skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> What type of person...

Ones who aren't good at what they're doing. I'm sorry you had a bad experience with school.

I think some of the aversion to the "doesn't exist" claim is it seems to leave a hole. There are two ways of saying something doesn't exist / isn't real. You can say the cause isn't there or the effect isn't there. Take malaria. As you might know, the name means "bad air". People used to think bad air from swamps and jungles made you sick. If I didn't believe this I could say "swamp air can't make you sick, malaria doesn't exist". Which, sure, the disease doesn't come from the gas. But people do seem to get sick in a similar way at swamps that they don't get sick in dry areas. Isn't that real?

Another reason people will react to you with hostility is you're pattern matching people who have been hostile to them. People with depression get told "it's all in your head". Sure, that's where the brain is. "No, it's just the way you look at things". Sure, yeah, bad at looking at things. Still depressed. I don't think that "gently scolding" people has show up as effective treatment. But the point isn't to help. It's to dismiss and degrade.

You're also still only half way to looking at things holistically. You want to zoom out (based on what you've said about yourself and the horse example). But instead of looking at the system all together, you're pulling the blame from 100% on the student (something you got as a painful message) and putting it 100% on the teachers. Neither is representative of reality.

Is someone disabled if they can't see well enough to drive? What if they don't want to drive? What if they can drive with glasses? What if there aren't glasses good enough for them, is it that optometrists are disabled? What if they can't afford them? These are all really interesting social questions and there are no perfect answers. But if I get the sense that someone is trying to ignore the reality that some people can see fine and some people see poorly and suffer for it, and that any of this suffering is at all localized on the person who can't see, I'm going to think they're trying to pull one over on me.
This seems like a poorly thought out question; the IP rights would become the employer's or not based on what was created, when, and how. The domain purchase being public only marginally changes the risk calculus and doesn't change the legal calculus.

From a risk calculus perspective, it only matters in the case you actually produce something of value but then becomes a landmine buried deep near the heart of the company, and the risk of that landmine can blow up later things you'd like to do like e.g. accept investment or sell the company. Your competent legal advisers will generally tell you "Do not do things which cloud IP ownership, and in fact, spend material amounts of time and money to do things which uncloud IP ownership such as e.g. getting IP assignments from your employees."

The biggest flag I'd raise, as someone who also gets domain fever occasionally, is that buying a domain name is a very tiny amount of the effort involved in a new project.
In order for that argument to make sense, you'd have to make the logical leap that jumping out of the perfectly flyable airplane ceases his responsibility for operating the aircraft. That doesn't seem reasonable, and I doubt any judge would think so...
Deutsche Bahn is notorious for being late or having technical problems. It's like a running gag. Everytime I have to take a train in Germany, I make sure to have at least 1-2 hours between connecting trains/flights.

And yes, Japanese trains are crazily accurate. Not only are they (almost) always perfectly on time, they also stop exactly at the position that is indicated on the platform, so you can line up and wait right in front of the train door.
Please, no. A common problem in data warehousing is that a design with lots of foreign keys becomes slow to load. A standard solution is to move the checks for referential integrity elsewhere, then drop the foreign key constraint. This massively improves load performance.

This syntax change means that this solution can't be used because you have no idea what random queries out there might rely on the specific existence of a foreign key constraint for the definition of the query. Thereby meaning that if a foreign key constraint becomes a performance problem, we're stuck with it rather than having a solution.

Features have consequences. And I don't like the consequences of making business rules that are now explicit in the query, be instead implicit in the table design.
What's your justification for not rating this paper?

Having just read the Methods and Results sections, I see a reasonably well conducted study, which does suffer from some of the characteristic flaws of quantitative social sciences (an over-reliance on normality assumptions, a fetish for normality and sphericity tests and a somewhat credulous notion of analysing the residuals, and a hatred for visual displays) but the work itself is pretty solid (speaking as someone with actual domain experience in this field).

