skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My first memory of WoW was leaving my starting city, traveling to the closest main city, and seeing the buildings were very conspicuously the same models reused. I found the environments to be the opposite of compelling. Lazy but well polished. Other MMO environments felt more hand-crafted.
The time has come to replace file systems
I guess they like strategy game maps from third person then. The early areas all looked a lot like Warcraft 3 maps, and there were even orcs peons chopping trees just like you'd expect.

I always assumed part of the idea was to allow asset reuse.
Moving Python's Bugs to GitHub
If you take work against your better judgement, then a quality of the dissent or dislike vests back on you: if you dont do your best, you definitely shouldnt have taken the role. If you dont try to head off or warn of the problems, likewise. Leave if you can't subscribe to the aims

If you take work because you have to, you lose a lot of ability to be as flexible. If you have the luxury of choice, bank it.
The FAA and FCC need to figure out what to do, but the above comment isn't the consideration they need to be worried about.

> Radar in general is more sensitive to noise.... The noise floor is quite a bit higher before it becomes unusable for communications compared to radar

This is not true. A radar has the huge advantage of knowing what signal was sent and only looks for returns that are similar- the FMCW radars in question often mix the return with the originating signal, and outside interference just doesn't cohere and won't affect the result unless the interference is very high power. Radars do not need to look at a wider band of spectrum, reflections do not change the frequency and the Doppler shift a radar altimeter (looking straight down) needs to accommodate is minuscule. A radar that can't handle noise is poorly designed, not that they are inherently susceptible to noise. Radar does require "high" transmit power to easily detect returns, but they can be robust to noise. A radar (including RA) can integrate over a relatively large window if needed and detect with an SNR <1 if it's designed that way.

Whether the old 737 RA was properly designed and can handle the interference, or if they took shortcuts because saving a buck took precedence is a different discussion than the (incorrect) generalities about radar presented in the above comment. Whether the existing RAs can be retrofitted with better filters for cheaper than lobbying the FCC is also unclear, but we know what approach the airlines are attempting right now.
History doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes
The most compelling thing for me was visiting a Silvermoon that was filled to the brim with people, all of them unique individual people.
Yep, not true at all. My solution has been to just stick to smaller/niche subreddits that appeal to my interests but stay rather small. And I can (anecdotally) say that the majority of them are apolitical.
The prebuilt executable failed because it couldn’t dynamically load libpng and after I compiled it myself I got a seg fault.
> rejecting signals that (according to design specifications) they should easily be able to reject

Please link to this specification. Because I've read the specification (TSO-C87), and it actually says nothing about required levels of interference rejection.

Should it? Probably. But neither the FCC nor the FAA wrote it in.
So why didn't the Ottowa and Ontario government tell the police to crack down? After all it's the Ottawa residents that were so inconvenienced.

Did the city or provincial government instruct them to? Did they refuse?
Ha, yeah we definitely know some of the same people. I remember that Phoenix Biltmore being so expensive I shared a room with like 7 other 25-year old guys for the week. Was a really great time. Some of the after hours anagrams games blew my mind.

Eddie L. at the Portland club got me into distance running and that’s been my main hobby the past decade or so. I’ve gotten really into the NYT Crossword and Spelling Bee, too.

I’ll check out the site!
> refs (and their various flavors) aren't really pointers though. They're a higher-level abstraction on top of pointers.

This is not entirely true. Refs on lower level are pointers - when it compiles down to CIL, the resulting types are rendered as T&, and referred to as managed pointer, as opposed to T* the unmanaged pointer.

And you can use T& as an independent type - it's not a high-level annotation on a pointer, but a fundamental CIL concept. The limitations that you describe are all about not allowing a T& that points to a local on the stack escape the function where said local is defined (whereas Go silently lifts the local to heap in this case). Hence why you can't have T&&, and why a struct that has a T& field must itself be declared as a "ref struct" (and have the same restrictions applied to it).

On C# level, refs were originally a function argument modifier, as you say, solely about pass-by-value vs pass-by-reference, implemented under the hood as managed pointers. But since then, we've got the ability to return refs, declare local ref variables and fields (in ref structs), and reassign them. So at this point they're effectively types, with some restrictions on use similar to Rust borrowing.

> You could implement goroutines with CPS if you wanted and async-await could be implemented by green threads. Off the top of my head I can't think of anything in the API of goroutines or async-await that would allow you to distinguish whether they're being implemented by CPS or green threads in the background.

To implement goroutines with CPS, you'd need to rewrite every call into CPS-style. This is technically not observable, yes; but perf would be atrocious in practice, so it's not going to happen.

