skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"... Facebook has made their newer pages fiendishly difficult to scrape."

This has not been my experience. It is still as easy as ever using the mobile sites.

However I suspect one person's notion of "scraping" is not always the same as another's. I prefer to work on the command line, in textmode. Thus when I check Facebook I want text-only, no graphics. First I extract the all the story.php URLs and sort them by date. Then I retrieve the contents stored at these URLS and dump into a text-only format so I can read through comments. If there is something that looks interesting I can save the story URL and check out the photos later on a computer that has graphics layer loaded.

TBH, with Facebook I mainly just check messages and notifications. Saving story URLs in chronological order is useful for me because it makes it easy to go back and find items from the past. But if I were really serious about monitoring a "feed" I can create one myself, better than Facebook's, by retrieving the profile page of each friend and extracting story URLs from their source instead of relying on Facebook's manipulative algorithms that deliberately hide stories and re-order what they do show, non-chronologically, in a way that suits Facebook's interests over the user's.

I do not use any fancy software, just a local TLS proxy, netcat (or equivalent) and ubiquitous base userland UNIX text processing utilities. I use a text-only browser (not lynx) for reading HTML and a pager (less) for reading formatted text.

I use the m.facebook.com or mbasic.facebook.com sites, not www.facebook.com because the site on the www subdomain uses GraphQL instead of hyperlinks. Not to mention the mbasic subdomain has no ads.

The way websites use GraphQL instead of simple hyperlinks is unnecessarily complex, reminiscient of a Rube Goldberg cartoon.
I just don’t see the harm of being supportive of the scientists who are courageous enough to to investigate/research the origins in a way that doesn’t necessarily exclude a lab leak origin, or in general being open to the idea.
You already can disable automatic updating, but this also affects intelligence data.

We are working on better support for this use case.
I don't want to underestimate the skill of being good at LC. In the past couple of months, I have solved about 200+ LC and I have been interviewing vigorously too. Its a tough skill for sure but beyond a certain point, you start seeing patterns you have applied before and once you are in the flow, it becomes slightly easier.

I only wish the real Software Engineering job was as simple as being good at LC, because it clearly isn't.
Before anyone gets too excited, this is a paper from a third party (six authors from various state funded science and technology institutes in Beijing.)

It is being hosted on the NIH’s mirror of an Elsevier journal. Specifically, the URL decodes as:

* PMC: PubMed Central, an information portal hosted by

* NCBI: The National Centre for Biotechnology Information, part of

* NLM: The National Library of Medicine, brought to you by the letters

* NIH: The United States National Institutes (more than 1!) for or-is-it-of Health. (The hyphenated part is silent.)

As for the paper itself, it’s just too bad that their Data Availability Statement is basically “yes” without linking to it. Googling the file names in their R scripts found them easily enough.
A large number of those are not reading the title of the submission correctly, by the looks of it, skipping the "Omicron" bit of it
I don’t think anybody is complaining about the initial barrier to entry. These interviews would be more like asking a surgeon who’s worked for 10 years in one hospital to pass an anatomy multiple choice quiz when transferring to another hospital
I do not believe the hard data you are looking for exist for real.
Interviewing is assessing what value an individual will bring to a project. Ideally we want this assessment to not depend on the interviewer and as a unidimensional real number so it's easy to do comparisons.

But the reality is:

- future performance depends on the team (and more largely on everything else in the business) and that varries unpredictably and is usually not part of the evaluation anyway.

- future performance also depends on how the project itself is going to evolve, which is hard enough to evaluate in itself (not just the timeline but oftentimes the involved technologies)

- assessing the value of anything is its whole can of worms (it's intrinsically subjective, you can't measure a physical "value" in SI units)

I prefer data over opinions like everyone else, but this may be a case where it is eventually safer to rely on as many as possible individual opinions and weight them, with just the amount of process in place to avoid common biases? (friends-of-friends, judging on look, country of origin, gender, ...)

I've seen big companies that takes hiring very seriously rely equaly on some preset metrics (based on prewritten questions thus easily gamed) as well as the gut feeling of several interviewers who are free to ask whatever additional questions, and I think it's the correct approach.
How many drug overdoses and suicides are directly related to covid and its impact on society, and by extension our failure to stop it before it became unstoppable?
TL;DR No.
Alternating between single clause sentences and sentences with two clauses, as the author of the article mostly does, is also not an example of good writing. It is perfectly efficient, just not particularly good. The clauses themselves should patter, creating ventricles that, like the heart, comprise contrasting units through which the gist is substantiated. A lot of the reader's cognitive overhead can be offloaded to the interest of a sentence's construction.
Try Kagi or Neeva. Both have far better results than google and support bangs as well as extensive customisation.
Instead of leaving the job, just try doing it less well for a while.

