skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You can teach the principles, and example of why it's important to create motivation.

any subject requires a motivated attitude to succeed. Critical thinking also requires an attitude to value the topic IRL - but arguable that ought to be the case for all topics.

> It's the attitude of never taking anything you read or hear at face value.

A class in philosophy (or history) of science will teach you all the ways in which people where wrong before the process was established, and will make you see the value of science. CT is the same thing applied to everything, not just formal physical studies.

> it's also super exhausting

Only because most things are written to manipulate. If publications actually suffered for their reputation b/c of poor articles the whole thing would be easier. Also, if journalists set out to prove their claims, and properly source them - arguably something like Wikipedia is a group effort to do what is hard for the individual (I think it fails, btw, by leaning too much on published material).
Flink CDC Connectors
Too bad that most of these experts you're talking about are sociopathic and egotistical growth hackers and nutritionists who overnight ended up being epidemiologists just because it helped them grow their brand.
It might be worth it if people could present their research without having to fork over US$600 or US$6000 to register for the conference. Air quality is worth a lot, though. I recall falling asleep from too many people crowded into a room at the physics department when they announced they'd discovered the top quark. Fairgrounds in lots of places do have air conditioning.

We held CodeCon in a nightclub --- during the day, when it would normally just be closed. This caused problems for aaronsw, because legally they couldn't let him in, and he didn't want to accept special treatment unavailable to other people his age, so he just didn't attend. Len got pretty mad at me when I took Aaron's side.
I realise this was a /rant, but it's still spectacularly misinformed and unhelpful.

If your hot take on politics is that climate change, COVID and the war on terror are all the same thing and this proves the left and right are both the same, then you're part of the problem.

This reads more like a smart person trying to rationalize their cognitive dissonance, when they know deep down they've found themselves on obviously the morally and factually wrong side of an argument and see no way to retreat while maintaining face.
I'm guessing it's an attempt to poison the well by pointing out that "I want to be able to choose which media I consume" sentiment is often employed by anti-vaxx nutjobs to protest social media censorship.
Not Western culture. Anglophone culture. Vast swathes of European cultures are quite happy with nudity; I remember nude sunbathing in Amsterdam in the summer being very common and not at all sexual. Denmark recently found fame for Dillermand, literally translating as "willy man", an animated children's show about a man with a prehensile stripey penis (1). He gets into trouble using it inappropriately -- for example by putting petrol on a barbecue with it. Owch.

I'd much rather children grow up knowing what the other gender looks like naked with that knowledge being delivered in some environment other than PornHub. It's insane -- I literally only knew about the female form from reading medical textbooks as a child and had never seen a naked woman until I was 19. Many women have no idea what their own anatomy is, because cultures have such a taboo about it. Yet on American cultural exports, love, breasts or bodies get an 18+ rating and explosions, shooting and murder get a prime-time action TV slot. I don't get it.

Everyone's naked under their clothes.

(1): https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/06/john-dillerman...
I'm not guessing. They are different dies. There is no need to write a hypothetical wall of text and get it wrong; you can just look up die shots or chip package shots or device trees and know they're different dies. This information is well known. There's a massive difference in size and aspect ratio between all 3 dies. It would not be cost efficient to fab M1 Max dies and sell them as M1 Pro. The M1 Max is explicitly designed as a logical and layout superset of the M1 Pro, but not for binning purposes, just because that way they don't need to do two completely different layouts.

SoC codes T8103 (M1), T6000 (M1 Pro), T6001 (M1 Max).

Yes, they do use binning and e-fuses for the lower core count versions within each die/SoC type.
> It does feel dangerous, somehow, doesn't it, to have the web of technology be so complex?

Yes, and it is disappointing that it is being constantly made mode complex even for the functions that our technology has been capable of performing quite well for decades. It's hard to opt out of the web (including the "world wide web").

> That said, you can do a lot of interesting stuff with a low powered machine, and I'd love to play around with one.

What could I do to encourage you to do so?

You can play with a low powered machine, get any cheap SBC. If you want less power and want to feel like you really own the machine, get some microcontroller development board and start writing your own tiny OS for it :)
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/skip-mobile-w...
Naomi Wu seems to upset a lot of people. She makes things, and was accused by the publisher of "Make" magazine of being a fake, with some guy doing the actual work. She replied by posting long, detailed videos of her making stuff. An hour of cutting aluminum extrusions with a chop saw and putting together a frame. Soldering PC boards. Eventually, the guy apologized.

One of the useful things she's done is to put up lots of videos of her running around Shenzhen. There aren't enough ground-level videos of the working parts of Chinese cities. There's extensive coverage of Tokyo, by comparison. It's interesting to see the high-density housing blocks and street-level activity. (The "let's increase housing density" crowd from Strong Towns should watch those videos.) People who've met her report that she knows Shenzhen very well, down to the back alley level, where some unmarked door leads to an important factory. She's toured the electronics markets of Huaqiangbei. (I miss the days when Silicon Valley had electronics parts stores.)