But I'd love to hear more about your problems with the paper, in the hope that I will learn something.
The question was whether a site was defaced, not how long it was defaced for.
I had to break this to you, but you can definitely find an affordable USB Floppy drive in Tokyo.
Looks like those guys only handle California. Seems like it's a CA specific law, unsure if available in other states
Or safeguard nuclear weapons. America's nukes got hacked literally the same month they proudly announced that they had modernized away from floppies. You'd think that'd be more newsworthy than a couple public housing applicants in Japan having their privacy invaded but nope. https://justine.lol/sectorlisp2/#footnote6
Right, so this is why the article tries to make the subtle distinction around "free" vs "open," not in the sense of the license, but in the spirit of the project.

Different licenses, but working at GitLab or working at GitHub probably feels pretty similar; you have a boss, there are probably sprints, you build features, fix bugs, and so on.

This is fundamentally different than working on a rust port of a GNU utility. This is the sense in which the article is using the word "free." This is idiosyncratic and doesn't align with its either of free's typical usages (free as in beer or free as in FOSS), but there really isn't a perfect word for what the article is talking about.
If there's one thing that I can absolutely rely upon, it's for VPN service providers to use any and every form of shady grey marketing sales technique that exists.
> If you have extra information about vertices you can use it to generate coordinates

Could you expand on this with an example. Or is there a reference or algo that I could look at. What do you mean by having extra info to generate coordinates. I am currently looking into graph drawing algorithms for a network viz problem and part of it involves placing nodes in certain places and I am interested to see if what you are saying is something I could use
> If you wanted to pay someone to fix some software, you didn't want a gift. You wanted a company.

> But if there is no company and someone gave you something anyway? Say thanks.

This is what grinds my gears. There is no market for a company that tries to provide a better version of the gift. The author completely glosses over the social contracts involved in gift giving. Contracts that software developers seem to be particularly immune to.

I think the party analogy is closer to the crux of it, because we all have a story about someone who threw and awful party or bought one pizza for people who helped them move and then retorts with something tone deaf like "you didn't have to come you know."

I didn't have to come, but I had other options that day, which I turned down to come to your stupid party. There was an opportunity cost associated with your gift. I'm not some dilettante who is going to crucify you for throwing a boring party. If that's the sort of people you attract then you've done yourself a favor by filtering them out. But an awful party is going to cost the group something.

(Also I wish the author had mentioned "Free as in Puppy" which is part of the situation they are describing.)
It was the absolute bare minimum change that they thought (correctly it seems) that they could get away with.

Dressing that up as progress hardly feels right. They could have solved all of this the first time around.
> I was able to use them to enumerate a bunch of storage, dig out more keys

That's unethical and likely criminal without explicit testing authorization (which it appears you didn't have).

I wonder if there are any examples of "researchers" being sued/prosecuted for stunts like this.
The tetanus vaccine has been used for over a century, it really is not comparable to a rushed vaccine like those against COVID.
I don't see no extra in either of these situations.

I am living in an apartment complex and I wouldn't mind if someone noticed my keys in my front door, opened that door, took a look and called out for me.

This cannot possibly register as breaking in?

I am not even talking about motive here. The actual event in my mind is clearly benign.
+1 ... needed at least as an option where FK is not declared
I takes less than two minutes to scan the front page to weed out Covid news. How is this a problem?
I'd cut a notch in the floppies so I could turn them over and use them. The back sides worked fine, too!
That's because it's a loop, so it's already read. Try appending a line to a running script instead.
Maybe I mixed up something and this is the wrong law:
The "Gesetz zur Modernisierung der Rechtsgrundlagen der Bundespolizei" was accepted by the Bundestag, but finally the Bundesrat did not agree.
https://dip.bundestag.de/vorgang/gesetz-zur-modernisierung-d...
From someone who used MomentJS back in the day, Day.js is such a nicer alternative! Moment was like 59k or something!
> You're confusing intelligence with wisdom. Intelligent people are likely to recognize a plan as foolish. They may or may not have the wisdom to avoid adopting it.

Well, to a first approximation wisdom is second-order intelligence, intelligence-about-intelligence, eh? Put another way, I see a continuum from mere cunning to intelligence to self-referential intelligence to sublime wisdom.

E.g. the Tao Te Ching is (IMO) one of the clearest and greatest written expositions of wisdom, consider chapter seventeen on leaders:

With the best kind of leader
when the work is complete
the people all say
"We did it ourselves."

Is that not describing hyper-intelligence? Leaders so smart and wise that they achieve their goals without anyone noticing them?

