skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> From where do you derive the need to protect people from the total consequences of their failure or misfortune by forcing the collective to bear the burden?

I'll answer this with a question: you said elsewhere that its unethical to compel doctors to treat a patient. Let's assume that's the case. What happens when you are robbed by someone, shot, and your wallet is stolen, you even pass out from the shock and blood loss.

A bystander calls an ambulance. Then what? The ambulance service, the hospital (and the doctor) have no idea if you can pay for their services. Let's assume you can, you have fantastic insurance. What is the right way to resolve this situation? It seems to me your answer is that the hospital should have every right to refuse to serve people without identification (and in fact this is probably in the hospitals best interest, from a pure ROI perspective).

So do we throw our hands in the air and let some people who, by any account, don't deserve to die (they're insured, if their wallet wasn't stolen, there'd be no issue at all!) through no fault of their own, or do we protect people from the total consequence of their misfortune by providing some kind of guardrail?

A more general answer is that people, in aggregate, don't like the instability that comes from a lack of welfare state. If you provide absolutely no welfare state, and I lose my job and can't find a new one, it is very likely that the best thing for me to do is to steal from someone. And people generally speaking dislike that because unlike robbery from the government, which involves paperwork and court rooms, that kind of robbery really actually involves guns. And people seem to find suits and paperwork to be less force than guns.

So you pick your poison: a democratically controlled nonviolent robbery that you can influence and plan for, or a stochastic violent robbery that you can't control at all. Personally, I find paperwork to be less violent than a gun, but you have weird ideas about what constitutes violence, so I'm curious what you'll say.

> What's the problem with strictly voluntary, at-will, consensual interaction between people?

It doesn't exist. Is coercion voluntary? If it's violent to threaten someone's life by holding a gun to their head, why isn't it violent to withholding food they need to live (or the money they need to buy the food they need to live, or the healthcare they need to live, or the money they need for that healthcare)?
This is usually done automatically in Postgres in the background by the Autovacuum process. For high volumes of traffic or certain usage patterns you might have to tune the Autovacuum settings, or it might not be able to keep up with the more conservative default settings.

One issue is that there is some counter-intuitive behaviour here, if you see the Autovacuum taking significant resources, the worst thing you can do is to let it run less often. You actually need to make it more aggressive in that kind of situation, and/or fix your usage pattern or add more resources.

If a manual ANALYZE is necessary, this can often indicate a misconfiguration of Postgres, e.g. someone reducing the Autovacuum frequency or disabling it entirely. Postgres also got a lot better at this, so it also matters how old your Postgres version is.
The end goal of a software project isnt just to write some code it's to write an effective application that's valuable to the business (aka it's supportable and iterable and all that businessy stuff). It's very easy to write some code in Python but very hard to know that it's correct without huge amounts of testing. And if you have changes happening on an application it's much harder to know your change hasn't affected something else when your main route is writing huge amounts of tests (that can also break).

A language that falls over at compile time when it's passing wrong types means your potential avenues for mistakes are already hugely narrowed down to business logic. If your application functionality is kept on course more then you're less likely to descend into chaos and find yourself paying a load of expensive Devs to chase down stupid bugs and debugging to keep things working rather than doing valuable "new" work.

Another benefit is if you can refactor with confidence you can expand functionality easier and not find yourself written into a corner by prohibitive Dev time costs.
And so?

Startpage is just Google.

If you dislike being tracked by Google and Bing it is still better to use DDG or Startpage.
We solved the initial exponential growths that were threatening to or did overload the medical system. It was the only possible solution.

Edited to add: furthermore, in most countries deaths not related to Covid fell drastically compared to previous years, including suicides. Yes, the fallout medium-long term is still to come, but you can't deny that it did stop the immediate very dangerous impact. In countries like Italy and France military hospitals had to be deployed, and many in intensive care were transferred to neighbouring countries. You can't just dismiss this and say people stuck alone at home had it worse than those on the ventilators.
I haven't had a chance to use mysql 8 yet (which I believe narrows the gap between postgres and mysql), but whenever I'm interacting with databases on mysql 5.7 I miss features like common table expressions from postgres
Designing APIs Book
>Does anyone happen to know if there is a community-maintained dictionary somewhere?

I had the same question and saw KOReader[0] has the GNU dictionary [1] that is creative commons licensed. Oddly I don't think it is in git or accepting PRs or patches: they just say to email suggestions.

As an aside, I've had trouble trying to find a capable, free, Linux system friendly English-Esperanto dictionary for ages. It seems weird that there isn't an open source translated dictionary umbrella project.

