skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Maybe, but this is not Spotify that's the issue.

They have a license to play music, and they pay for the songs at a rate that the labels charge for. If artists do not get enough money from streaming then their label should negotiate more from Spotify. If they are already taking 80% of Spotifys income then that means that either they aren't charging Spotify enough, and Spotify should charge users more, or they are taking a larger chunk and deflecting blame.

With them using the RIAA for the longest time as a distraction from it actually being Sony et al that was suing it's customers, I would not be surprised if this is misguided blame again.

But again, if artists do not get enough money from streaming music, then that is not Spotifys fault. It has paid for a product that it is reselling. You don't then get to bitch that you sold someone something for below the cost that you wanted to.
The difference between a file menu and an hamburger icon is that the file menu hides file operations while the hamburger icon hides… anything. something. dead bodies.
Yes. DDoS is always wrong. We should not start a culture of DDoSing people we don't like (even if the dislike is completely justified).

A nation state may play tit-for-tat with another nation state but they will assess the consequences and act accordingly.
It’s sometimes called reasoning from first principles too.
The difference is a matter of a pinion - one has one more pinion feather than the other.

No, I don't know which. Heck, I don't even know what distinguishes a pinion from other feathers on the wing.
So much easier, than piracy and buying cd's !
What? Completely new to me, but is expected.
A "natural aversion"?
>Now one of the worst parts is that everywhere I only even hint at not completely loving the new libadwaita theme I instantly get shut down and disagreed with before I can even get the chance to give some feedback.

Gtk2 -> Gtk3 dejavu.
The error here is that the criticisms may be erroneous. You cannot whipsaw around a conclusion with increasing amplitude.

This is common on HN where authors are posted without being informed and it is not uncommon for someone who lacks the knowledge and ability to understand the sophisticated position to 'debunk' something that is nonetheless true. Then others like them pile on to the thing and everyone has concluded that the thing is false merely out of a lack of knowledge and intelligence.

An illustrated representation https://i.imgur.com/xyoCO9g.png

Orubyq nf V hfr gur zrzr abg nf vg vf zrnag, ohg vagragvbanyyl. Fhpu frys-ersrerapr.
I remember this from many years ago. Much as I appreciated the step-by-step instructions and their accompanying pictures, I always thought that the genius element - and perhaps one that might have real IP value - was the schematic representation combining recipes and the cooking process.

My favourite example of this is the schematic for the "meat lasagne" recipe, which is at the end of the instructions and before the comments:

http://www.cookingforengineers.com/recipe/36/Meat-Lasagna
The UI is minimalist and ad free.
There is also a great API.
What more could you want.
> Atheists make precisely the same mistake as deists, claiming to know the unknowable.

At every meaningful level we have to have trust in something. When we say the Earth is round we have to trust our instruments, our faculties, our observations, etc.

In that sense, everything is unknowable in an absolutist sense, because there’s always some faith required somewhere.

But that doesn’t mean there might or might not be a teapot orbiting the Sun somewhere between the Earth and Mars: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot
For future reference, don't assume everyone on HN writes C/C++. I know what those terms mean but I was trying to point out that OP probably meant the exact same thing.

Telling someone who doesn't know what widening a variable means that they meant widening a variable without explaining what widening a variable means helps no one.

(Plus adding 1 bit to the "bit size" of a variable _does_ double the base 10 size of the variable if you want to be really pedantic)
While FOSS implementations are great, their tooling is still missing the whole stack experience as offered by Allegro and Lispworks.
Your comment reminded me of this video: "2:30am at 7-11 near Disney World - 1987" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYbe-35_BaA

It's definitely the kind of thing that stills can't beat.

I find it very hard to take videos of personal events, I'm too much of a nervous wreck. Pointing a camera at anybody, even or especially friends and family, I can hardly do it, though I wish would get over it and film more.
Years ago at pyData Berlin I remember a talk trying to classify comments from three major online newspapers with the question if we. Could detect where a comment was made.