Async/await, though, is literally defined in terms of callbacks in the language spec; threads are completely orthogonal to all that. The dispatch loop can decide to run continuations however it sees fit, including threads - but at this point we're talking about callback-oriented code that is already desugared from "await". And running that on top of green threads is possible but pointless, since the semantics of await requires that async context switching happens only at awaits; but the ability to pre-empt at any arbitrary point is precisely the advantage of green threads.
The norse gods are in favor now. I doubt anyone would complain about Project Oden. In a decade or so the MCU will have moved on and Egyptian gods will probably be cool.
I've got a 750w and it handles hills pretty well. To the point where you don't need to actually pedal unless it's a long steep one but even then it's like pedalling on a straightaway (using pedal assist is of course is always optional).

Before I got the bike I wanted the most powerful one available but I realized after getting one you don't really need that. And it's actually kinda dangerous, even for a experienced cyclist who's used to speed.

Even the standard tier batteries are more than enough for any urban biking in terms of distance. I rarely use even 20% at 48V, 10.5A.
I was ready to be critical and say that "bullshit" is relative, that the interface makes the user, etc., but then I saw the emacs-like navigation and now its hard to be too critical. Looks fine!

Anyway, just curious: if I use vim in a GPU-rendered shell like kitty, is it pretty much the same as this in terms of GPU-related benefits? Or is this supposed to be better?
Chuck Klosterman on writing the past and relishing the present
Is there a citation for that case law?

It seems extremely unlikely that the simple repossession of a car with personal property is conversion given that roughly 100% of all repos will have at least some personal property within.

It’s clear they are obligated to return it to you, but your argument here doesn’t sound right.
Thanks! I came up with it on the spot, maybe because I had recently eaten a salad. :) It could be better, let me know if you improve it.
Pfizer drops India vaccine application after regulator seeks local trial
https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN2A50GE
I did not say it was impossible to design a radar system to work with a higher noise floor. Also, if you have looked some of the concerns the FCC has in the S-Band range is radar. If you have looked at the frequency allocation rules and such. Quite often around certain frequencies you will see your not to cause interference with radar. However, a lot of radar in the S-Band pulse power tend be quite strong because of atmospheric attenuation, and also noise.

Additionally, lot these weather radars are not trying to achieve same level of accuracy as an altimeter. If the weather formations ones monitoring is off by a little bit, but overall the data is close it's fine. Similar thing with a lot maritime radar, ships are not moving that fast so you also have a lot more time to average out the data. If an altimeter when landing is off by too much can cause a lot problems, especially when you factor in the speeds of an airplane it's you have less time to average out noise or doing other things to filter out spurious noise.
Edit:
Also one other thing about maritime radar there nowhere as much interference once you get outside ports or areas near land.

Also it's not just Boeing here having issues, airbus also along with Boeing has brought this to the attention the FAA. The frequency bands in other countries for 5G tend to be farther away as well from the frequencies used by altimeters so it's not been issue in other countries. It only seems to be handful of air-frames that effected.

Secondly, NOAA have been concerned about 5G, particularly near 24Ghz, again for possibly interfering with radar.

All I was saying is radar is a lot more sensitive to the noise floor and if suddenly that noise floor is higher I am not surprised some equipment will have issues depending on it's use case. Especially, when things were designed long before these new spectrum allocations.
It is, thanks. Unfortunately the results leave a lot to be desired.
That's half the story, I don't want to have to build my own infra to host something simple like an image in a redundant highly available way.

In the end I just settled from hosting on s3, downloading the images with curl (or similar) and running `lxc import`.

The support in configuration management tooling is also pretty limited and the stuff I've used has been fairly buggy, in my opinion, because it's not very popular.
Instead of snark I'd suggest doing some research. The science on this has been solid for about 50 years now. The political will is the problem.
When eating a meal, how the meal tastes (burnt) is at least #2 on my top priorities (just below whether it will lead to illness). When consuming an app though, bundle size has got to be at least #5, far below something like "Does the app do what I want?" and "Is it performant" etc.

While it would be nice if everything was optimized, it's really not comparable to a meal tasting good, since that's basically the main reason to have a meal in the first place. Most people don't care about bundle size, especially when it's tens of megabytes versus gigabytes.

> the typical amount of trying is really bad

Again, we really have no way of measuring just how bad it could be. IMO it feels like everything could be way, way worse.
My friend and I named a band after this news when it happened.

https://buttheadastronomers.bandcamp.com/
It's part of Phaedrus by Plato (one assumes that his portrayal of Socrates' opinions isn't misleading, since we really only know Socrates from Plato's writing):

https://newlearningonline.com/literacies/chapter-1/socrates-...
Anecdotal but the Peertube instance I was recommended for this purpose closed down.
The RFP format automatically excludes the bottom 90% of commodity applicants
Symbols are good to ship so that your users can see what is going on as well, FWIW. They just shouldn’t be 200 MB…
Wait until 2023 when every major OEM will likely ship Arm laptops with the Qualcomm-Nuvia (former Apple M1 team) SoC with Microsoft Pluton (equivalent to Apple T2). That may generate enough volume for Linux-focused devices.