If your other options are unemployment or destruction, then why not keep getting paid while you spend more time focused on yourself?

Do you work from home? Set a timer and work 25% - 50% fewer hours each day than you do now. Figure out if devoting as much time and energy as you do actually improves your output. I highly doubt it does. You're probably destroying yourself for 5% more productivity in the end. Work much less and I doubt you will see your output drop significantly.

Spend the extra time each day exercising, cooking, and socializing. Start a hobby that involves socializing like playing music or sports.

After that, if you feel better, reevaluate whether you want to leave or stay.
Oh no, now who will buy East Texas their ice skating rinks and sports stadiums?
Oooh yes, thanks you're right. That, would make for tricky shadow fd accounting... Ugh.
Oh please, many events are a "thing" without being likely at all or likely enough to force a mass, obligatory response to them. Every year in the world a small number of children also die of the flu, this hasn't been used to justify forced, mandatory flu vaccinations on a national and global scale. It's very reasonable to argue against these things without self important response like yours. Furthermore, look at the WHO's list of known cases of vaccine side effects. By your own logic of things simply being a "thing" as justification for strict measures, plenty of argument could be made specifically against olbigatory vaccinations, especially of young people.
Here's most last HN discussions about most of the articles in the "Things I won't work with" series. Note that the content was published at least on three different domains in the last years (science.org, sciencemag.org, corante.com):

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
I do, and thank you. The amount of fluff in pop-sci books is absolutely killing me.

Does anybody ever really read them cover to cover? Does anybody retain all these words?

For me the volume of filler in most books is overwhelming.
Excellent content, this stuff is life-changing. I haven't read Atomic Habits but it was on my reading list. It appears based on other comments that the full read is mostly unnecessary compared to a summary like this or the one at the end of the book.

However, it's hard to learn without spending time committing content to memory, which reading a book does well due to the apparent large amount of filler content. Perhaps re-reading a summary multiple times can have a similar effect.
The goal of stuff like WINE and Proton is exactly to enable using games on a platform whose creators never intended to support.
I’ve had thoughts on what’s been causing this, and turns out there’s a hot-take that’s well articulated by a professor under the concept of ‘Mass formation’.

Decent summary, you can find him discussing it on YouTube:

https://medium.com/@dina.osman/what-is-mass-formation-d2ac63...

The gist of it is what I’ve mostly concluded over the last few years. There’s a pathological level of frustration/anxiety/apathy that is leading to all of this at a mass scale (which makes sense considering we are virtualizing lives at scale, and I use the word virtual in it’s most abstract sense, not necessarily digital). We all have a very abstract identity that is unfulfilling because at the levels of abstraction we are at virtually is not relatable or realistic. I know, it’s a serious hot-take, but this is roughly where my line of thinking is at now days. The outcome of all of this is, well, people now bask in the cacophony of whatever life even is at this point (especially because there’s not a chance in hell any of us will be able de-scale the world (tech/vanity/capitalism/etc)).

Quoting the most important part:

… if ANY narrative is distributed through the mass media identifying an Object of the anxiety and providing a strategy to deal with that Object, mass formation can thrive. Since it provides the masses a sudden connection to a heroic struggle allowing them to meet their needs and provides them with a release — giving them a new social bond and meaning that has been lacking.

There you have it, people are literally bonding via this constant hysterical back and forth.
Easy to come across the wrong way online where if you said the same thing in person with tone and emphasis it may be ok.

I’ve fallen for that trap a few times and so now I even delete comments before posting as if I think “maybe my intent wont come across correctly here”.

I think the problem with the comment (the one starting FWIW) is it comes off a bit sarcastic even if you didn’t mean that.
This is plausible sounding but wrong, in fact it's in Alina Chan's top 10 myths:

"(4) (FALSE) Wuhan is a place where SARS transmits from animals into humans frequently. That's why the Wuhan Institute of Virology was built there.

Actually, Wuhan is ~1000km away from SARS spillover zones. Its human population was even used as a negative (no SARS) control group."

https://twitter.com/ayjchan/status/1394327680456220672?s=12
Unsafe for vegans but so delicious. Figs here in Oz have been a revelation to me, brought up on dried figs, fresh ones on tap...

I happen to like them all ways, especially grilled, finished either with or without sugar by a blowtorch, or with goats curd and prosciutto, or simply torn through salad or on my brekkie cereal.

Keep you regular too...
I was a very outspoken atheist myself for many years, an officer in my college's chapter of the secular student alliance back in the early 2010's. I was raised going to a mainline church sometimes, but it didn't do anything for me. I never had a grudge against Christianity or anything, but I grouped Jesus and God in with Santa at some point as a teenager and never really thought further about it.