One newspaper was left leaning, the other had the reputation of right wing trolls commenting and one was somewhat in the middle ground with a reputation of the audience being pseudo intellectual neoliberalists.

The 'center' (most typical) comment for these three sites totally was in line with these sentiments. The perfect proof (or confirmation bias).

But the classification didn't work. While there were clear cut cases (one has to love stereotypes) most cases were just neutral. Meaning they could have been made on any of these media sites. Either they were just too short or just not extreme enough.

I feel (used explicitly here) that toxicity is not something that is easily classifiable without deeper understanding of the context. Else, if feeling a comment was toxic was the measure one would need to query all walks of life from extreme left to extreme right and afterwards would probably be left with a lot of toxicity that doesn't tell us much except that different people will find different things toxic.
The problem is our politics - clearly our health care system needs fixing. But nobody chooses to act on politics, and the obvious obstructions to progress.

> I'm reminded of a patient encounter. A man was in my office talking about conflicts at work re: a micromanaging supervisor. It was a group of PhD-level software engineers. I was thinking, do these people even need "supervision"? Shouldn't they be trusted? Trustworthy professionals can be relied on to do their jobs. Sure, keep an eye on work quality, allow the track records to speak for themselves.

Generally, yes, good management is knowing who to trust, and putting them in a position to succeed. But the original bias, of course, is toward ourselves. They/we are still human, we still put our pants on one leg at a time. Just because we are highly skilled in something, doesn't mean we have good judgment in other ways, we are motivated, not distracted, biased in other ways, etc. Plenty of very successful people do god-awful stupid things.
> FAANG-level salaries (which can absolutely be 300, 400, 500k TC) are the 1% of the 1%.

FAANG & companies that pay similarly employ something like 8-10% of the engineers in the country, so this is an enormous overexaggeration. We can quibble about whether it's reasonable to represent that as "industry standard" or not, but it's not such a drastic outlier that it becomes unreasonable to use it as a point of reference when discussing things that might be reasonable to aim for (or expect, in certain contexts).
Wes Anderson's adaptation of Fantastic Mr. Fox is another great example of this setup.
Lisp is excellent even if you write every line of code in a file, and compile every time you test, using a fresh image (using the REPL only for some exploration of the code committed in files, and debugging).
These confounders are everywhere. Sort of in the way that only the dumb criminals get caught, we're probably missing many more confounding factors because our statistical analyses have limitations. Now add the stigma around questioning the vaccines political/financial pressures and you have a recipe for poor quality science.

It's not a conspiracy, people just tend to look away from things that could endanger their livelihoods. An emergent property of socioeconomic systems. A failure mode, so to speak.
Another headline that completely ignores the concept of threat modeling. If you're preaching about what's "right" and "wrong" regarding security without considering the threat model, you're only doing harm to your readers.
> Genuine question: how does someone in her position know they're right and the research is wrong, and not the reverse?

She doesn't know, and that's the problem with medical research: being a specialized surgeon is like a carpenter who's made hundreds of a particular kind of furniture. Then a scientist comes along, saying we should change how we do it. As an experienced carpenter, you know that most of those scientists actually have very little practical experience, because they used that time to publish and are actually very bad, practically speaking. And therefore oftentimes reach nonsensical conclusions. So, what to do? You go ask the most practically experienced guy you can find, hoping he'll be able to guide you. Repeat 100x/year.

I'm not exaggerating: some of our academic practitioners who've published a lot are really among the worst practitioners I know, and do kill people who should have lived on a regular basis! Ironically, some of them are respected professors and patients often seek their care thinking it'll be better. One of them is a surgeon and has received an award for outstanding teaching. He's the absolute worst surgeon I know.

So, no easy conclusion here...
It would appear that the authors are selling a book on this topic, which explains the BMJ article.

