skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>>Arms Export Control Act is a US law

Notice the first word - "Arms"

>> I don't like it one bit when I see US law reach into what should be sovereign countries.

The US govt also does not like it when people attempt to use US arms to kill US people, military or civilian.

So, yes, your nationality or location are irrelevant. If you are actively exporting US military goods or information without a license, you should expect that the US will do whatever it can, including asking favors of other nations, to find and imprison you.

In Other Words - do not f'n do that - or get a proper license and do it right (or make sure your smuggling is sufficiently profitable and you are sufficiently clever that you can live the rest of your live always positioned out of their reach - good luck).

It is not that hard to avoid shipping US Arms information & goods without a license.
ICANN makes a cut of every registration, not just the TLD application fee, or the quarterly registry fees.

ICANN has LOTS of problems, but it is actually incentivized to see TLDs in general availability.
This line of reasoning makes littke sense. The fact that certain things were incorrectly labeled as harmless should definitely inform how we go about determining id something is harmful. But the leap that we should expect harmless-seeming things to be harmful is unhelpful.

It's not far removed from flatearthers/qanon/911-truthers/moonhoax people defending theie stance by naming conspiracies thought false at the time but later revealed as true. Such events, and your speculations, are merely examples of the fact that we're sometimes wrong. Not that we should live our lives expecting that every accepted fact is wrong.
> you are still paying for other people's transactions

Ultimately, someone needs to eat the cost of that. For barter, you need to eat the cost of wrongly-advertised products. For paper money, you need to eat the cost of either actively rejecting fake paper money or accept that from time to time you will have fake and unredeemable paper money. For coins, same thing, you need to verify that the weight is indeed what's expected or accept that some fake coins will end up in your coffers. For electronic systems (regardless of the form), someone needs to run the computers that verifies that transaction A did indeed happen.

Some pretend that only centralised electronic systems are the only ones having costs, while in fact it's far from the truth. Ironically, the credit card game in the US where they jack up the merchant fees way, way up is a counterexample that capitalism is fostering a pro-consumer market (I'm not saying that capitalism per se is broken, it's just the fact that capitalist policies in this area doesn't work out great). In Europe where they implemented caps, "rewards" type credit cards have gone down, but regular credit card and debit card usage have gone up. This is because the "rewards" system isn't pro-consumer, it looks like pro-consumer but instead it actually benefits only those who massively use them to the detriment of others. Unlike "rewards" type credit cards, regular credit cards acts more like a tool that can make or break finances who uses them not correlated to the frequency of use, and debit cards are essentially plastic wallets.
Yep. At best, it's a black hole that pays money to the people lucky enough to have spare renewable capacity.

But the extra money is of no help to the climate. From an Iceland's point of view, the alternative to using excess geothermal to Bitcoin mine is (i) build smaller geothermal power plants which have even smaller carbon footprints to build/maintain or (ii) reduce the carbon footprint of other countries by courting their energy-intensive industries with low cost renewable electricity.
I'm usually a market proponent but bitcoin is a clear example of a market pathology.

It also clearly illustrates that government/regulators are incapable of acting quickly and efficiently, especially with interest groups involved, it's been over a year where it's plainly obvious that allowing institutional investments in BTC is a terrible idea.
> The article appears to attribute all accidental poisoning to fentanyl. That seems like an error.

I don't think it does. Sure, they throw out the 100k overdoses number at the end, which isn't specific to fentanyl, but the other numbers they cite are around 40k/year and a run rate of 64k/year by Deceber 2021.

Current data is here:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/drug-overdose-data.htm

It's about 62k deaths from synthetic opioids/year (excluding methadone) at the end of the series-- the vast majority of these are fentanyl. Plus a bunch of heroin deaths which are rapidly becoming "really fentanyl" deaths. And that's up to April, not December.
I was that way with my cardio, super boring to the point where I dreaded doing it. I got an iPad and started watching Family Guy - which is something I would never do outside of cardio because I don't have the time, but watching it while doing cardio seems okay because I don't feel like I am wasting anything.

Point being, if you have a guilty pleasure - stuffing it into exercise can make exercise not so boring, and your pleasure not so guilty. Two birds with one stone.
I disagree. Any communication system can be gamed, but the incentives can be distributed many different ways. If Twitter had shared blocklists for example, it would be easier for people to coordinate that kind of signaling. I think the originally intent was to have it as a platform for positive conversation (so you can favorite or share a tweet but not downvote it); however the structure of the platform meant that disagreement instead became expressed through snark, sarcasm, and pithy one-liners, to the detriment of any real discourse.
Care to share your evidence for the first paragraph?
I doubt there's an actuarial crisis brewing, for the simple reason that changes in life expectancy are a known risk which can be hedged. In the case of life insurance companies, the usual solution is to also sell life annuities; if insurance payouts go up, annuity payouts go down.
The problem is the age group they gave is very wide: 18-64. It would be helpful if they could sub-divide this to give better perspective to which age group is seeing the largest shift.
Dark body radiation is slow as shit and generally were gonna need a huge surface area to dissipate energy.