In the context we're talking about, the "we" is (again by definition) the smartest (or, if you will, the wisest) minority, at the far end of the bell curve. The idea that idiocracy should be fought with eugenics is itself a layer of the idiocracy, not something that these very intelligent people would credit.

> Knowledge doesn't necessarily change behavior -- there are many many smart people who've gotten addicted to harmful substances, for example.

I disagree, I think that knowledge (by definition) is that information that makes us capable of changing our behaviour at will. Intelligence is operational. Smart people that become addicts and can't stop are obviously less intelligent than those who avoid it in the first place or who find ways to stop, surely?
Mine either. Even putting aside media decay there is the mechanical failure (for 3.5"). For mechanical issues I was the go-to resource among friends and family, and when I worked at my Uni's help desk. I'd open them up and put the spring back together, or if need be take apart the drive to remove stuck disk, canabalize a blank disk-- toss out the media, keep the mechanical bits to slot in the old media.

Unfortunately stuck disks were often corrupted if mechanical failure occured during r/w. Sometimes I was still able to use recovery software to get data off, but plenty of times it was gone.
I started Empirical with the goal of "q like Haskell". The end result went in a radically different direction, but the guiding light has always been to have a statically typed language where tables and queries are a first-class operation.

The source code is publicly available under AGPL with the Commons Clause:

https://github.com/empirical-soft/empirical-lang
No, my concern is not that you can also specify the table name that explicitly states the name of both tables, it's that you have proposed a syntax where it is possible to leave off the explicit table name.

If you got rid of the syntax that uses the underlying "magic" of needing to know which table the foreign key points to, I'd be more amenable.
What is lacking in the current decentralized technologies? Mastodon has been around for half a decade, is actively supported, and is part of the Fediverse.

One of the difficulties that I have is that the decentralization proposals don't seem to offer anything over the existing solutions out there aside from the "I want to build it again."

Don't get me wrong - building it again is a legitimate reason. There are several services out there that I'd like to build again... though I also want to do it because I feel that there's a problem that the existing solution doesn't properly solve or has a less than optimal underlying model for my use case.

So, I return to the question of "what is this going to do better?" This can help lead to feature discovery of existing platforms (the "wait, it does that too?"), the addition of missing requirements to those existing platforms, or the beginnings of a paradigm shift for how one works with such services.

I want to know what's missing so that I can work on the making it better. I don't see what is currently missing in the current (distributed) solutions.
Because the text in quotes is not in the paper.
Older people should WFH and be careful. They shouldn’t burden younger generation for their disproportionate susceptibility to this disease.

I know what the next counter argument is: But they will get COVID from their children. Then I guess we should discourage older people from hanging out with anyone without testing and precautions.

Why aren’t we placing burden on older generation to protect themselves?
The sensitive documents were paid bare on the porch. He just walked up to the door and looked down.
The statement is made by the prosecutor though. They could be saying the truth. It is a very biased person’s word to go off though.
> And I tried to look at that from the point of view of a normal non-tech person who doesn't know about view source or curl

Safari read aloud would have blurted out the SSNs in this case. So even for a layman, the lock analogy falls short.

> Like what if I sent out a paper newsletter to all my neighbors but printed it on recycled paper that happen to have SSN info on the other side

Court would place responsability on the person who failed to inspect the paper used. There's a reason medical offices all have shredders; you can't reuse paper with patient's personal information on it.
When everything is multiplied by a fraction of a percent, the result is a bunch of small magnitudes overall. Like 12 times more likely to be hospitalized than fully vaccinated 12-34 year olds? What the latter's rate of hospitalization? Near 0, I assume?

This is all just weaponized statistics to generate fear. Or at least, vaccine sales.
> This blind boosterization is only demonstrating how the governments are still shitless scared of their medical system collapses with vulnerable groups, so that they want to boost anyone in sight, just to be on a safer side.

I mean yes, that's still sort of the point.

There's still probably about 10% of the population which is unvaccinated and unexposed. If they all wind up catching Omicron in the next 2-3 months (due to its ability to reinfect and ignore neutralizing antibodies to travel through the population to find those still-vulnerable hosts) then the fraction of them winding up in the hospital will be sufficient to knock over the hospital system again. We didn't have any excess capacity in our medical system when this started, and we have less now.

