skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There was no shortage of radicals coming to Europe already. I think the lesson from all of our engagement and lack of it in the Middle East, and beyond, is you can’t not be engaged. It will come and kick you in the arse whether you like it or not. For all the problems our interventions might have caused, our attempts to disengage have caused as many if not more problems.

I suspect anyone who thinks our withdrawal from Afghanistan, and abandoning its people to their fate is the end of our problems in that direction is going to be sadly disappointed.
Reminds me a bit of the classic "Abilene Paradox," by Jerry Harvey: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/machiavellians-gulli...
For similar reasons, PyPy's Python implementation can outperform C.

https://www.pypy.org/posts/2011/02/pypy-faster-than-c-on-car... - JIT'ing across compilation units

https://www.pypy.org/posts/2011/08/pypy-is-faster-than-c-aga... - JIT'ing % interpolation.

(Wow, those are 11 years old. I remember when PyPy was a new project.)
Then, weirdly:
> "The @internetarchive did not ask to take these off of Flickr's site. We do not have any power of them-- it is up to them." —https://twitter.com/brewster_kahle/status/151100996579578675...

IA and Flickrs pent weeks talking about this (according to flickr...), but didn't come to enough understanding that they both agree on what happened?

I'm also curious what happened with the title of this HN post. It currently says "The Internet Archive Book Images has deleted their Flickr account", but apparently originally said something else? Shouldn't the HN post title match the tweet linked, regardless? Under what HN policy do mods change the title to not match what it's linking to?
It was very surprising to me also, after watching several videos of crossbow testing against a typical knight's breastplate, that hand-launched missile weapons could really only make dents (best case scenario) in the armor and only when hitting at a nearly perfect angle.

The vast majority of projectiles would have simply bounced off.

The effectiveness of archers then, is mostly in sheer volume (and getting lucky shots on the horse or weak spots in the armor) of projectiles, against less armored targets.

Modern crossbows with 200lb+ draw weights might be different, but that's another story.
Smuxi – An Open Source Client IRC, Twitter, XMPP, Campfire, JabbR
Yeah because no one in a logistics or support role was ever awarded a purple heart /s.
I don't know what you mean by 'safe' but I'd rather be unsafe than Tibet or Hong Kong who had no defense forces to resist Chinese annexation.

The ICJ is a political entity for political convenience. Its not the neutral arbiter of truth you wish it were.
I think that's a very realistic scenario. Thanks to the Russian war in the Ukraine we might even be looking at 15 years instead of 25 but that's just timing, I think you have the right outlook.
I think you can definitely make that case for both the Dems and the GOP.
Why should I be responsible for his medical care?
This brightened my day. Also, Thimbleweed Park was great IMO.
It’s funny how the presence of the last sentence changes the vibe of your comment from “well-intentioned question implicitly asking the reader to give it some thought” to “crazy talk coming from a conspiracy-theorist.”
> I think she should replace "science writers" with physicists.

The two are not mutually exclusive. What you're describing is physicists being science writers (or talkers, if they are doing videos or PBS specials). And yes, they are just as sloppy when they do it as non-physicists.

> I think physicists have done a poor job explaining that what they do is model building. The models are not reality.

I agree. I think this is one of the key sources of confusion for non-physicists trying to learn about physics.
> I don't dispute that plenty of successful leaders in technical organizations have become rusty as hackers when they hit the mega-seniority, but the idea that some L6/L7 manager shouldn't be able to lift some of their team's serious code off the ground, let alone some undergraduate dynamic-programming interview question as was the original point of my original post is simply contradicted by a mountain of evidence both generally-available and anecdotal to numerous people in this thread.

I think this is the root of the disagreement. I want my managers to be technically capable with an engineering background. As far as I know, my entire leadership chain, arguably excepting my SVP and CEO (at Google) have such a background. Yes they should be able to pass a tech screening and certainly system design.

They should have enough knowlege to know why you're making certain technical decisions and be able to see that you're justifying them well. That's all true. What I'm saying is that a manager who is staying so deeply aware of the details of all of their reports work that they can drop in and take over in a pinch probably has too much context. I'm not making an argument on abstract technical ability or knowhow.

Like in the same way that my entire management chain has technical knowlege and background, practically none of them have submitted code at work in the last 3-4 years at minimum, for some that's their entire career at Google. I expect that, with enough effort they could all work on the projects I work on and make contributions, but they'd need to learn all of {language and codestyle, libraries and relevant tactical design patterns and norms, various technical constraints to the design that are important but nonobvious}, so in most cases it would be similar to onboarding someone who was a technical contributor from another team or an experienced new hire. I don't really consider some random employee of Facebook to be someone who could "do my job in a pinch" either, even if they're more technically competent than I am.
New insights into the genetics of Alzheimer’s disease
Sum types are often used in cases where the type is unknown at run time. In C++ the analog would be std::variant. In Rust it would be enums. In Haskell its algebraic data types.