So I didn't think I could be converted either. I thought "Good without God" was how I could live, and things would eventually work out if I could just tune my environment or my brain chemistry accordingly. But I eventually found myself backed into a corner when I realized I had no way to reconcile meaning, joy, or goodness with myself or life as I could understand it. I wasn't good at all, if I was honest with myself. I felt exactly as you described, without value in a world that had no value.

There's a lot to be said to tell the whole story, but to be anticlimactic, my solution was indeed Jesus. Considering his words, his claims, his promises, and daring to believe they applied to me, that's how I found hope, and a reason to live life as though I do have some value. How I got to that point from atheist, that required a long process of addressing a number of assumptions and biases before choosing to believe. The whole "church" part came after, and was more of the icing on the cake.

BTW, if you're curious at all, here's what I was reading tonight that actually got me thinking on the topic of "poverty of spirit" and what it means to Christianity in particular (starts at section I.1 - https://www.ccel.org/ccel/wesley/sermons.v.xxi.html )

I gotta go to bed, but if you wanna chat more or hear the whole story sometime let me know. I can email that address you posted in the other comment. Wishing you the best.
I've wondered this too, sometimes I land on one without ads and its a very high turnover, it's almost like there's a college course out there with the final project: "scrape and clone stackoverflow, grades will be proportional to web traffic you capture"
My dad used to be a chemical engineer and one evening his "what did you do at work today?" story started with a chucle: "So one of the lab guys was doing this thing where you boil concentrated hydrochloric acid in a glass reactor and add cynanide.....".

Suffice to say it ended up on the evening news because a residential area had to be evacuated.
Centralized in this instance means one provider controlling the platform. GitHub is owned and controlled by Microsoft and therefore has a descent amount of vendor lock-in. Email is not controlled by a single provider and if configured correctly, you can easily migrate email between various providers or host it yourself. Email uses open standards.

A mailing list is centralized, but much less so than GitHub and is secondary in this instance.
The Ontario government also reports many more COVID-19 cases (per 100,000 for each vaccination status) among the vaccinated than unvaccinated:

All Ontario: Case numbers and spread https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data/case-numbers-and-spread

Rate per 100,000 (12/31/21, 7-day average):

Fully vaccinated: 79.86

Partially vaccinated: 63.77

Unvaccinated: 59.75
451: Unavailable due to legal reasons

We recognize you are attempting to access this website from a country belonging to the European Economic Area (EEA) including the EU which enforces the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and therefore access cannot be granted at this time. For any issues, contact info@franklinnews.org or call (847) 497-5230.

MEH.
Fiction books are something to savor. Nonfiction books are a necessary evil needed to get to an understanding.

I don’t need 30 made up fake sounding anecdotes to understand a principle. I can tell when someone is making shit up to prove a preconceived conclusion and to sound more convincing. Also I’m a slow reader and get annoyed easily.

I find interviews with writers pitching their book a good example of acceptable information density.
It's available for iOS as well.
I see a lot of people talking about their bipolar diagnosis that has no or very little manic component. Why call it bipolar then? It's just cyclical major depression.
> Every machine can do web browsing too.

Tell that to most of my browsers which refuse to display any Gitlab content (they only ever show the side bar).
Trump didn't dub it the China virus, the mainstream media did, as was the fashion of the time, that is to name it after where it originated.
Trump didn't really start playing it up, until China blamed the USA for the virus.
While I think we could have done a better job in protecting our elders, instead of shutting everything down, I'm not sure you can really blame Trump for extra days as USA is basically right along with the rest of the world. Reality was, there wasn't much we could have done.
And blaming the president for making this political seems odd. The mainstream media pushed the narrative that it could NOT have been a lab leak after a republican suggested it was. And scientists were afraid to suggest a different possibility
I didn't say it was a bioweapon, just that it very well could have originated in a lab. From your article:

> The two main hypotheses — that the virus jumped from animals to humans in a natural process, or that it escaped from a research laboratory in China — remain on the table, ODNI said. Both theories are plausible, the agencies concluded.
A really great diet. However sometimes you get a bit of a H Pylori issue and it rarely gets caught unless you have a good Dr that will send you to a gastro.

Whenever I am feeling like shit for a while my fingernails become weak and bendy that's when I know I need to consume differently.
Besides loading resources which was mentioned by sibling comment, some websites still rely on submiting forms cross origin, even with cookies! XMLHTTPRequest is not required. iframes exist, so the user doesn't even have to see their browser make those requests.
While it may be irrelevant to how we address this current pandemic, whether covid came from a lab leak holds relevance because of the possibility of future lab leaks.
You can't communicate experience like you can communicate theory, if you could then it would be called theory instead of practice. Theory is great since it is something we can communicate, whatever instincts you developed working on a big codebase can't be communicated. Some people thing you can, there are lots of talks about these things etc, but in practice you can't teach practice, you need to experience it yourself. And if you distil practice into pure enough droplets of wisdom that others can recognize as the truth without being your in-group, guess what, that is what we call theory!
Relevant Tom Scott video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5wpm-gesOY
Corman Lisp maintainer says there are few IDEs for Common Lisp. Thoughts?
All I can say is that my experience on macOS is completely different from yours. Invasive MDM software from employers not withstanding, I’ve never had major beachball problems that have persisted for days, I’ve never even hated the bad keyboards that much.