The population's tolerance for any sort of behavioral changes is low, and the unvaccinated aren't listening to anyone, so the real only remaining lever to pull is recommending boosters to try to provide some level of protection against disease and transmission over the next couple of months in order to flatten the curve yet again.

The modelling estimates that I've read though are that we're at about 90% of the population being exposed (depends somewhat widely on vaccination status and how hard the area was hit by Delta though), so we're just about done with the pandemic. Omicron should mostly finish the job that Delta started of finding all the holdouts and burning through all the dry wood in the population. In the meantime though that last 10% is enough to put the medical system under too much stress again.
Just last year we got documentation for a self-driving car project from a japanese OEM on a DVD. Hilarity ensued, I remember IT running around like a headless chicken trying to find a reader, then trying to buy one, then trying friends and family.
I didn't have the surgery - I wasn't willing to risk pain and anaesthesia just to please other people. There's a wide range of treatments for sleep apnoea nowadays (for instance: stop smoking, loose a bit of weight and learn to sleep with head tilted back) so I reckon I made the right decision.
I still have a functioning zip 250 drive. Step.
Polygon Admits the Network Was Hacked, Hacker Swiped 801,601 Matic Tokens
Interestingly, there was a Lyme vaccine in the late 90s that was pulled from the market:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2870557/

I think it’s a shame it was withdrawn, with a low effectiveness of 80% and even requiring annual boosters I’d view that as a great option if I lived somewhere with deer ticks. Lyme disease is scary.
As I've gotten older, my conclusion is all people are just people. Not all Doctors are best in class, some are shit. Not all politicians want to be there for the good of people, and maybe some do.

Overall everyone is on a spectrum of really extremes with most falling in the middle. It does seem the outliers are the ones that society props up and puts in the lime light. Idk, maybe I'm jaded but sometimes I look at this and sort of laugh that we have not blown this planet up yet.
But apparently not too early to force others to be the test group.
Ahh the last stage of loosing an argument. Personal insults. As I said, good luck.
I'm glad about this decision. Anyway removing all personal data from logging will be a huge project in large organizations. I'm thinking about IP addresses [1] which are often used to aggregate requests, debug, etc. Wireshark could become a hot tool to handle.

I didn't spend much time to think about it so I might be totally wrong but anonymizing IP addresses is probably not easy unless we give up aggregation. I think that anything that uniquely maps IP addresses also becomes personal data, e.g. cookies.

[1] https://www.whitecase.com/publications/alert/court-confirms-...
On iOS you have to use Safari if you want to use a content/ad blocker, which means I’m kind of stuck with it on my iPhone/iPad.

Then you bring macOS into play, and the way Safari on mobile syncs with Safari on desktop is really nice. Password sharing in particular is great, so you end up getting sucked in to Safari!
Definitely appreciate how careful Haskell is about the distinction: it's where I first started having these thoughts!
The additional justification there seems to ring true to me at least. If you had machine access, why not download the database from the “trusted” (compromised) machine? Why not extract the plain text passwords when they unlock their vault? How would it impact users who hadn’t logged into their accounts in years?

Malware doesn’t seem to fit to me.
It reduces for both, but Moderna's still high at that "9+" week mark because of the larger dose. It's only reasonable to assume that it will plummet fast as more weeks pass.
Notice also how the AstraZeneca vaccinated are disadvantaged yet again: they both have less protection in the first place and lose protection no matter what booster they get.

The conclusion is that the current boosters are essentially obsolete for infection control. When considering also the risk of myocarditis, vaccine mandates in colleges don't make sense.
But that "simple example" is like 95% plus of all my joins, where I'm joining two tables on a foreign key.
Was thinking the same thing, like theoretically it's better than encryption :D
As if data retention was the only thing the government had to decide on...
But the risk for children getting sick at school and bringing it back to their parents very much does not play out like the flu.

I also think it is irresponsible for this article to not mention what ages they’re actually talking about. At some point there is a crossover of the risk and it may be in the younger to mid teens.
> Edit: I source my claims yet people downvote me.

The actual contents of your sources don't back up the summaries you wrote.