I'm oversimplifying a bit here, but the point stands. e.g. if there are 2 safeguards, each with an independent 1/10k chance of failure, and you get 2 failures within the first 20k items manufactured, then you know that's incredibly unlikely without a defect. But even this reasoning only works after the 2nd incident (not 1st), and it still requires you to know the characteristics of all the safeguards... which is not information consumers have immediately available, and neither of which is the case here AFAIK.)
I don't think age, pass, etc. have ever claimed to be an enterprise solution. It sounds like you want Hashicorp's Vault or even a managed secret offering like what AWS, GCE, Azure, etc. all sell.
If you don't have cold starts it would be cheaper to host away from serverless. If you do have cold starts your traffic levels might be better served on a traditional server. Are there that many people who fit somewhere in the middle where serverless makes sense?
The American response, to a non-American, is fascinating.

You believe that you “deserve” compensation, but at the same time you guys are all crazy on independence and don’t-tell-me-how-to-behave and whatever else. But as soon as a thing goes wrong you want money for it.

It’s like you don’t believe in the concept of an accident.
>You act as if this is some new phenomenon

It's not new. What's new is having your tribe so convinced that an election was stolen and them so unquestioning that they storm and loot the capitol while being armed.
Rails was done by a product guy to solve one need. Most of the "the new rails" challengers are made by engineers.

Rails took a need: creating a blog engine; and make everything needed to have the simplest and most understandable way of doing it. Going through that example was like: -"Ahh makes sense.". Features were secondary and the focus was on the solution. It was about solving one specific use case and grow from there.

So far, any framework I saw that claims to be the new rails, is speaking about features and the million things you can do.

It feels like Rails was done by a product guy, and all alternatives were done by engineers.

From reading the article, remix feels like the best way to deploy to edge. An engineering problem. Not a user one.
The ACT and SAT have been to heavily relied on. Getting rid of them seems overkill, but they really shouldn't play as big as a role as they do.
Avoid the Top Best Health Keto UK Mistakes
that empowers you to get thin and lose sound weight while remaining vigorous. The enhancement centers around carrying your body to the sound condition of ketosis where it consumes off the fat cells rapidly and effectively to create energy for you. Moreover, it likewise stifles the undesirable food cravings and longings for food for the duration of the day by keeping you more full. In addition, it improves the digestion for sound weight reduction.

https://buddysupplement.com/best-health-keto-uk/
"Markets are" <-- actual existence

vs.

"Markets require" <-- some kind of logical construction
I am expecting it will help me in Civ 6.
Perl Turns 34 Today
I’ve read The Power Broker. But to be honest, I don’t remember much.
The issue is with how many will interpret that headline. People who already want to believe that 100% of the vaccine research is a sham will run with this. The burden is on BJM to be extremely clear if they don't want to add to the misinformation.
if you long press it, you'll get a list of sites, so you can just skip back multiple at once
Getting injured in America is expensive
Untwister: Seed Recovery Tool for Mersenne Twister and LCG PRNGs
Building Tags Megastore for AWS
You will not be able to produce a hammer (can by mistake crush a skull), or a ball pen (can pierce the chest and reach the heart in a fall), or a bottle of water (one can choke on the water).

Nothing is perfectly safe. People should deal with it, and remember that they don't live in a fairy tale.
> We are happy to share our security validation report of the agent as well as the configuration with any prospects/customer.

I am the OP. I am not your customer. My customer is your customer. My customer wants me to install your agent.

When I contacted Drata on email with some concerns before I accepted your terms and conditions (which I will never accept in its current form) and got any real information about your agent, your secretary responded: "Feel free to reach out to your Drata administrator internally with concerns. Do note, that when your company contracted with Drata, any edits or redlines they provided will prevail for all employees of your company."

That is not very reassuring for a company (Drata) that want me to accept undisclosed terms and conditions, wants to sell my personal data to targeted marketing, reserves the right to change the user agreement over night, and who exploits a loophole in GDPR so you can move my personal data out of EU and do things with it that would be a crime in EU.

I interperate that reply, from your secretary, as: "We already sold our thing to your company, so we don't care. Not about you. Not about your company. Bend over and take it like a good bitch!"

As others have suggested here; if you want people to trust your agent, you should open source it, have it audited, and publish the audit reports.