She's done some nice technical work. Her main thing is 3D printing, and she came up with the first angled 3D printer that worked reliably. The print head moves in a plane 45 degrees from vertical, and the base surface is a belt, which advances the workpiece one layer at a time. So it can produce objects continuously, or very long objects if you add support rollers. Others had made prototypes of such machines, but the properties of the belt and print head are touchy to make that work right. She got it all working, and it's now a product, with her picture on the box.

At various times she's pushed on GPL compliance, mask quality, and other issues of interest to the tech community.

She wears skimpy outfits sometimes. So what? That's most of Instagram. Unlike most Instagrammers, Wu has something original to say. Sometimes with a biting wit. I gather that it's more biting in Cantonese.
I've seen "no eye contact" mentioned a few times. I think this can be explained by the fact that this person either didn't realize, or wasn't told, that they need to stare directly into their webcam for a television interview.
By your logic, we should never try to establish facts and "I didn't do it" should always be a valid defence for murder, as reality is really complex and making a determination of truth or facts is impossible. What's more in decreeing one version of events to be factual, and imposing a prison sentence on someone for 'murder', the state is acting as an authoritatiran arbiter of reality.

Just to add - I specifically said I didn't advocate censorship, and asked what actions might be taken. Do you have any ideas in that direction? Or is the idea of taking any action, however small (for instance better education in evaluating information) offensive to you in an axiomatic way?
Companies care whether a court of law could find them to be a monopoly (in jurisdictions where that is a problem).

Somewhat generalized, they also care about the court of public opinion.

Both kinds of courts rely heavily on interpretation and on words. They don't ascertain objective truths.

Things revealed in proceedings in a court of law can often be used against you in the court of public opinion, too.
Have GMO advocates scientifically backed up their safety claims?

The burden of proof lies on the side deploying self-replicating novel agents into the environment.
It's also much less time-consuming.
Corporate training is partially about training you.

It's also partially about being able to show that you had the opportunity to learn. So if you act contrarily to the training, you can be fired and/or claimed a rogue actor.
Lol exactly. This is why I try to remind myself to pay attention to how I and others may be feeling underneath, and have even dedicated my professional life to it, because I have honed very strong rationalizing skills.

I find often the people who disagree with me the strongest can also go toe-to-toe with me in finding stories and evidence that confirms our beliefs and if I remember (and have the courage), I try to go deeper to talk about how I'm feeling afraid of this, this, and this, angry about this and this, ashamed of this, and so on, and try to imagine how they might be feeling across those contexts, and more often than not, realize we're both two humans trying our best. But goodness I can avoid going there sometimes, and if I do get there, it can be after a long long discussion with someone, and sometimes one or both of us gives up before we get to that point.
> We can build on the work of others and they can build on ours.

This only works if both parties publish. Otherwise it's "we can build on the work of others"
Physics progresses one funeral at a time.
The faster you go the less of those 100.000 years you will experience so there's that.
I think there is an impedance mismatch in how easy the game is to understand versus how the ZK proof part has required reading. Some (if not most) of the questions or comments here must sound silly to someone knowledged in the field. Anyway, here is mine:

How is the proof different than a signed message saying "This person has found the treasure"? With the private key derived from the coordinates?

Anyway, I'm off to read more about ZK proofs in hopes of making the above sound silly to me.
The current implementation has easily survived a worldwide hug of death due its massive viral success. It’s plenty robust.

Your server-side PHP version would be slower for most users and might get expensive to run.
In theory people work because they want something from someone else (says law). So in theory there can never be unemployment.

In practice some people want money itself, which is an empirical contradiction of says law. There are also people who hoard jobs because they like them, which is bad for people who want the money to actually spend it.
That must be new with the M1s, on the exact same project my 2018 Mac struggles (<5 FPS) while my 1080 rolls through ProRes 422 without any issue
yes, the M1 Air is the best laptop since... the original Air? it might be the best laptop in terms of value for price ever. I've never had a mac before, but this thing is objectively the best there is for the price.
Every time I read one of these articles on modern antitrust, I get frustrated by the laws themselves. Win or lose on the case, I don't think they do much.

Everything seems to be based on a marginalist theory/formalisation of what monopolies are and how they affect economies. The theory/law seems to target very specific sets of economic dynamics.

IRL, monopoly is a more nebulous concept. Size, power, ability to structure the market are often its primary characteristics, not a simple more-profit-less-utility outcome that can be charted with a simple model.