And I'm not sure their premise is all that accurate. If they think the FDA is in the pocket of pharmaceutical companies, that runs entirely counter to my experience. I can recall plenty of times where we'd suggest a change to a filing and the FDA response was "nope, changes denied". If you think the low level reviewers of submissions are secretly pulling the strings for Pfizer, you'd be wrong.

And in terms of the quality of publications - this is nothing new. There has always been a robustness to clinical trials. That's why the NCCN guidelines for cancer treatment actually rate the clinical evidence from Category 1 (strongest) to Category 3 (no evidence whatsoever).
But not if instead of copying, they support a "Run this data as a program in virtual machine with access to these segments of memory" operation. The behavior would be functionally identical to emulating the architecture and interpreting the data, except that it wouldn't be slow and could be done recursively with no cumulative overhead.
Atheist/theist and agnostic/gnostic are orthogonal. Atheist/theist is about whether you believe there is a god or believe there is no god. Agnostic/gnostic is about whether you claim it is absolutely knowable one way or another.

The vast majority of atheists are agnostic atheists as they acknowledge the point you make about the unknowability of the nonexistence of an entity. Many theists are gnostic and some claim direct, personal knowledge of god.

However, the fact that I am an agnostic atheist shouldn't be taken to mean that I am in any way weak in my atheism - my belief that there is no god - or that I don't think there are extremely strong, rational, evidence-based reasons for that belief.

The best way it can be put is to take an absurd example of something that cannot be known to be false but which everyone will agree is surely false. For example, that somewhere in the Boötes void there is an elephant floating through space.

This cannot be proven to be false, but there are many strong, rational, evidence-based reasons for believing it not to be true. These reasons aren't just about the absurdity of the notion but about the theories we have formed to understand how things like elephants come to exist, and the evidence we have gathered for such theories.

I'm not much of a fan of Richard Dawkins' all-out assault on religion (while I'm an atheist I'm far from anti-religion, and I spend more time in church than most christian believers), but this is one thing he explained very clearly in The God Delusion, and it's a point that I think is worth making clear.
Symbolics and Xerox PARC beg to differ, and their products failed to establish themselves more due to their mismanagement than technical.

Rust still needs to grow up quite a bit before it can assert to be (C++)++ specially in anything that involves a GPU.
Changing entire social norms to include a very small population will only lead to problems.

Accepting trangenders for who they are is a much better strategy in the long run. Why are they so keen on fitting into existing definitions, social norms and binary gender tropes when they are not the same? It's absolotely ridiculous.
Aliens of course
How would people compare to DataGrip?
No - the example I gave above with multiple @(posedge clk) in the single always statement is synthesisable (by synopsys at least, I don't know about others) and contains an embedded loop - it's arguably a higher level way to make logic than the traditional always/case/state state machine. Maybe a simpler example will do:

always begin
@(posedge clk) v <= a+1;
@(posedge clk) v <= a-1;
end

is identical to:

always @(posedge clk) begin
v <= a+1;
@(posedge clk)
v <= a-1;
end

both can be synthesised and make the same logic
> I don't think a single person would believe otherwise,

It depends. Saving "a hundred" or a "a thousand" lives seems "doable" by a normal person as a result of a conscious, "moral" act, saving "millions" devolves into messianism, and as such it's not the job of essays or of simple, logical human thinking to talk/write about it. I know that the author doesn't insist on that aspect but in real life quantitate differences turn into qualitative differences most of the time.
I am still, after nine years reminded that it started on my birthday. It was a beautiful present by chance.

I should watch it again. It was lovely.

There are quite a few videos of it on YouTube [0].

[0]: https://youtu.be/VoV-jzwaw_Q
I used 1password for maybe 7 years and the slew of recent changes and the slow deteriorating of their product quality, paired with the fact they ignore very simple features people have asked for for ages, made me switch to Bitwarden. It's not as polished but at least I'm not wasting money.
For that you need to dive into Lisp commercial offerings.