[0] https://github.com/koreader/koreader
[1] https://gcide.gnu.org.ua/0
If you want to use jq but with Python syntax, I wrote pq:

https://github.com/dvolk/pq
I have witnessed quite a bit of cross team pollination in my time.
I share the view that end-to-end encryption (E2EE) provides strong security guarantees only if the clients used to exchange data/messages are fully under control of the end users. All it would take Signal to undermine their E2EE is a single update of their app that exfiltrates all chat messages (not saying that I think they would ever do that). Same story for WhatsApp. In my opinion, a necessary ingredient for secure E2EE is that you don't have to trust the central infrastructure operator, at all. And that just doesn't work if the provider controls the client software.

Another problem is that almost all E2EE messengers can still be trivially man-in-the-middled (MITM) by the infrastructure operator, as there's no out-of-band verification of keys. The central server can just replace client keys in transit and decrypt all the data exchanged between two clients. This can only be detected by clients comparing their public keys over an out-of-band channel. Most E2EE messengers simply disregard this risk [1], while some provide functionality for out-of-band key verification (e.g. Threema). Always struck me as a bit odd as it's like using self-signed TLS certificates for your server, which leads to a security exception in all modern browsers but somehow seems to be fine for E2EE messengers. Keybase tried to solve this problem but unfortunately they got acquired by Zoom so I doubt they will continue working on that.

[1] https://signal.org/blog/there-is-no-whatsapp-backdoor/
> Apple cares more about pressuring people into their walled garden than actually serving customers well and encouraging a vibrant market of products using cross compatible messaging protocols.

Apple has already been serving their customers with Messages. A free E2EE messaging system usable across all their devices. Your "Apple walled garden" complaint rings a bit hollow considering there's tons of messaging apps on iOS. Why are you not complaining WhatsApp or Signal doesn't make their infrastructure cross compatible for Apple to use? You know, vibrancy and all.

Messaging platforms (Apple included) don't want to be interoperable. It slows down feature development and partners in development may be at cross purposes. It also means opening expensive infrastructure to use by third parties. The rollout of RCS has been an object example of those issues.

But no, it must be Apple bad. Walled garden! WHARGARBL!
> These critiques are usually unmoored to anything actually happening in the blockchain space

Then call it just that: blockchain space.

Why web3?

I think because the 'web' part of web3 needs to be attached to this idea of blockchain and distributed ledger to give it a sense of fairness and legitimacy.

I'm not saying blockchain or distributed ledgers are bad, I know way too little about that to judge it accurately.

It's just that the name 'web3' irks me a lot. Maybe it has something to do with the 'web 2.0' that promised golden mountains, but eventually just F'd everybody in the A.

Just add another number to the name and all the sh1t is forgotten, it seems. Here's a blank screen for you all, please start painting the same pictures.
Sure, I mainly meant that if someone posts their minimalist stack and it’s a mattress on the floor and a cardboard box with a old ugly computer on it, they’ll most likely get made fun of at best even if they’re actually embodying more of the tenets of “minimalism”. Basically it’s just a classier version of consumerism unless you do it in a very unsexy way
Most of this article is about the same solutions that are always proposed (wake me up when people actually use them and they actually solve the problem at hand.)

To me the most damning part of the article is:

> These critiques are usually unmoored to anything actually happening in the blockchain space, and unaware of the technological development and cultural vision. This bifurcation is extremely harmful for the health of the emerging technologies: these technologies are not going to go away, so if your only answer is dismissal and anger, you’re actually just ceding the power to decide what these technologies will look like in our world. This pattern of discourse creates a negative-sum feedback loop that does a disservice to all.

Quite frankly, if web3 really was all its cracked up to be, enthusiasists wouldn't be so offended anytime someone "didn't get it". After all, if it really was gold, they would be too busy making cool things and the results would speak for themselves.

As the author says, those who ignore something ceede power to those who show up. But why would the people who show up be so offended that people are giving them power? If it was actually valuable wouldn't they want it for themselves?

Every time someone criticizes cryptocurrency, its always the same refrain: people are wrong to be negative. All the bad vibes will turn your heart black, etc. That's what cults say, not what people with viable tech say.
Just wanted to send you a virtual hug! You are amazing!
Apparently, majority of world is ruled by far left. Otherwise we can't explain lockdowna in other countries.
Very useful table. But it would be very helpful if the table of test results were furnished with a glossary that:

(a) explains the function and workings of each item under test, and,

(b) also explain how said item is a threat to one's privacy, etc. (how it leaks one's info).

This ought to be important,
for many users wouldn't have a clue what some or even many of those functions do and it wouldn't be expected as such that they do (given that the internal working of browsers is a specialized business).

Second, I tried to send feedback to this effect but could not as I'm not a Twitter user (it seemingly being the only of sending feedback to PrivacyTests.org).