I’ve been using Macs since 1984. They’re not perfect, but throughout that time, they have demonstrated over and over again that they are the least horrible hardware/os platform that I have used. Some years are better, but all years have been better on macOS than any other hardware platform I have experience with.
I am no expert by any means, but just skimming to your problem description I see two "pain points":
1. Your job - no fulfillment - just money.
2. Your spouse - no trust - lack of compassion.

For the looks of it you are stuck in two places of frustration. Find adequate therapy, speak with people who you trust and have respect for. If after this solution is not present - exclude the two points of frustration from your life and restart, rebuild and enjoy life. Wish you luck.
This is why we can make GET and POST requests without an OPTIONS preflight...

Apparently, since developers should already have been protecting against cross-origin requests on GET and POST via other means (CSRF tokens), there was no need for the additional preflight protection.

They only added preflights to requests that browsers couldn't make previously.

Source: https://stackoverflow.com/a/39736697/114855
I worked on ringpop and the associated tech at Uber, though I wasn’t part of the original design & implementation. This isn’t the origin story I remember. My recollection is that ringpop was inspired by the SWIM paper, Hashicorp’s Serf, and Microsoft Orleans, and was part of an overall desire to move away from Chubby-like CP systems to AP designs.
I imagine the 2022 issue was even mentioned in the original ticket by the dev. Though the dev is probably long gone and the ticket long forgotten. I know I’ve mentioned “this approach will break if the following assumptions change” on tickets.
I am not asking sarcastic questions, and my comment is not intended as any kind of attack. Please read my tone as 100% earnest, just confused. And I hope the top poster will accept my apology that I didn’t phrase my comment to make that clear enough.

The tone of voice in the top-level comment reads to me as extremely aggressive/aggrieved, like they had been personally wronged by someone (not just a victim of a tragic accident). But I don’t understand where that anger is being directed toward, or what precisely they are trying to say, so I am asking for clarification. Are they upset at doctors? the hospital? genetic test providers? themselves? Or perhaps I was grossly misreading the intended tone.

I am not judging or criticizing them: having a chronically sick kid must be a horrible traumatic experience, with no easy answers. I am sure I would be incredibly upset too, under the circumstances. I am just trying to figure out what they are trying to say.

* * *

Separately, I’m sorry for the “It sounds like your specific problem” part, which is phrased insensitively; clearly they have much bigger problems than this one. I didn’t mean it that way. I’m just trying to point out that taking a genetic test with zero false positives wouldn’t have made any difference to the top-level poster.
The problem with this argument is that in a complex field, a layperson does not have the baseline expertise needed to evaluate cases made by experts. Try reading a novel mathematical proof published in a journal paper and see if you can weigh the available evidence and make an assessment as to whether it's correct. The only reasonable way to do so as a layperson would be to acknowledge the fact that the proof was peer reviewed by experts, and so is likely correct, and assume that to be the case unless it is later disproven by experts. (A fact you'd also be unable to independently verify.)

In a field like mathematics it's obvious that we don't have the necessary tools to evaluate expert evidence, but the same is true in most complex fields, of which epidemiology is certainly one. The experts of course won't always be right, and their best guesses will evolve as more evidence is gathered, as they should. But asking people without specific domain knowledge, even intelligent generalists, to independently weight expert evidence without resorting to trust of experts is likely to result in less informed decision making, not more.
It’s quite likely that the timing of 25-44 yo deaths from Covid has a much wider distribution than older age groups.

It seems reasonable to speculate that younger people are able survive longer with respiratory problems and probably have less co-morbidities.
Fun fact: Garcia spent his entire career before taking the Dallas role was in San Jose (CA), serving as Chief from 2016.
What was the source doesn't matter for fighting COVID but certainly matters for people who work on gain of function research. If the virus leaked from the laboratory then it will be a strong argument against funding this kind of science.
I almost always get better results from Bing, and while they’re not good they’re not obviously getting worse (barring ahem porn queries which Bing has consistently been better at and still is, you just frequently need to add “porn” to the query now).
I would imagine there's a pretty strong correlation between job loss and a crashing stock market. I wonder how the opportunity cost of keeping an e fund in accounts that won't lose principle compares to the downsides of potentially having to sell off stock after a crash.

Of course that's assuming you're able to sell your stock and transfer the funds in a timely fashion. Maybe things have changed in 2022, but I know plenty of people (especially using Robinhood as their brokerage) who had liquidity issues when trying to sell shares in 2021.