Jupiter notebooks are the poor man's experience of what using a Symbolics or Interlisp-D workstation used to be like.
Depends on the sub, but the popular ones like politics, news, worldnews, pics, all have a hard left agenda and you will be kicked out if they don't like your opinion whether you're being civil or not.
I don’t find issues with your views but I think it’s completely untenable to make this happen politically and will either result in global war or the collapse of our civilization. Kind of saying the same thing twice I suppose.

If the people that say they support sustainable living actually understood what is meant by that phrase almost none of them would support it. It’s not just billionaires giving up their jets as is the popular notion, but as you point out, basically giving up everything Americans consider staples of middle class life.

I think we’ve got a better chance inventing a giant machine that removes greenhouse gases from the atmosphere than we do of convincing people to follow your way of life. And climate change is just the tip of the ice berg.
Centralized Exchanges Will Be the Death of Crypto
You're unaware that science advances and I do research in this field on the brain, reasoning and language. So you are obliviously unaware of the headway of cutting edge research that undermines old notions that you were taught about how reason works.

Sorry to tell you random internet commenter will never compete with someone who researches human reasoning for a living. That is why I know things that you don't and you think you are "reasoning" not having any idea how reasoning processes in the brain work. The whole process can be studied and reverse engineered and that has implications for "bad reasoning" aka much "good reasoning" that is seen as such will be seen as "bad reasoning" as science of reasoning works advances.

Sorry to tell ya, but you don't understand enough about your own brain to even engage in conversation with me about this topic.
It has to some extent. The opposite is also true - look at Compose and SwiftUI.
Well, we're going to find out how well IPFS does under heavy load. This crypto startup plans to host streaming porn on IPFS.[1]

[1] https://sugarbounce.com/
We have a lot of APL in SimCorp and are one of Dyalog’s main customers. 1.6 million lines in 2014 I’ve heard, but I don’t know how much we have right now.

The biggest single issue with using APL in production is developer hiring and training.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

> the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making empirically unfalsifiable claims, rather than shifting the burden of disproof to others.

I think you’re doing the opposite and expecting a burden of disproof instead of a burden of proof.

A burden of disproof is unreasonable and frequently unattainable.
Any books so I can be better interpreting paper? Thanks
Seconded. Tableplus is great. Started using it after DataGrip subscription expired (which is also great).
Stripe payments are available only in US, Canada, EU + few other select countries and that's it, maybe 40 total out of 195.
the shift register example you give would normally be synthesised to something with a synchronous clock and an async reset - during simulation the loop is waiting for either
I use this almost everyday - no frills, rock-solid piece of software.
Parts of Antarctica have been 40°C warmer than their March average
The cited part of the analysis wasn't covering that. It was only looking at the employee conditions and wages.
For tech news and product reviews. Discussions on the like as well. Sometimes nothing relevant to my interests but I learn about new things.
That's true that malware source code was available in the open even before large scale Internet access. But no one made a fuss about licensing, "freedom", philosophy and the authors were mostly unknown.
I disagree. I had to sit and think for a few minutes as it was extremely unintuitive - my first impressions were that I couldn't decline the invitation at all, and the button was disabled or missing for some reason (I've seen some bad CSS in my career so it no longer surprises me when it goes missing).
So if an application on your PC makes it overheat and break the PC is at fault for being defective and you get to RMA it? What about a laptop? And a Camera is different how?