A first class sum type in c++ ala Rust or Haskell would certainly be appreciated, as the clunkiness of std::variant/std::visit is a well known annoyance.
"not giving opportunities for the expression of agency" doesn't roll off the tongue quite the same...
The reason that containers are not generally considered a security boundary is that many of the namespace primitives were _not designed_ as a security layer, they aren't designed to actively reduce the privileges from the current user's context. Since most containers are started as the root user, the namespace transition inherits root's permissions even if they're later dropped. Without SELinux or seccomp restrictions, root can still pretty much do anything to the host even inside the containers.

For the most part this is troublesome when parts of the kernel or host userspace code are not fully aware of the different forms of namespacing (there are still portions that just check for an effective UID of 0, without checking whether they're in a namespace for example). These are the components where a lot of container breakouts happen and is largely mitigated by having internal processes in the container not running as root in the namespace. Dropping privileges to a different user still trace's it origin back to the root user on the host, so in some cases being partially aware of namespaces in a section of the kernel or host user code actively hurts the security by tracing the user back to root and using those privileges again. SELinux really tightens the potential to pull these shenanigans, but most production k8s clusters at least that I've seen are built on Ubuntu where those protections aren't available. In this case the security layer is once again SELinux not the namespacing.

As long as the container runtime is performing the various namespace isolation primitives starting from the root user these container bypasses are going to be a risk. There are 'rootless' versions of containers which can only use the privileges available to lower (presumably heavily restricted) user but those aren't widely used. Once again this is relying on the security protections of the host user authorization, not on the namespaces.

The networking analogy is NAT. People treat it like a security layer as it kind-of-sort-of looks like an ingress firewall since you can't directly address devices inside a NAT, but its not and can be pierced pretty easily. NAT is not a firewall. Namespaces are not a security layer.
Not commenting on the specifics of this case because the article is paywalled, but if one suffers an injury that will result in a lifetime of medical expenses / disability, it could absolutely make sense to sue for a lifetime of salary.
How do we know those are the offenders?
If you peer at the photo very carefully you can see that the author is not in fact holding operations orders, but hard copy of a long discussion from bugs.ruby-lang.org regarding optimizations of the third implicit context
I think this is a translation thing? I'm not sure they're doing it on purpose since a lot of it isn't proper idiomatic English.
Yeah, I guess it probably is some sort of criteria that requires a formal request? The resource under that number might be automatically provisioned via "freebie quota" per team. I don't work for Meta but I believe most of the big techs work in a similar way.
Whether he was drunk or not is irrelevant to the root of the problem. Having a life altering accident like this in the United States cost hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars. That puts people in a situation in which their only hope is to sue someone. It doesn't matter who is actually at fault. Fault isn't the motivating factor. The motivating factor is that people need money to pay for their care and a lawsuit is the most realistic way to get that money.
TRICARE is great. The VA: not so much.
Smuxi repo on GitHub:[0]

[0] https://github.com/meebey/smuxi/
Yeah I guess I was thinking more of numbing mental pain with drugs as opposed to physical pain and the spiral that could lead to (taking more and more until you can no longer function). In the case of anxiety for example:

1. Avoid work socials.
2. Hybrid working.
3. WFH.
4. Camera off in meetings.
5. Skipping meetings entirely.

Maybe not the best example but you've went from minor avoidance to help you keep your job and avoid your anxiety to major avoidance that will lead to you losing your job - and on top of that your anxiety will have increased to a level that recovering is much more difficult than if tackled earlier.
Return to Monkey Island Announced
I am in the unique position of having built a large part of the RedwoodJS framework (up until about a year ago), and then building Snaplet[1] in RedwoodJS.

So I have the perspective as a creator and a user!

Of course, as an author, there may be some bias, but I've found RedwoodJS to be malleable to all my, and my teams, needs: It's prescriptive all the way down to the architecture, with the intention that you have an "escape hatch" when you want or need something customized.