It is highly annoying that such groups don't have alternative more neutral methods of feeding back such information, especially so in this instance given PrivacyTests.org's stance on privacy (that being its primary reason for being).

Perhaps someone with a Twitter account who thinks similarly could send them my feedback and or send them this link.

Edit: Re results, I was rather surprised to see how poorly Tor featured in the tracking department, it failing every test. I'd have thought tracking failures would be deemed a significant security risk.

Would someone like to comment on this? (BTW, I've little need of Tor's security, although I've used it on occasions, thus I can't claim I'm very familiar with it.)
I face the same problem as our company is heavily using the atlassian products (Jira/Confluence…)

I once found a plug-in that did almost the same, allowed Confluence to read and render markdown files directly from (private) GitHub repos thus allowing me to get the best of both worlds!

- docs stays in the repo (thus is much more likely to actually get updated)

- docs get exposed in Confluence (thus is accessible for the business folks that does not do git)

- docs are easy to update (as you can use any editor: vi, emacs, IDE’s etc)

So conceptually the same as you’re solution ;-)

Unfortunately we did not implement the plug-in as we have too many eggs in the Jira basket (+1.000 users) which have the unfortunate side effect that the licensing price is derived from the +1000 users even though only the much lower number of devs would use it.

That is one repeated problem we face in the Atlassian stack (well a source of their income…)- even a seemingly cheap plugin (extension or whatever they’re called) ends up in the person suggesting how to ‘work smart/not hard’ having to find the funding typically a two digit thousands of € or year (thus I never bother with that anymore :(
That's a great point, Makes me wonder what long term projects my own government have. Does anyone know of other inspiring long term projects in progress? The ITER fusion project is one that comes to mind.
I have been arguing with people on Blind about this. Not actually fraud!

However, you are likely in violation of employment contract. Where I currently work, and my previous job, you could actually find a way through the official channels by just not being totally accurate about the other job(s).

If challenged it comes down to the details. Moonlighting is a perfectly normal activity for driven people (I did tech blogging for a previous employer once while employed by someone else, so I have navigated this system at one company), and by structuring your disclosures very strategically you could likely avoid any legal impacts.

All that said, working multiple jobs like that will definitely get you fired if you are found out. Even in a state with strong worker protections.

And again, all that said: Don't do this.
> Every time someone criticizes cryptocurrency, its always the same refrain: people are wrong to be negative. All the bad vibes will turn your heart black, etc. That's what cults say, not what people with viable tech say.

True. In reality the "bad vibes" are just folks trying to find a consensus on where this technology belongs- if you can't communicate the benefits of the tech in a convincing way, it's not everyone else's fault.
So its a really fancy way to make an immutable public back up?

I mean i guess, but you could also just back up your subscribers list.
My take is that notation allows to squeeze more into our limited "thinking memory". It's easy to remember "integral of that plus integral of this equals something", but it's nearly impossible to memorize the expanded definition that uses only basic terms. I guess, good notation is like a box: it lets us move a bunch of things at once.
Sony to Launch Company to Enter EV Market
One criticism of Linux that I've never heard before is too few music players ;)

Whichever music player didn't work for you here, there are dozens of others that might.
Hmm it's still on IA for me
You're not the only one and more level-headed psychologists have warned about this pretty early last year. People are bombarded with horror news about ever rising case numbers of this 'killer virus' on a daily basis. Read up on mass psychosis and mass psychology in general. There are many documented cases in the past, but this time with the internet and our ever more connected world we seem to have a case gone global. The media plays a major part, just look at how case numbers are reported without putting them in relation to the total number of tests done. It's reported when water is tested positive for sars-cov-2, but then negative aspects of the panic are downplayed by for example reporting the increase in suicide attempts as 22.3% + 39.1% in this article. As we know from surveys the average reader will not understand this adds up to around 70% more suicide attempts since the start of the pandemic, because most people aren't good at math.

I'm certain if people were bombarded with touching individual case reports of people, including children, suffering under the measures and not just under the effects of the virus, public opinion would be different. As it is the reporting is very one sided though with everyone focused on the virus to the point that nothing else matters anymore to many. It's not surprising that this can induce panic, I find it scary myself.
This is about attempts (!) in young (!) women (!). That’s so specific, it’s suffering from multiple-endpoint problems: look at 50 subgroups and some are always going to show some seemingly drastic change.

Here, the reporting of this factoid almost certainly means there was no significant change in actual suicides, or in attempted suicides of the population at large. So both may well be true.
How does the protection work? What technologies were used to create this product?
And every Australian I know was happy about it too. Australia is very similar to the US, but one difference is that they're less oppositional. Helps that it actually seemed to work though I'm surprised there hasn't been more objection to the lack of tourism.