Actual antitrust, I think, needs to be more like an industrial policy set than what exists currently. Whatever the outcome of current antitrust actions, the monopolies stay mostly intact and unharmed. What's the point?
It makes misunderstandings more likely, however i am not so sure if the distinction still exists when every conversation online is covered by private-sector censorship. Seeing as in the end the private sector always has governments influencing their moderation policy. And be it just through liability.
Again, somehow you are able to discern Rogan's nonsense - how do you do it?

Then we can move on to the fallacy of the infallibility of judgement (which ties in nicely with the quote you provided) that J.S. Mill points out in his arguments against censorship.
I would argue that the combination of the two skills is what makes a hacker like Thunder particularly scary. As a general rule I would say that most folks who are technical in a hacking capacity would struggle to learn social engineering and vice versa.
She completely has that right. I think a lot of the controversy is an appearance of being disingenuous by claiming that she’s not trying to be sexualized.

I’m not talking about this particular video by the way, but more than likely the reactions to her other videos have affected how this particular video is judged, which is probably not fair.
> The money lives at interactive brokers, the cash flows through etrade

Why use e-trade (or ibkr) at all in this situation? What does this whole thing mean?
> but he's a hack because he disagrees with the "scientific consensus" or something. Reasonable minds can differ on that.

That's kind of funny, because throughout history the people who were very critical of the scientific consensus (especially those who maintained this position even after lifting themselves up from a lower social status) are the ones who, on average, turned out to be right and either revolutionized that field or had an amazing insight that was a missing puzzle piece.

The mentality of 'scientific consensus says A, therefore B is bogus' does a lot more damage than people realize.Still, to be taken seriously you need to have some sort of proof or a sensible explanation of how you reached that conclusion.Here it's not as much that the guy is an incredible genius and is the only one with that position, but more of the fact that the critical voices almost entirely colluded.(This is de facto "proved" by the latest wave of western articles admitting that the narrative they adopted and pushed was done in an irresponsible fashion.See german press or even american outlets)
Yikes. I have a fair amount of non-tax advantaged money in a target date fund. Not sure what I should do with it now. Hrmmm.
> How do you apply your personal autonomy to a domain you know nothing about? In fact, how do you even figure out you don't know enough about something to make a good judgement?

Mostly because the experts don't care about you and don't have the time to care about you. What trust can people have in doctors if they treat people like ATMs? My partner went to one of her doctors and he prescribed her a vaccine (not COVID or anything like that) for something that's more of nuisance than anything else. She wanted to take it but checked about it first. She also has an autoimmune disease. Turns out, even though her autoimmune disease is in her file, the doctor didn't even read the file and prescribed her a vaccine that should never be prescribed to someone with that particular AI disease. So yeah, talk about good judgement and trusting "experts".
In a sense strncpy() is exactly the sort of unsafe nonsense that got C into trouble.

C's strings are zero byte terminated, but the strings strncpy() is intended to target are not, they're file names in a fixed length buffer. So, it's fine to fill the entire buffer with text and no terminator, or to write a single byte of text, and fill the rest with zero bytes. If that's the exact problem you have, strncpy() is the exact feature you wanted. Otherwise it isn't.

If you aren't aware of why Unix wanted this feature it's a very strange thing to find in C's small standard library.
But publishing the most profitable lies and claiming it's a moral stance will really help? That's surprisingly convenient for your business model.
Is there a link maybe?
People from the Republic of China (i.e., Taiwan) with English language proficiency don't refer to themselves as 'island China' or 'the real China' (barring fringe elements), but may call themselves (ethnically) Chinese. Generally though, they call their country Taiwan and themselves Taiwanese in English.

Besides, if ambiguity is the concern for people from the PRC, the phrase "I am from the People's Republic of China" lacks any political subtext.
Nah, I only see minimal difference when building on a ram disk (source tree copied there too) compared to a nvme SSD.
Xamarin support ends in 2022 on Bitrise
I'm curious how adding network requests and server dependencies to code makes it faster and more robust than code that works entirely offline.
Australia scientists find 'spooky' spinning object in Milky Way
Excuse me, what makes you think AWS isn't fundamentally rent seeking? The brainwave of AWS was figuring out how to meter basic compute tasks.

AWS = An implementation toolkit for cobbling together and paying rent on an ESB.
Second that - any chance there's a link to the webinar?
Pay transparency series by Insider goes horribly wrong
Once again, the media trying to pass someone with social engineering skills as a hacker. You might as well call it Lying engineering, those people are just good at lying and manipulation, for me, hacking is another entirely different activity.

Also she ratted on Mitnick, those people are called informants, not hackers.
Blackmail? Spider-man? Murdering journalists? I feel like maybe you’ve lost the thread here
Why does this have to be a loss leader? I'm pretty sure Costco can probably make a profit on that chicken?
Just a couple of years ago the only thing I had ever heard about Ben Shapiro was that he is "crazy." I must admit that I didn't actually follow up on that. I just took it as fact. The truth is that I was living in a very safe, very insular media bubble; consuming news which gave me just one narrow narrative.