The mechanics of heat sinking in space is amazing and terrifying.
It's strange that this article doesn't actually mention the number of deaths for each year. They only mention the 40% increase for the younger demographic and the source says "the increase in deaths represents huge, huge numbers".

Let's assume deaths for older people haven't changed so the increase is entirely among the younger group.

x: younger
y: older

1.4x + y = 1350
x + y = 1319
0.4x = 31
x = 77.5 (younger 2020)
1.4x = 108.5 (younger 2021)
y = 1241.5 (older 2020 and 20201)

So assuming no increase in non-COVID deaths in the older group, we have 77.5 deaths in 2020 and 108.5 deaths in 2021 in the younger demographic. The actual numbers would be even lower since there have obviously been deaths in the older population.

Unless I am embarrassingly wrong on the calculation, these figures don't make sense. The source says this 40% increase figure is based on his life insurance customers who are “primarily working-age people 18 to 64”. This being just among his policy holders could explain the tiny absolute figures in the younger group. But where are the numbers for the older group coming from? His statement doesn't exclude the possibility of policies for ages < 18 and > 64. But if that's a small fraction of their customer base, it would imply a huge death rate for the older policy holders.

These numbers seem very fishy. Even if his older members are dying at astronomical rates and his numbers are correct, this is about as far from a representative sample as you could get and cannot be extrapolated to the general population. And I assume that's what the source means when he says "the increase in deaths represents huge, huge numbers."

By the way, I am not implying that there hasn't been an increase in non-COVID deaths among the young and old in these last two years. We know that's the because there is actually real data on this that the article could have included.
> the pull of actually doing something sedentary (I have multiple hobbies) is always stronger...

You need to make it an absolute red-line in your life. You wouldn't go a day without cleaning your teeth, and you wouldn't do another hobby instead of cleaning your teeth - make exercising like that.

I exercise every day, and I think that's actually a lot easier than exercising five times a week, allowing you to pick which days you exercise or not. You can't kid with yourself that you'll exercise tomorrow if your routine is to exercise every day. Sometimes I get back from work at 11pm and I'll still drag myself out for an hour's run.
There is a process that occurs when compound words are adopted. Initially the emphasis is on the second word but as the compound becomes more widely recognized the emphasis shifts to the first word. There is a name for this process though I have forgotten it. I don’t know if this process is different between American English and British English.
They don't want the liability of calling here a liar. But she's big on posting about 'vaccine deaths' and that the vaccine doesn't work against Delta and that people 65 and under don't need to worry about Covid.
She still has her congressional account. This is only her personal account.

edit to add: That said, she can say things on C-SPAN that would get the congressional account suspended too (see: Trump hopping accounts as they got suspended after the initial ban). And those things would be reported by people who can do so under the cover of reporting, so it's not like she has any less reach for the goofballery now.
I feel like lots of people forgot about 2007/08 and the impact on so many people around the world. It was truly painful and destructive. And very clearly people responsible got off free, with bonuses and some even ended up with jobs in the treasury.

A lot of people I know working in crypto saw their families hurt badly by that crises and will happily spend their lives trying to build something else (even if the odds are stacked against them). They protested at OWS and saw little political will for change.

Eventually we are left with the question: Do we just sit around voting every few years for another colour to be in charge, or do we try build something else, maybe it’ll work, maybe not, failure is ok we already live in a failed state, maybe all we need to do is threaten the existing political/financial institutions so that they do things differently or risk irrelevance. Who know. Trends and forces.
Some context: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/02/tesla-tsla-q4-2021-vehicle-d...

They handily beat delivery expectations.

“Tesla deliveries amounted to 308,600 electric cars in the fourth quarter and full-year deliveries amounted to 936,172 vehicles.”

“According to a consensus compiled by FactSet, Wall Street analysts had anticipated Tesla deliveries of 267,000 in the fourth quarter and 897,000 for all of 2021.”
The point isn't that Blockchains are or aren't more novel than a NoSQL database - it's that both are technologies and not a solution to a clearly defined problem.

Basic solution design says start with a problem that needs to be solved and understand the key requirements, and then decide what technology best matches the requirements. That might be blockchain, or it might be something else.