In the end it would be faulty / bad design that makes the Camera fail. And that is absolutely a valid reason the RMA it.
E.U. Takes Aim at Big Tech’s Power with Landmark Digital Act
I don't think it's actually possible to get $45k in federal loans. The max is about an order of magnitude less than that, depending a little on personal circumstances.
Hollywood put Penelope Cruz on their blacklist over her support for Palestine, when Israeli soldiers shot protesting children.
You can ask copilot to do it for you!
I’m curious, how does this project compare to slonik that is also a fast, lightweight, full featured, using SQL template literals etc ? Is there any reason to consider switching, for example?
> I'm not sure that's any worse than a doctor misunderstanding real science

It is worse. A highly experienced practitioner who would've done the right thing might get led astray by new bogus research. Precisely because most practitioners don't have the ability to judge scientific work on their own.
People are obsessed about it because on one side you have a bunch of people trying to redefine it to mean whatever set of obligations they feel like e.g. 'You open sourced it so now you're responsible for it' etc. etc. and on the other side you have people trying to hold the line and say 'No, that's not what open source means'.

You're basically arguing to turn 'OSS' into a meaningless blob of text that anyone can interpret as they like.
Yes, everybody have been knowing that from more than 40 years. And there were humans back then. They time travelled from not so many years in our future.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saga_of_Pliocene_Exile
It's not that far off today from how junior engineers treat stack overflow. There's just fewer intermediate steps.
> If it's not obvious, it's probably not a critical feature, just a nicety for those who discover it.

That's a really bad way to go about usability. It's pretty frustrating you're looking for a feature to have to hunt for it like you're playing a point & click game. At that point I wouldn't even call it a feature, it's an Easter egg.
I wish of a web without JavaScript and desktop apps with JavaScript
That way we would keep the web fast and clean and the OSes can provide native electron bridges so that developers can build those apps much faster without worrying about cross platform compatibility.
An external intervalometer can. And in any case, both in both the SDK and the intervalometer case, the camera's OS is free to just stop functioning, to prevent any possible damage to the sensor or shutter mechanism due to overuse.
> guess that the approach used in Nature, which values ideas for themselves, would be more successful with the general public; it's just not used.

I sadly have to disagree. As much as I'd rather not. After university I worked as a junior editor for an online site with > 10 million uniques per month. Shortly after joining I was handed over the "science" section (double, triple, quadruple the quotes). I tried to make it more about current scientific ideas, the big findings of the past and less about 'Hitler living on the dark side of the moon', 'Aliens visiting earth', 'This dietary idea will make you loose weight fast' and all the other bullshit one reads in tabloid.

No clicks. Advertising revenue down the drain. The audience had no interest in scientific ideas and great findings. They wanted entertainment.

Maybe I just wasn't able to deliver modern scientific research with enough entertainment value. At least not compared to described topics above.

I know. This is just anecdata from a random guy on the internet. YMMV.
For cloud-based, I think BitWarden is the obvious consensus. For local-first, I settled on Enpass. It's closed source and proprietary but the format is decently documented and they provided help in making an open-source database reader https://github.com/hazcod/enpass-cli

Now my passwords are somewhere I control, in a format I can read with open source tools, and sync is done by Dropbox/maestral. It's like being back on classic 1Password but slightly more stable and slightly less polished in the UI.
Theoretically speaking, atheism and agnosticism are the same argument, the former following from the latter in any kind of rigorous formalism. I've always found it odd that anyone could be agnostic but reject the mathematical implications of that assertion. Atheism is a rational operational assumption conditional on an agnostic belief and nothing more. Agnosticism and atheism share the same axioms -- I treat them as equivalent.

The assertion that atheists claim to know the unknowable is baseless. We have mathematical theorems for optimally reasoning about the unknowable, the implications of which look a lot like atheism. Not following through on the implications of those theorems is willful ignorance.

I reject any argument that tries to treat agnosticism as distinct from atheism, insofar as it tacitly rejects mathematics that show their equivalence.
> This has all the features I like from GTK 3. The only issue with it is that font rendering looks horrific, but that might just be my machine

I don't understand linux users' font tastes, apparently. To me the GTK4 screenshots are the only half-way decent font rendering in the lot. All the GTK3 shots have broken kerning in headings, not to mention the awful (lack of?) antialiasing.
Norway is really corrupt hey.