Covid struck and I became increasingly disappointed with the information I was receiving. It began conflicting with actual scientific research I was reading. I stepped outside my bubble. Boy is the world a bigger and more interesting place. Ben Shapiro promotes old timey family and economic values. That's it. His views would be mildly left to anyone in the 70s or 80s. Of course, to some, old timey family and economic values make him "literally Hitler." Not to me. I don't agree with most of his values but I also think he has a right to speak and discuss his views. He's clearly not crazy, and the world has space for people who believe in nuclear families and proletarian work ethics.

I'll never again make the mistake of not challenging the information I consume. I am now very suspicious of anyone who tells me that challenging authority is wrong.
perhaps an unmask would be helpful: https://www.getunmask.com/
I was thinking that too. It's really wild to me how much of the technology we allow courts to rely on is totally unreliable and fake.
This type of subreddit/culture-war drama seems off-topic for HN.
Even if you don't understand their motivations, nearly everyone believes that they're doing the right thing. As I've internalized that, it becomes a lot easier to empathize with people who have different viewpoints: instead of being a bunch of cackling fascists, maybe they are just well-intentioned people with different values than I hold (or perhaps even the same values, just weighted differently)
> Here's an interesting thought experiment: A man gets breast implants and then goes around topless like he did before. Can you imagine the chaos that ensues? The legal questions? The social commentary about "decency"? The traumatized children? Can you see the hypocracy?

I’m curious if you are suggesting that is perfectly acceptable that, in a society that prohibits topless women from walking around, it would be perfectly acceptable for a man to implant breasts on himself and then walk around topless.
That might be true, but wouldn't matter in a legal sense, if there are anti-trust laws on the book.
So you think a Roman temple or senator weren’t commissioning statues of beautiful naked women for effectively marketing purposes?

Like people who think anything Mozart or Shakespeare is high art but fail to realize both are full of dirty jokes.
But dropping USB sticks or sending phishing emails (which could just as well be called technical hacking btw) is not what social engineering is about.

That's like saying running a brute password cracker or port scanner requires no skill or hard work at all, so lumping software work under hacking is really an insult to all the "real hackers" (whatever real means).

Social engineering often requires you to get someone else to do something that they should not, don't want to and often are trained not to do. Very often in direct interactions, not only is it hard (depending on target you might also need a lot of background knowledge, needing significant prework), but it typically involves much higher direct risk (which makes it even harder).
The is no single default but there are entire hosts of different defaults that will work across different communities and some norms that ought to exist across all communities. Hacker News wont let me abuse you verbally and if I make a credible threats of violence against you most places OUGHT to lock me up in order to prevent you from being murdered. Turns out there are TONS of reasonable defaults, some of which we can arrive at by simple logic others which we can arrive at by trial and error.

It would be shocking if communication was literally the only area of human endeavor which couldn't or shouldn't be regulated. Stranger yet to pose the idea on a moderated forum. Turns out authoritarian solutions do work.
IMO, society doesn't conclude, it reacts, mostly by imitation and deviation. Among long term cycles
It was an experiment - I think the general consensus is that it was a bad idea.

The double dot notation is mostly used for inequalites:

(x . < . 3) instead of (< x 3)

and for function contracts:

(any . -> . boolean?) instead of (-> any boolean?)
Eh, not really. Conglomerates have been on the decline in the last few decades.
Fox News actually didn't select her - the mod team elected her as the best representative. Think about that.
This is very true!

At the same time, this can be important or not.

When I do my pc builds I pick the cheapest case as well, and I'm fine with it.
Similarly I took non-Apple laptops all my life (up to 5 years ago, when I started coasting on employers' hardware) without many problems. I just couldn't justify spending 3k to have a laptop which performs as well as one for 1k, just for the better quality of the materials.
You're not wrong. You are being discriminated against. I mean you have so many things that 'family friendly' reactionaries would object to: Chinese, LGBTQ, cup size, making naked torso. I guess they all count. If it was only one you'd probably be fine. It's not a surprise. For what it's worth I do not support such discrimination and in a better world this wouldn't happen.
What a depressing view. But hey, you are still welcome to visit us!
Have you heard of this disruptive new idea. I think it's called the μWave. It uses a sort of high frequency energy pulse to excite water molecules. It even works through the walls of containers. There are some small plasma discharges when you use it wrong but I've had one for years.

In my local grocery store there are aisles worth of compatible containers filled with nutrient rich bits of protein and all sorts of plants. No idea what they're for but when I stick them in my μWave I can convert them into edible food in just a few minutes.

You can invest in my startup.
Lamborghini releases its first NFT, which is the most Lamborghini thing ever