Nothing can match Apple M1 today.

If the purchase is ideological rather than utilitarian, there is the MNT Reform laptop, or a few industrial motherboards.
An average "likes to do a couple 40 mile sporty bike rides a week" cyclist probably can do around ~150-200W continuous and maybe peak for 10-15 seconds at around 750-1000w. A hill that takes 20-30 seconds to climb, less than 500W most likely. Depends on their weight and training.

Cargo e-bikes tend to be at or less than around 1kW. 750W is still considered fairly powerful, and 500W is much more typical and still plenty enough for even a cargo bike to get up a hill, with appropriate gearing. 250W is about the standard for low-end e-bikes.

2.4KW is gross overkill, especially if you're not doing direct drive. More watts just means you can go up the hill faster. This assist motor is driving the wheel through the rear derailleur so it potentially has a pretty wide range of gearing.
"Proof of work" is the straightforward answer to this; not in the sense that it's used within cryptocurrency, but purely in terms of: does an individual contribute value and take on some/most of the effort to investigate and understand the issues they're assigned to (or volunteer for) themselves?

If not, that's not necessarily a sign of malice -- patience and education are worthwhile and usually the answer, especially in calm times -- but if your organization is under time pressure (and has sufficient staffing capacity available) then proof-of-work can be a signal to aid allocation of focus/time (or to navigate away from a problem).
Folks submitting Career grants already have nominally full-time time jobs as faculty with corresponding full-time salaries. The jobs are usually termed '9-month' appointments to allow them time in the summer to get paid for research. So the 5 year timeline reflects that this is not most of what they are doing. Certainly if you have CS background and you're mostly interested in making money this is not the career path for you.
I don't think that's entirely how it would work.

As an open source maintainer I would much rather you pay me than pay your own developer - because no matter how talented they are, if they're doing the work I'll need to spend a huge amount of my time discussing the work with them, reviewing their code and generally being a now-unpaid engineering manager to help shepherd their efforts!
Yeah, but that's the way these things go. The people working on this project are working on 5 other ones as well. It would be nice to work on fewer research projects at once but the way these grants work (check out the low total amount), its generally unfeasible. Its sort of laughable extremely hard to get grants from the NSF, DoD etc. wouldn't even pay 2 typical FAANG SE 1 year FTE.
Not all of WOW is very compelling and I wish the author had taken his admittedly unscientific ranking and examined different zones to see what would come out on top. Especially in Vanilla there were a lot of grindy areas and depending on which faction you chose you would have a radically different early game experience. The Orc, Tauren, Dwarf, and Undead starting areas I remember being pretty boring and it seemed like a lot more care was put into the Night Elves and Human areas.
The best environments were generally in the mid game where the developers seemed to have the most leeway in what they were building theme wise. Once you got to the end game it became very grindy and the environments were not so compelling. Everything became volcanic, lots of generic evil and vistas of browns.

Having said all that - I think the real reason it was so compelling was the community. It hit at just the right time where everyone was finally coming online and there weren't many other games of the same quality level pulling people away. It was a well designed game and everyone seemed to be playing it. I only spent so much time there because it was where I could reliably chat up friends. The few people I know who are still playing it today only do so because of their guild.
> It looks like it has a chainring clutch
You know, the thing I always found extremely frustrating or non-transparent about the academic grant process (and it leaks over into government / NSF / etc applications by the nature of who evaluates those: academics again) is how much unofficial or unspoken criteria come into it.

You get extra credit points if you're active in visiting other universities and giving talks on the annual job circuit. You tend to do well if you advisors are well-connected. You have to sprinkle a bit of fad-ish topics into your research if even if it's a stretch to do so.

I suppose that it has always been so. And now looking back, I don't find huge fault in that you should be able to connect your research with larger ideas. Or that people in richer environments with more information are generally more successful.

But having tried to be on the faculty track before, from a middle-tier university, I never knew these things. Or the professors I was around never told me those unofficial factors. And I thought it very unfair that the judges allowed those factors to creep into their consideration without making it clear to everyone that those were important. If giving talks in person is important, tell people at least.

I naively (I guess) thought that the strength of what you wrote in the application/grant document dominated. Maybe it does for some fields or if reviewers are diligent about understanding the blinders they wear and their availability bias.

Well, anyway, I left the field all the same. No regrets, but I wish these fields would improve their explicit processes about it.

I do note with some amusement now in industry, that basically I am able to approve spending of $500k for certain things with approximately a 30 minute conversation with leadership (with appropriate justification and documentation)...
> Stripping symbols of shipped binaries is standard good practice.