[1] https://www.snaplet.dev
Threat is not the only factor.
The control (entering a PIN) has a cost (it's tiresome) and only a certain risk reduction value (if they can steal my key, they can probably steal my PIN).
well, wireguard is great, EASY, opensource, super stable, secure, and already in linux Kernel (Windows and Mac, too)

The general public will very soon have plenty of wireguard's offers (and with very basic knowledge being able to run their own little server)

my advice: stay far away from anything (and anybody) related to "openvpn" :) :)
> MAD is for deterence

If you decide now that you wouldn't counteract then, and your enemy knows this, your MAD deterrence plan has already failed.
I remember when this all blew up and the way the Bakery was treated was outrageous. I don't even remember what the original dispute was over but I do remember what happened after and it was pretty awful and unreasonable.
The way I understand it it needs to be activated first, and that requires a human.
If I knew my country's armed forces were 100% a domestic defense and emergency response force, I would absolutely have considered signing up when I was young. You learn good skills, and I see great value in some larger-than-self contribution to community there. My father is German and left Germany for good not long after doing his compulsory 1 year service. He hated it, and it was one of many factors that led to him emigrating. But one thing my aunts have told me is that before he joined he was a disorganized messy irresponsible person, and afterwards he was neat and structured. He is also an amazing marksman, which he learned there (before he left they were talking to him about advancing him through sniper training). He amazed my Canadian uncles when he went hunting with them.

But even here, in Canada, the armed forces gets involved in adventures abroad which I can would characterize as "dubiously thought through" at best ... but "blatantly imperialist" at worst. Being deployed to Afghanistan or some other adventure that I could not support would both enrage and depress me.
Reminds me of the typical story of someone with a complete damage protection plan and a flaky device. Take it in for repairs, passes all the tests, but they know it's funky, so snap it in half or otherwise completely wreck it right in front of the tech and demand that repair.
I guarantee that some of this is un-processed bitterness over my eventual rejection after 3 or 4 rounds of interviewing. :-D

This particular FAANG does have a poor track record on products that have any kind of real-world component. I tend to approach products from an issue-spotting, pre-mortem perspective that's focused on mitigating roadblocks.

I could tell where I was falling short was that they wanted to hear about how it would scale to billions of users rather than overcoming the 0-to-1, 1-to-10 barriers that I was focused on. The response was always that they could skip those steps because of their massive resources.
Introducing buf format
I think I'd rather have the Soviet system of having this system that you can turn on that fails deadly while also requiring multiple parties to agree to turn it on or launch than the US system where just one person has the authority to launch a nuclear attack all on their own.
Didn't you answer your own question above? It's firmware bugs. The disk reported a successful write at block X but it actually wrote block Y. Later you read block Y and you get data X. The block-level ECC codes are consistent. You also stand a low but not zero probability that you requested a read at block X and were served up some other block, again with matching checksums. And of course there's always the possibility that your firmware simply has a bug in the code checker.

The paper "Parity Lost and Parity Regained" assigns a probability of 1.88e−5 to misdirected writes bugs among disks, so if you have a warehouse full of disks you now have this nightmare.
Desktop is actually better for that. At least getting the laptop up to eye height with good posture. My chiropractor says they see more younger patients (30s and 40s) with degenerative disk disease in the neck related to laptop and smart phone use.
J is an APL language. APL is the coolest language you’ve never heard of. It’s mind blowing in the same way people talk about Lisp, but more so since the concepts are so alien to most programmers.
> Just as a quick FYI the other side of the story is the the claim that he'd been drinking large amounts of cognac.

You're not quoting the article accurately:

> lawyers for the city argued [...] that he had consumed a “large amount of cognac” the night before

> A judge who ruled against the city when it asked that the lawsuit be tossed wrote in her order that no forensically defensible blood alcohol test had been administered.

It's very unlikely that his BAC was over the limit the day after (he was going to a job interview!), and regarding the cannabis in the urine, that stays detectable long after the effects are gone.

These allegations are tactics to discredit the plaintiff (note how vague they are, no hard numbers) and make him unsympathetic, and by looking at many of the comments here they're working.
> “Afraid to meet you on my own” is not a valid reason.

Sure it is. Maybe you're about to meet an ex who used to beat you.
They aren’t even trying to pretend it’s a community project anymore.
Someone else posted the same remark 4 hours before you, one comment down. To not repeat the same conversation, please refer to there: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30904892
Location: Sao Paulo, Brazil

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: TypeScript, NodeJS, AWS, React, Jest, Go, C#, SQL, PostgreSQL, GraphQL, Git, Docker, Hasura, Linux, Auth0, Stripe, TDD, Scrum.

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/filipegarcias/

Email: filipe.garcia1997@gmail.com

Resume/CV: Feel free to request on LinkedIn/E-mail.

About: FullStack software engineer with experience in all phases of software development. I worked on several projects in different segments, in which I collaborated in the construction of scalable applications. I'm based in Brazil, but I work remotely for a startup based in Los Angeles.
> I'm probably in the same boat as those people, but in AI. Some of the problems I find interesting are just out of my depth.

You are not. There's an ocean of difference between someone that recognizes their ignorance, and someone that doesn't.
MAD sets ups a lose-lose scenario. No one wins if they fire nuclear weapons so, theoretically, no one would fire nuclear weapons
Books about Data Centers?
I am looking for good technical books about data centers
Cloudscale / emerging tech / etc
I stumbled across "The Datacenter
as a Computer" 2nd edition from 2013.
Anything else/new worth reading?
I knew a Soldier with a 32 ACT (yes, I double checked as that's a great score) from East St Louis. Guidance counselors and everything else failed them, so they joined the mil.

