skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I empirically tested these types of glasses over the past 18 months with my own n=1 study. There are a lot of confounding variables pretty much wrecking my shit (a regrettable period of "crunch time" at work, sometimes drank too much last year, other times didn't get the usual exercise in, a few times I had a specific problem space where if I woke up I would churn that specific problem set in my mind and not easily regain sleep).

Nevertheless, I got a conclusion applicable to me, after trying 10-12 pairs of these things: these glasses really do absolutely improve my sleep, but only:

a.) if I buy the orange ones which block 99.9% of blue and green light, which have the side effect of making everything look really shitty (like Flux/Night Shift on steroids, delicious tangerines look like sour lemons)

b.) if I put them on 2-3 hours before bed (I set a calendar alarm)

Since around the time I had kids (10 years ago) I've had trouble both falling asleep and staying asleep.

I lost the orange glasses for a few days (actually, 4-year-old absconded with them to play "robot") and my sleep problems returned immediately. (Note that I use screens in the evening and night, even though it is mainly reading email and books at those house, I read books on iPad Pro including in bed, so I am bathing my eyes in blue LED light).

I ordered anther pair, and my sleep (both subjectively, and as tracked by my phone and watch (to the limited ability of those devices to track one's sleep)) went back to okay/good immediately. I mean literally the second orange glasses arrived from Amazon in the morning, and I slept well that night.

Anecdata, but life-changing for the anecdoter (me). I'll never be without such glasses again, until such time as science devises something even better.

NOTE: I tried like 8-9 pairs of the clear normal-looking kind that purport to block blue light. These had no measurable effect at all on my sleep. It was only the color-warping orange ones that worked.

UPDATE: I forgot to add that these glasses block blue/green light so strongly that they have the side effect of substantially dimming ALL light. So it is entirely possible that wearing regular sunglasses might have the same effect — I haven't tested that.

[1]: The first ones I bought: https://spectra479.com

[2]: The replacement ones I bought after my kid stole the first ones: https://www.yamamoto-kogaku.co.jp/safety/product/detail.php?...
Because around the same time as intel started to experiment more with the AMT stuff, the complexity level of actually starting up the CPU and keeping it running had grown to the point where having an extra controller to help it run was found useful.

Another reason is that ME (and PSP) are used to assert "security" of "Protected Media Path", which is part of streaming services DRM.

It's not the only way to do it, sure, but there's a reason why IBM POWER designs have approximately 2.1x amount of cores that is stated in the spec - pretty much every core has a smaller, simpler one dedicated to keeping the big one running without melting and helping transition to low-power states and back, and there are at least two more cores whose only job is handling some of the early loading of code from flash. Part of why they have those cores is that since POWER8 there was a shift towards more standalone operation without external controller chip (and POWER9 even describes such boot process in manual). For comparison, traditionally the FSP (aka BMC) on IBM POWER systems initialized all of hardware before the CPU would execute first instruction, puppeting the CPU buses through debug interface.
Looks like it was taken down from the archive. :(

https://archive.org/details/simrefinery
Who puts this blue checkmark and verifies?
maybe most people are at home these days? plus you can shoplift in public at daytime for $950, why bothering to break in anyone's property while adults are at home ready to shoot back?
I’m surprised French taxes are so high for a non profit
Graphics, yeah, easily, but the Atari STE surely had better sound!
windows back then, used to do that. I think XP / 7 days.
> Gill's book, Bayesian Methods, is even more dismissive, and even hostile towards Frequentist methods.

I'm skeptical of this because Frequentist (likelihood) methods are a special case of Bayesian methods, with flat/uniform priors for parameters (and the "flatness" of a parameter is dependent on your chosen parameterization anyway; it's not a fixed fact about the model). So it's reasonably easy to figure out when frequentist methods will be effective enough (based on Bayesian principles), and when they won't.
The Mac II had millions of colors at 640x480.
ENOM data migration renders hundreds of domains unreachable
OpenStreetMap needs a lot of bandwidth and runs on donated hardware https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Servers/Tile_CDN

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Planet.osm#Planet.osm_mi... Not sure if their new torrent based approach is easier to add.