Asking 'what can we build as a blockchain' is poor engineering, lazy thought process and symptomatic of a technology bubble IMO.
Israeli study urges ‘rethink’ of Covid’s nature, indicates antioxidants may help
I'd like something that eases in reverse engineering websites. Maybe it could record the screen, JS console, and HTTP requests, and enable interactive playback of that.
I don't know if it covers your whole list, but github offers RSS feeds for a lot of functionality.
Why do you assume it's even interesting to them at all?

I make small games as a hobby, but I absolutely wouldn't want to work in game development professionally (I only ever did some light contract work before moving on to another field). I treat making my own games as artistic expression, just like recording songs or painting images - not everyone does these things, do they? Seems like it's just a particular kind of people. That said, I got hooked on initially only because writing my own game framework seemed interesting technically - and now that I have a technical base for my games mostly figured out I wouldn't want to do it again; there are much more interesting things in IT that I haven't explored yet or that need much more love and can actually make a bigger impact, so games stay as my artistic hobby that's mostly limited to game jams and I like it this way.
> It turns out that computing differences safely is actually quite hard for signed integers because of underflow, even in languages which support wrapping behavior for them, e.g INT_MAX - INT_MIN is still going to be incorrect even. There just isn’t a trivial way to do this safely

And that right there is a compelling reason not to use C or C++. If the language is so broken that it doesn't even let me subtract signed integers safely without risking shooting myself in the foot it is worse than useless in today's world because it gives me the illusion of programming in a high-level language when in fact I am not.

When I want to subtract x from y, I want to be able to write y-x and have the language worry about the details. That is the whole point of having a high level language, to abstract away the low-level details and let you write high-level abstractions without having to worry about introducing bugs that could imperil your entire enterprise. C and C++ don't do that.
It looks like it’s designed to fit under of the eves of the house while still providing head room and there is a down pipe on the house that the shed can hook into sharing the soakway.
Because you enjoy it! Physical labor(in moderation) is good for the body and soul. And unlike your SaaS infrastructure which will likely be gone in 2 years, your sheds may be a lifetime monument to an actual, real tangible accomplishment.
At least on their consumer facing site, they only seem to cover highways. https://roads.dot.ca.gov/
Yikes. For ages 18-45, since heart disease and cancer still lead overall but still yikes.

https://api.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/dec/23/facebook-p...
I noticed that selecting text on the article doesn't change colors. Probably not what you're referring to :)

(I enjoyed the article.)
Ah, let's get out the two wonderful arguments:

- Censorship bad, the state should regulate social media to not censor

- It's a private company, they can do whatever they want

Used however it fits by either political side.

Are we better than this?
>We have “once in 200 years” events happening it seems far more often than once in 200 years.

I just don't take it seriously anymore. Track 200 factors, 200 businesses, or 200 industries and you will see 1 event per year. Track all of the above and you will see 40,000 such events in a year.

More to the point, their actuarial model was probably wrong, not reality. Somewhere buried in their model were assumptions excluding black swan events
I'm not sure about the case at hand here, but one reason for hearing about these events more often than once every 200 years might be because they are uncorrelated.

E.g. a "once in 200 years drought" in California might happen at the same time as a "once in 200 years over-mortality event" in Indiana.

News would tend to report on these, so we see many of these even though they are rare.
This is a very strange comment from the article:

>37% of openers clicked a link (I think this is because Mailchimp’s links are black rather than blue and it’s easy to miss them)

IMO, if they aren't doing anything to customize the appearance of their emails then this experiment isn't worth much. It also makes it sound like the emails weren't completely identical, which makes click rate comparisons invalid.

Some of the bullets are helpful, but I wouldn't take this as any kind of gospel.
Keep in mind that "once in two hundred years" is (an estimate of) the probability of a given event. The more events you track, the more "once in two hundred years" events you'll see in any given year. If you're tracking (or reporting on) many events...

Think of the number of hundred year floods you see reported on each year. Then look at the number of floodplains that your news source would report on...
> My opinion changes on this…

It's a fine orthogonal discussion. There are several things worth considering in my mind:

* Perhaps these social media platforms are defectively designed

* Section 230 may need to be amended so that billion-dollar companies have more to hold them to account when things spread on their platforms

* CEOs could be criminally prosecuted when their companies lie (e.g., Facebook's ad revenue fraud in promoting FB video)

I think there are far better reasons to consider leaving social media than them suspending the personal account of a known provocateur who breaks rules all the time (her official government account is intact).
Almost exactly 10 years ago I picked up climbing/bouldering and I cannot recommend it enough. It's a fascinating sport combining elements of pure strength, coordination, technique and problem solving. Every route is unique and it's not uncommon to have vastly different approaches depending on your height, finger strength, flexibility, and many other parameters. Finding a solution that works for you can sometimes be more difficult than the climb itself. It's definitely not as boring and repetitive as weightlifting. I highly encourage everyone to try if they haven't yet.
I’m such a fan of this. Nicely done! I opted for a $3k Costco shed and went off grid with it even though it’s in my back yard: https://drodio.com/going-all-in-on-an-off-grid-workspace/

Off grid = No need for a permit but more importantly, a proof of concept that with starlink, this small office “shedquarters” could be placed anywhere in the world — say a beach in Costa Rica for example!
If social media is that important - and that isn't a decision anyone has actually voted on, it's just something people say now - then the government can build its own social media platform and regulate it as a utility. Having the government take over a private business because it decides the free speech rights of politicians should be more important than the free speech and association rights of everyone else is a bad idea.