How that kid (making an adult's decision by joining) wasn't scooped up by basically anyone other than their local recruiter blew my mind. If you spend some time around the military jobs that require smarts, these stories are very common. The non-high test score jobs tend to be staffed by very solid and smart people who just didn't have many other options at the time.

Soldiers from enlisted to General can and often are idiots and by glorifying them one risks the same risk as glorifying a professional athlete or any other symbol, but in aggregate the above story is common.
Shell data processing: a nice one-liner
Less crappy jobs, I should say.
> I don't get this argument.

Maybe it's because you focus on typescript here. But typescript is in a position that other languages are not: it has to make things work within an existing ecosystem, in particular with an untyped language. Under these constraints, flow typing might be the best solution. But that doesn't mean it's generally "at least as good as pattern-matching/switch-blocks".

Btw, pattern matching and switch-blocks are very different things - maybe it make it easier for you to understand to dive into a language that has native pattern matching and no switch-blocks at all because from what you write it seems to me that you have not been exposed to pattern matching much yet.
I think the idea would rather be that you would pay 5 cents a year towards his medical care, rather than have to pay all of it.
There is a really big discussion in the legal world right now about whether the indemnification clause in the scooter agreements is binding on consumers.

There are strong arguments made both ways. It's probably going to come down to the CA Supreme Court ruling on this.
This is a useful analysis of what "being an adult" means. I've noticed that the moment when I feel like avoiding social discomfort or potential conflict as the precise moment when I have a choice: either be an adult and understand what I want and communicate it, or avoid it and dislike myself and project those feelings onto others.

Invariably when I choose to behave like an adult I feel empowered and ultimately at peace with myself and others in the end. If I choose avoidance, resentment builds, and further avoidance follows.

The idea that avoidance behaviors can be selfish or agreeable cuts through much self-deception. This can be helpful when I tell myself "I'm just being nice" because it adds the proviso: "yeah, but I'm not being an adult." Which I could see being a really helpful inner monologue in those situations.

This is also intimately connected to the concept of "taking responsibility", which begins with not avoiding something which "someone else" might deal with so you don't have to.
There's no point in reporting spam, just setup an adblocker in general and move on.
the sentence from wikipedia definitely needs more context
As a matter of course, not a medical professional:

Double check against ADHD.

If you have it, it changes how you approach all of the advice you might get, because it means your brain is literally physically different in how it manager attention.

If you don't, that's also valuable intel.

Either way, you'll also want to learn what emotions are in play with your new project cycles. Emotions tend to indicate needs, if indirectly, and if whatever need is driving all of the new projects is not met in some way, it'll continue to frustrate attempts to focus on one project. This is because starting a new project is a well-worn path for you at this point. That goes triple of ADHD or other neurophysical forces are in play.
So you need validation for your virtue signaling? Besides, it's "einen an der Waffel haben". Not the most brainy crowd you virtue signal towards.
You can decide now, you just have to not televise it (or televise the opposite) to the other side. :D

Anyway I'm more interested in the rationality of the counterattack once the deterence fails, and nuclear conflict starts.
uhm, having been active duty for 10 years...i disagree.
Why a command rocket that is launched to broadcast orders instead of using satellites?
It’s not just capacity to counter-strike, but willingness to do so.

This is a whole game theory thing that was developed in could war.

To be willing to kill millions even if it was pointless is part of the game: the enemy must be completely and absolutely convinced that a counter strike will happen. This is the only way to deter.

Absolute and complete certainty cannot be faked (given spies). It can only be provided if indeed the willingness to counter attack is real and enforced.
> But his actions are morally considered whereas I think the question is morally thoughtless.

I would disagree with this. Agreeing to fight an as-of-yet undefined enemy is abdicating any moral decisions based on who the enemy is, or how the war is fought. It is delegating personal moral decisions to the masses.

> He therefore believes he can fight on its behalf based on what the democratic leadership determine.

This is basically exactly my point. The soldier doesn't get to decide that it's immoral to carpet bomb El Salvador; they've already agreed to kill whoever their leadership tells them to.

I find it unpalatable under my personal morals, because I believe there is no act with more gravitas than intentionally killing another human. No amount of societal cohesion or democracy can absolve a person of their personal responsibility for that death.

The basis of the question is "How can you morally justify outsourcing your decision of whether it justifiable to kill a person or not?", because many of us simply can't imagine that. Democracies have done a lot of morally unbearable things, from slavery to the rise of Hitler, so they're clearly not infallible.

This is basically just the Nuremburg defense with a veneer of democracy.