TOR network nodes (bridges?)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_community_network We have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freifunk for example in Germany

Sell your bandwidth to crawlers https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29926063
From slide 5 of lecture 2: Explanations with more ways to produce the data are more plausible. Sorry, I disgress, the bias/variance trade off implies that you should ponder the complexity of the model to avoid overfitting.

I don't know much about Bayesian data analysis, but I think the first idea to be introduced is not the concept of likelihood, Bayes theorem is the foundation and I think it should be introduced before likelihood.

On slide 31, it is not clear if you state a causal model before making observations, you should indicate a prior before making the observation so that you can then see how it updates, if done otherwise you are using the observations to elaborate the model and then the analysis is crookely designed.

On slide 35, the concept of relative plausibility seems to me a little sloopy to develop some theory.

On slide 48: In the context of confidence intervals: "95% is obvious superstition". I think 95% interval is using a standard way to communicate results that gives a useful information and avoid the question of why you computed, for example, the 93.728 confidence interval.
Toffoli[0] & Margolus’[1] Cellular Automata Machines (1987) is the CA bible, I guess. Andrew Adamatsky edited the encyclopedic Cellular Automata (2018). Ed Fredkin's[2] stuff on reversible CA is fascinating. Gerard Vichniac[3] wrote some great papers in the 80s, e.g. Simulating Physics with Cellular Automata (1984). Kenichi Morita[4] papers. Rudy Rucker[5] has written a lot of stuff on 1 and 2D CA, and worked as a CA programmer. Etc. There are a lot of papers. The very common finite element method of solving differential equations and PDEs is basically the same thing as CA - see e.g. Anderson's Computational Fluid Dynamics.

Attractors and approximations for lattice dynamical systems by Shengfan Zhou, 2002.

1954's Studies of Nonlinear Problems by Fermi, Ulam, Pasta, featuring a 1D CA. https://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall02/cs323/li...

Noether's theorem comes up frequently - that every symmetry of the system corresponds to a conservation law.[6]

Smooth Life is Stephan Rafler's very cool version of CGOL with every discrete aspect turned into a continuous one.[7]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommaso_Toffoli

[1] https://people.csail.mit.edu/nhm/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Margolus

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Fredkin

[3] https://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?as_vis=1&hl=en&q=gerar...

[4] https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=kujUxFYAAAAJ&hl=en

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudy_Rucker

[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether%27s_theorem

[7] best video of SmoothLife https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJe9H6qS82I

https://sourceforge.net/projects/smoothlife/files/

This slideshow by Rafler contains the best, most complete explanation of it I've found: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyTIXRhjXII

Shadertoy version https://www.shadertoy.com/view/XtdSDn
Don't we already have that with WebAuthn? It should be possible for the authentication request to be directed to the password manager. Less secure than using a hardware key, but more secure than password, email, or text message authentication.
Sure, we think it was just a brief, harmless fad now... wait until we discover that they've been breeding in the landfills, all this time. We'll go to mine precious hydrocarbons sometime in the next few hundred years and find "pet rock" colonies have eaten everything of value.

I remember getting one of these. With the manual and the nice box they really were a fun little gag gift.
Here's a guide which helps select tools for Game Boy homebrew development based on skill, experience and project scope:

https://gbdev.io/guides/tools.html

There was a big Game Boy homebrew jam / compo in 2021 with more than a 100 entries. A bunch of them are well polished and have solid gameplay :

https://itch.io/jam/gbcompo21/entries

https://gbdev.io/gbcompo21.html

A lot can be found on itch.io using the "gameboy-rom" tag:
https://itch.io/games/tag-gameboy-rom

GBStudio has really changed the landscape and brought a lot of people into homebrew development who might otherwise have not joined for lack of programming and tooling experience. In addition to that, there are also a good number of non-GBStudio releases happening (ASM, GBDK-2020, ZGB engine).
> We don’t sell any data.