Of course, it's ineffective against omicron which is just too infectious to be stopped, and they aren't doing it now.
I don't think they implied that. I doubt OP meant anything by it; they also refer to their "good" friends, do you also question whether OP is ignoring suicide when it happens to (children of) ordinary friends?

The distiction between sons and daughters is interesting though, because women are statistically much more likely to attempt suicide, whereas men are more likely to succeed at it.
Now that you say that, I remember it was jelly, not jam. It was almost transparent, and not very strongly flavored--probably to take away the sharpness.

Thanks for the soup recipes! I had never heard of that.
Most bittorrenters leech.
You might like Quod Libet. It comes from the "spreadsheet" school of music library management.
There are more common/accessible setups than just BitTorrent. Remote desktop software, media sharing e.g. Plex media center, doorbell cameras (and many other smart home IoT devices), PS/Xbox remote play, etc.
I feel this way at times as well, a therapist can help with techniques like Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Also check out Ryan Holiday's podcast... they often help put things in perspective. For some people mediation helps, it doesn't work for me but I have never had the discipline to consistently implement it. I can't say I 100% avoid such thought patterns but I am better at avoiding them or at the very least shutting them down quickly now than I was 2 years ago.
reading is one of the most straightforward activities to get deep concentration back. Read in a room without distraction, or in general do uninterrupted work, art or sports without distracting yourself or multitasking.

However the entire 'dopamin fasting/detox' thing is unscientific[1]. You can't detox from what is a basic neurotransmitter involved in just about anything in your brain or body. Detoxing from it makes about as much sense as bloodletting. You don't need to deprive yourself of stimulation, which in general is healthy, or do anything radical.

[1]https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/dopamine-fasting-misunde...
In the world of boolean logic this could be expressed as:

Type I: true

Type II: false

Type IV: FileNotFound
System boot is a hard problem with dependency resolution, service management, etc.
Scripts didn’t properly solve the problem — they were like the easy solution for small ns. But that approach simply could not scale at all.

Systemd may indeed be somewhat more complex, but I don’t think that it would employ many accidental complexity— it is complex due to the problem domain. But imo that is a worthwhile thing to spend complexity budget on.
I've used Kotlin Native around 6 months ago, which seems to be the iOS target for Kotlin Multiplatform. I ended up switching to Go, as much as I didn't want to, because of memory leaks when interacting with the official HTTP client (Ktor). The multithreading through coroutines is pretty experimental and unstable.

The community is small, and there is not a lot of actually multiplatform Kotlin libraries, although I saw some libraries making progress towards it. I found myself having to write bindings to C libraries a lot.

The language is very promising though, it's great with the JVM or JS as target.
Here's the thing though.

Let's say, I want to provide special benefit to people who own membership on hackernews.

In the model where this data is public, I can query the wallet of people to check for HN nft and provide special discount or perks.

If this membership data was privately backed up, I cannot do that.

It fits nicely into the blockchain model, imo.

Subscriber owns the membership and can prove to the service provider.

Service provider has access to the membership and can check the validity.
as the article mentioned, web3 was a term coined back in 2014. It was very much a reaction to "web2.0" silicon valley years which was probably felt a lot stronger back then.
the term flew under the radar for a while, but the past six months people suddenly got annoyed by it.
Don’t people here run raspberry pi’s for their home server needs?

As for the general public, they have to trust someone to run their home servers for them, whether that is google, apple, amazon or their friendly neighborhood HN reader. Trusting a megacorp is not necessarily a bad move because while they do take abusive steps to further their bottom line, they are pretty good about security and software updates and as a customer you are unlikely to experience severe harm like having your bank accounts emptied because of the privileged access they have (well, except if you buy into the apple ecosystem, then the emptying of the accounts happens willingly).
JQ syntax feels too unusual, doesn't resemble known code, gives me the feeling of looking into cryptic Perl or regex, could never remember the simplest things.

For example how would you take key k1 from a list of dicts [{k1: v1, k2: v2}, {k1: v3}]?
Note that the right amount of knowledge to have about "brain chemistry" is none; we don't know how antidepressants work. The difference is uninformed commenters seem to think it's all serotonin levels.

They are effective though.
Org Babel can be useful for explorative programming (emacs-jupyter), devops-y stuff: more permanent than REPL but less structured, more fluid compared to the usual code practices.
That is true, but it was designed specifically to perform certain tasks. It’s capable of much more, but those are essentially bonus stretch goals. Nobody is saying a second JWST would have no value, or couldn’t do useful science, that’s a gross mischaracterisation. There are diminishing returns, that’s all.

We all want more science, the question is what’s the best use of 3-4 Bn in extra funds. The real question is which other future telescopes and space missions would you cancel to get a second JWST?
Related (and shameless plug): http://antirez.com/news/124