This isn't like the FCC regulating the airwaves, the internet isn't a limited spectrum, and there's no reason to act as if the capacity to disseminate information over it is actually a scarce resource.
Region-Based Resource Management in Continuation-Passing Style
Perils and Pitfalls of Explainable AI: Strategies for Explaining
> but from a pure "number of deaths" perspective I think most people have a huge difficulty comprehending the severity of the pandemic.

Some 55 million people die each year. An extra 5 million is a big deal, yes, but there's almost 8 billion people on the planet. I think most people have a huge difficulty comprehending just how many humans there are on earth.
> The entire blockchain world is focused on building systems for global consensus, but global consensus is a goal that is fundamentally at odds with the goal of decentralization.

This whole article starts by missunderstanding logical and operational decentralization. Blockchain tech succeeds in allowing developers that don't know each other come to a consensus about how a financial system should work (logical centralization) and then operate an instance of that in a completely trust less, participatory environment (complete operational decentralization).

This is "works as intended" and explicitly good. It shows that consensus on what is right can be achieved over an anonymous internet.

Based on that, I'd say improbable that anything insightfull remains inside this article.
Poll: Americans increasingly justifying political violence
What an absolute boon for Marjorie Taylor Greene. Twitter is not a place where useful, meaningful conversation happens in the political space (especially by people like MTG) but she’ll be able to dine out on this ban for a long time. I expect it’ll be featured in every fundraising email she sends until something changes.

She’s not meaningfully censored, just like Trump wasn’t: every press release he sends gets coverage, he still sends out emails to his millions of followers just fine.
The interesting thing with Tesla is that they are supply limited at the moment. Demand for outpaces their supply for the foreseeable future.
Chernobyl could have been much, much worse. It was successfully contained.
Ideally, you would mine your Bitcoin in Iceland or Chile [1] with geothermal or hydro and buy corn from Iowa with it and the farmers there use it to buy power from the local windmill grid, so it's a battery in that sense.

[1] https://www.hydropower.org/country-profiles/chile
I don't think that is what downvotes are meant for, and AFAICT the intent is not defined anywhere. Here's a thread on the topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29564976
"it's hard to imagine the world without them"

There is soviet sci-fi novel that features a distopian society where people a killed before they become frail and become a burdain, and its considered an honour. They can't imagine the world otherwise.
How hard is it to write a test that checks every date in the next 5 years to make sure we know the function will not break without giving us sufficient time to publish a fix in the regular version pipeline?
Almost hit 1 million vehicles/year. Should easily hit 2 million/year with Austin and Berlin coming online next quarter (Austin is already validating the manufacturing lines). Go Tesla Go.
So you don't trust any data from any country in the world?
Banning maybe wouldn't eradicate it but it would collapse the price and reduce mining.
I'd guess war is usually excluded from insurance policies.

I wonder if the 1 in 200 year example wasn't communicated very well; it could be the actuaries view a long-lasting 10% increase to be the 1 in 200 year event; it does sound low for a single year stress.
I found the bit about whether the samples may have been altered in final transit interesting as well as the artificial crater created by landing—the rest, per my layman eye, is effectively reporting means, nothing interesting yet…
I commented on this elsewhere, but I think your point is fair. Many real-world processes follow power laws, but they are modeled as normal distributions. The issue with that is that a power law can "look like" a normal distribution, except it has fat tails, where you get these "once until the heat death of the universe" type events much more frequently.
>> But in January, the province of New Brunswick is widely expected to announce that the cluster of cases, first made public last year after a memo was leaked to the media, is the result of misdiagnoses, which have mistakenly grouped unrelated illnesses together.

If they want to say that, I think they are obligated to also provide the correct diagnosis.

I hate when people say "we know it's not X" without proof and without a specific alternative.
I’ve encountered many of these as well and have always assumed this was somehow the result of trying to make everything “just work”, wherein providing detailed user feedback or error messages would be some kind of admission that it hadn’t “just worked”.
Or New Zealanders: "noyy"
How do you legalize money laundering?