Not only do I have zero reason to trust you when you say that (because every person planning on selling my data ways the same thing).

But I also have zero reason to trust you're skilled or resourced enough to adequately secure my data (or have sufficient motivation to do so).

And I also know that one day you'll likely sell your SAAS, and will have no control over what the people you sell it to will do.

If you've got enough traction that people are willing to jump through minor disposable email address hoops to use your product for longer than the free trial, but not enough traction to convince them to pay for it, I reckon you'd be better off building more features that add value and reconsidering your free trial plan - instead of devoting any dev effort into rejecting disposable emails.
Magic, impressive.
I have no word.
If these ideologies are both extreme and irreconcilable, why is it my ideology that has to shut itself up and let their ideology flourish? If our ideas are outlandish to each other, what is the goal of conversation in the public spaces, unless one side is willing to give up their ideology? If we look at each other in disgust, why is my disgust invalid?
The NotJustBikes YouTube video series on Strong Towns addresses this. One thing to look at is the collective cost of state tax, federal tax, and private debt. What’s true of all Ponzi schemes: eventually, someone has to pay. You can move the money around to different budgets all you want but it doesn’t change the fundamentals.
I think the story is embellished a lot.

I also think, though I might have my historical periods wrong, he lived in a time when stray dogs and cats were considered pests and eating puppies and kittens wasn't the weirdest thing.
A normal user wouldn't make anywhere near that many and to a bot developer, "banned by Google" doesn't present even the slightest of challenges. Source: I develop web scrapers for many sites that really don't want to be scraped, including Google/Abc properties.
Starting income for developers in Norway are normally ~€55k. The average 33yo developer income is ~€75k.
> But: If an attacker manages to flash a new BIOS to your server, you're already lost. That either requires physical access (which is bad), or access to the OOB / BMC / IPMI (which is equally bad, because those usually have a remote KVM feature, so you could e.g. boot the OS into recovery mode)

BIOS flashing from the OS has been a thing for a long, long time now. Heck my XPS 13 running Linux even gets BIOS updates from apt-get.

> About 99% of all hardware (except HDDS) from datacenters is sold on the second hand market. Locked CPUs are essentially worthlese, especially if buyers or sellers don't know and throw the CPU away because they think it's defective.

And 99% of that hardware is sold together as a unit. It will hamper repair efforts, as the CPU & motherboard are now effectively a single unit, but it does not effectively kill or even significantly harm the second hand market.

> I think this is just AMD's greediness again in the cloak of "improving security"

Intel has this same feature. This almost certainly wasn't done by AMD's "greediness" but rather because major customers, like Lenovo, demanded it. And even as a "greed" argument it's a pretty flimsy one. Nobody is running a datacenter on second-hand hardware anyway, there's no market to cripple there.
There’s always Rust (^_^)
The numbers say that no amount of vaccinated people would end the pandemic. Vaccines reduce R0 and are worth it, but in isolation, don't reduce it below 1 for omicron. It's possible future vaccines will, and it's possible future omicrons will circumvent those vaccines.

I think universal N95/KN95/KF94 masks would bring R0 below 1 (even without vaccines), but with animal reservoirs, even that's no longer a long-term viable strategy.

The trillion dollar question is long COVID and impacts of COVID on the brain, both with and without vaccines.
Yeah, I can see that. I think you’re right. But that feels more to the "cultural" point (i.e., different perspectives having different priorities) than the specific claim specifically that "profits" are the driver.
I think I'd have nodded and read on a couple years ago when I'd only had thoughtful/well-informed/diversely-experienced developers review my code. I've learned since that it's also possible to have your code reviewed by someone without particularly deep understanding (nor awareness of what they lack), who would insist that responding to a critique of (what they think is) a problem is essentially being argumentative because they are certain they've already got the 'correct' answers (in a similar way that a first year philosophy student might think they've already got the answers).