But please still make them available separately!
Chinese Rover Spots Unusual Glass Beads on Far Side of the Moon
VESA had one but it never took off.

https://web.archive.org/web/20081209121702/http://www.vesa.o...
Agreed, it's the stupidest thing around, especially because Linux is about having control of your own systems, then they force updates down your throat, it goes against a lot of the things I use Linux for.

I just avoid snap and Ubuntu wherever possible now.
fluxbox ;-)
Maybe in the early 2000's, when stories about it kept making evening television, but nowadays, the rest of the developed world is roughly on par with it.
Besides, can't they just take you to station and take fingerprints to verify identity?

Pretty sure that's an option.
I actually love this comment, since it's a near perfect example of what I mean.

Your first 3 re-writes all lose some of their meaning in the simplified form. The last one is basically fine.
Graphic design played a large role, I'd guess. Warcraft imagery had this unique mix of cartoon, fantasy, and realistic in a way that most of its successors (and even later versions of WoW itself couldn't match. Plus, the open world aspect of it was the first time many players had ever encountered something like it. There were loading screens only for dungeons and continents. You could walk, run, or ride in Azeroth for hours without anything from outside intruding on the experience.
I was involved in writing a grant relating to product development (Singapore has a SG$250k grant for developing product prototypes). Between 5 colleagues, I estimate there was a bare minimum of 300 hours of work... the application itself, multiple rounds of follow ups and justifications, documentation/receipts on how money was spent, etc.
Ha, that's cool. Yeah, we still have the basic for loop that does upstream selection and load balancing, with the same timeout configs, etc. It's come a long way since then like you said, but I still consider Caddy 2's reverse proxy a derivative of your contribution from, like, week 3 of Caddy v1.
What made WoW environments so compelling is that were very stylized and deliberately not "realistic". If you look back at the history of games that focus on photorealism they date really quickly as the tech moves on yet WoW's aesthetic is much more timeless.

Secondly, the game feels good. By this I mean the movement and responsiveness.

Third, the game in its original form was particularly immersive as the WoW developers eschewed the loading screens that were an immersion-breaking feature of the big competitor at the time (ie Everquest). Sadly this design principle has fallen by the wayside in recent years.

Lastly, WoW came about at a time before social networks when online games were the first proto-social networks for many, many people. Through guilds you found likeminded people.
Thank you for your comment. I think I see your point of view. There are some points missing I believe.

The auctions started if you scroll down the article since 2018 (outside the US) for the neighboorhood in question.

https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights...

Nobody raised a flag then. And nobody tried to stop the auctions. FCC has full jurisdiction on this. The C band is the popular one as the article also stresses. Yes FAA complained in 2020 and tried to delay the auction.

To even get to the auction the 5G workgroup has been simulating these ranges since 2014 at least (from personal knowledge). There is no chance the engineers working in the neighborhood bands did not know as at least word of mouth was out for anyone doing RF, WiFi, or with interference channels.

If you look at the 2016 European 5G annual journal the 3.5Ghz area is mentioned. https://5g-ppp.eu/annual-journal/
(The bands 42 and 43 which are the ones on question where mentioned that is.)

In 2017 FCC did the RFC for the auction. This is the biggest auction ever. Aviation Spectrum Resources (ASRI) was testing and passing altimeters (initial test done and submitted 2019). FAA and various altimeter developers did nothing. (See https://5gamericas.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Mid-Band-S...)

If you see the article I shared in prior post, FAA has approved radio altimeter models and has disproved others.

In 2011 there was an assessment of the neighborhood bands interference as part of what they called NTIA Fast Track evaluation. And they raised interference issues with current spectrum and practices. FAA and developers did nothing.

FAA needs to pay to properly deploy antennas like other countries have for years, in airports and/or have someone buy the spectrum. 40 countries did it right already.

Worst case, they had since 2011 to do this.

P.S. When you build and antenna/receiver you are the one responsible for staying in spectrum.

There is 200 mhz fallow. You can't just go around building devices that will get affected even with a 200 MHz buffer. Nobody is invading their spectrum.
Joe, CEO @ Hydra - Awesome, looking forward to talking! On the top banner on Hydras.io we link to our Discord
The takeaways are very true. I would go further to say that not only is the story telling and the scientific vision a very important part of the sell, the language and terminology needs to be in sync with the reviewers. Often times researchers write very technical details in the proposal that is hard to parse and backfires.

In non-blind proposals, pre-communication is the key.
> A credit card?

Most people, I'd say.

> getting a mortgage really know what they're getting into

Also most people, I'd say. It may not be the best choice for them if they had a magic omniscient oracle, but most people can understand the concept that they need to pay $XYZW/month for the next 25 years if they don't want to lose most of the value of their house.

Now, if your example was of 18-year olds with zero life experience suckered in by shitty colleges that promise the world, and deliver nothing but misery...
Did the city or provincial government even instruct them to arrest and tow them? Did the police refuse? Why is this all based on supposition opposed to public record?