> ... they are stuck in an endless loop of making mistakes and refusing to learn from them

I am probably overfitting to my own recent experience, but to me, while this could be a legitimate problem with the reviewee, sounds equally plausibly like a red flag on the part of the reviewer: someone who has settled into a set of "correct" answers and now sees other people not adopting their personal outlook on code as a failure to learn.

It is not a simple matter to (definitively, non-subjectively) find a 'problem' once the criteria become anything more nebulous than "does it produce the correct result".

There's an analogous situation I've noticed in more casual conversations: someone is describing a problem they have or a situation they're in, and the person they're speaking to keeps smugly offering "solutions" that only sound good because they haven't listened closely to the other person, took a superficial glance and assumed the issue was some common one and so offered a facile/common solution—and then don't understand why the other person isn't appreciative.
Though, ironically, as per your example, there is no library for it in Bash as far as I know.
I’m too rudimentary of a developer. What’s a Userland? What is this doing that writing apps as Go executables doesn’t or can’t do?
When my brother-in-law emigrated to Ireland he ended up requesting that we send him one.
> This isn’t often relevant for games, but, if you need to check how much things would have been scaled if you weren’t DPI aware, you can call GetDpiForWindow and divide the result by 96.

If you aren't scaling up text and UI elements based on the DPI then it doesn't really sound like your application is truly DPI aware to me. I don't see why that applies any differently to games versus any other kind of application.
The idea of the "property ladder" is that your first house is (relatively) cheap, and then as your get older your earnings increase and the old mortgage seems cheap, and maybe you now have children and want a bigger place, so you sell your property, hopefully making a profit on it, and buy something bigger that you couldn't have afforded before, and repeat. The reason for the ladder metaphor is that each house is a step towards the next bigger house, but if you hadn't bought the first house, probably you wouldn't have the increased equity available to make the more expensive house available to you. Likewise, with a ladder, you have to do all the steps in order.
Low-resolution monitors and laptops remain widespread [0], and vector-based UI just doesn't look that good on those (either blurry or misaligned). I'm doubtful that HiDPI will become the mainstream standard anytime soon outside of smartphones and tablets (small screens). Cost increases quadratically with screen resolution as a function of production yield, so low-DPI hardware is likely to remain the cheaper option that many people will continue to choose.

[0] See for example:
https://www.amazon.com/bestsellers/electronics/1292115011
https://www.amazon.com/bestsellers/electronics/565108/
Note that Rust isn't dropping things "at the end of the scope" but at the end of their lifetime, it's just that if you declare local variables their lifetime ends when they fall out of scope and so this often (but not always, so it's worth remembering to care about lifetimes not scopes) coincides for values in those variables.

Making things more confusing, Rust is inferring scopes you never explicitly wrote, for example Rust brings a new scope into existence whenever you declare a variable with a let statement:

let good = something.iter().filter(is_good).count(); // good is a usize

let good = format!("{} of them were good", good); // a String

This is fairly idiomatic Rust, whereas it would sound alarm bells in a lot of languages because their shadowing is dangerous (if you hate shadowing you can tell Rust's linter to forbid this, but may find some other people's Rust hard to read so I suggest trying to see if you can live with it instead).

Obviously that first variable named "good" is gone by the time there's a new variable named good, and so that usize was dropped (but, dropping a usize doesn't do anything interesting, beyond making life harder for a debugger on optimised code since this "variable" may never really exist in the machine code). On the other hand the String in that second variable named "good" has a potentially long lifetime, if it gets out of this local variable before the variable's scope ends.

Because Rust is tracking ownership, it will know whether the String is still in good when that scope ends (so the String gets dropped), or whether it was moved somewhere else (e.g. a big HashMap that lives long after this stack frame). Because it tracks borrowing, it will also notice if in the former case (where the String is to be dropped) there are outstanding references to that String alive anywhere. That's prohibited, the lifetime of the String ends here, so those references are erroneous, your program has an error which will be explained with perhaps a suggestion for how to fix it.
Agreed. There are situations where frequentist guarantees is what you want rather than optimal estimates of parameters.

Frequentists consider the model parameters fixed and allow the data to vary. Bayesian consider the data fixed and allow parameters to vary.

For example many software engineering, drug testing, and large scale pipelines want frequentist guarantees, because your system will have varying input data and you want theoretical bounds on what inferences you can make.
It's more that software is already so unpredictable. A 90% confidence estimate for a task might be 4 hours to 4 months. That's not very useful. Counting routine work would increase accuracy to something like 2 days to 4 months.

I'm not sure if it's better, but we can make some plans around that. The extra control is a little comforting. And it's less demoralising when it's not done by the end of the day.
>Even more when you have an idea, share it, someone who’s not in the corner takes it and runs with it. That experience is even more isolating because the immediate reaction is to just not share any more ideas.

This! But I learned the lesson as the person who took the idea and ran with it. The "coworker in the corner" got pissed off and snapped at me one day in front of a few people. I wasn't the only one to have the experience and got to have an awkward conversation with our manager about having to walk on eggshells around certain coworkers. The end result was I didn't care what he worked on. Code reviews? Approved, no questions. Your ideas? Awesome, but you're on your own for getting them into production, bye.

Don't be like that. You will suffer. You will know you are suffering too, when you compare yourself to your "lesser" peers who are getting more traction with their ideas while you become resentful.
""" Matrix is a decentralised conversation history replication protocol, not a messaging protocol. Architecturally it has no concept of direct messages or store-and-forward messaging for IM; instead everything is a group conversation with a conversation history getting replicated between servers (and their clients). Conversely, XMPP is a message passing system (although it's true you could layer a DAG-based conversation database on top in a XEP, at the expense of compatibility with the rest of XMPP). It's literally the difference between NNTP (Matrix) and SMTP+IMAP (XMPP).

"""

This is how Matrix solved my problems right away and why XMPP never actually understood or cared about my problems.

I want all my messages and history on all my devices wherever I login with the proper credentials.... not a handwavey reference to 3 different ways to implement that with 9-15 different XEP combinations which noone has done yet.

TLS/crypto and the federation on top are great/mandatory but Matrix solved the core problem first and thats what matters.

Thanks again btw :)
I co-founded an ATS company and I can say that we were never asked for, nor provided, any functionality to automatically screen candidates out based on keyword filters (though candidate answers to actual questions like "Do you 5 years experience with node.js?" are often used to automatically screen out).

That said, I have heard this often enough that some people must do it. I can't imagine why though, as it takes only a few seconds for a human to scan a resume. Even at 10 seconds per resume (a conservative estimate), that means the human could screen 360 resumes per hour.
That sounds like it pushes hiring managers forward, not industries. You get a benefit out of making it easier to fill open spaces, at the cost of everyone else's unique life experiences.

We have a "verification standard" in the form of diplomas and certificates and neither of those have fixed the hiring issue so far.

If you want to skip background checking, just make people bring their proof of certification with them to the job interview. Of course, those certifications barely mean anything in most fields of work, but it's an exact equivalent of the blue checkmark system you propose.

I get that hiring is hard, but that's why hiring managers exist in the first place. If we used a nicely standardised, automatically validated system, all recruiters and hiring managers would be out of a job. Why pay someone to do that stuff when you could pay a cheap machine learned AI to fill a list of requirements for you?
Why assume it's not just some poetic license on the part of the writer here.
Valve's new Steam Deck device runs Linux. If it proves popular, that will be a big incentive for developers to improve Linux support for their games, and help jump that hurdle.
If only all companies actually had an unsubscribe link in their emails…