skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Morality is sticky here.

I personally believe in universal health care and would say that his medical expenses SHOULD be covered without any sort of legal involvement. Hell, dude going around high and drunk probably needs to be in an addiction recovery program as well.

The reason he's suing is because he can't afford his medical bills and the legal bills end up compounding the problem. Were there no medical bills, the lawsuit he could bring up would pretty much be pain and suffering... maybe.

So, should taxpayers be on the hook? Partially in the sense that I think all medical problems should be publicly funded. Morally, removing discretion around who gets medical treatment and treating everyone ends up being a good. Will you waste money on people doing dumb things? Sure. However, you won't waste money having a giant system of people trying to weasel their way out of every payment (insurance). More people get their healthcare needs taken care of. An absolute net good.
Theories of Everything with Curt Jaimungal is a great resource if you are looking for a little more than pop-sci.

I think the problem science communicators have is that the English speaking tradition divorced itself from natural philosophy so long ago that it seems intractable to build a bridge back to intuition and meaning from algebraic structures and faculty blessings. Fortunately luminaries such as for example Stephen Wolfram and Eric Weinstein are pulling ears, so the entrenched narrative of the nature of reality is no longer the exclusive purview of the pseudomathematical priestly class. :o)

I warmly recommend listening to Curt's Salvatore Pais interview, as you will quickly dismiss certain doubts about the intent behind certain patents.
>Also, people don't usually go to job interviews drunk.

Having worked for years in the service industry, you'd be surprised.
Handling null: optional and nullable types
Yeah, it's not an easy problem to solve.

But it is worth pointing out because you can't trust plans for figuring out if something will work or not. However they are great for letting you know what's about to get CRUD'd, which in itself is very valuable to help prevent a set of issues but it doesn't guarantee victory in the end.
Some Apple employees are losing their minds about its return to office plan
Morally: Because he's a human being.

Financially: It's a lot more efficient for society to cover all health care that's proven to be cost-effective regardless of who needs it or why. Putting gates on who is allowed to receive benefits costs more than it saves.
What’s the difference with type inference? Is it that flow typing can happen at runtime for just in time /noncompiled languages?
The post frames being avoidant as always being about not hurting someone else's feelings and I think that's almost never the case.

It's usually juggling:

- As a rule I usually end up happy I went to things in hindsight, even if I don't want to in the moment

- Empirically, canceling even once on someone significantly reduced the odds of plans being remade

- I want to see myself as the type of person who doesn't cancel plans
While it's not exactly what you're asking for, I do find the LinearAlgebra (standard) library in Julia to be pretty fantastic: https://docs.julialang.org/en/v1/stdlib/LinearAlgebra/
The author feels like he's on the opposite political side to me, and so I'm ironically sceptical of his own 'policy relevant' opinions.

Having said that, using a study done in 2022 (which we're only just out of the first quarter of) to justify basically anything, seems kind of ridiculous, and I'd like to live in a world where people just laughed that off in the same way they would if someone said an astrologer predicted their policy would be successful or if Joe Rogan was offering medical advice.

And that's before we get to the brainwave part, which seems to push this into the ridiculous.

If we really have no better research to suggest how to improve society in general or child welfare in particular, then that alone seems like a sad state of affairs. We have a whole globe full of children, more than 2 Billion of them in various different locations and societies, have we really not got any way to identify what is helpful. Are we claiming nothing at all that happens to any of those 2 Billion children makes any difference? That seems very unlikely. Or that we already do everything we know to do? This feels only marginally more plausible.
> you sign away all your citizenship rights

> completely desperate ... the military is there as an option

This does not happen by accident. It's practically indentured servitude with extra steps

Step 1: cut public schooling, food programs, job programs, affordable housing, public transportation, free healthcare

Step 2: fund the army to recruit a lot of people. Provide schooling, housing, food and healthcare to soldiers.
Don't let your users get pwned via email HTML injection
That's how the legal system works. If you file a claim and it caused another party legal costs, the other party can counter sue to cover those costs. Otherwise, you end up with tons of legal costs because someone hurt themself doing things they shouldn't have been doing.

"Even more abominable, Bird argues that if the lawsuit goes to trial and Peña is awarded damages, it is Peña who must pay the damages … to himself."

True, most business/user agreements seem to circumvent the spirit of various laws. Honestly, civil law avoids protections of many rights (no right to counsel, lower bar for verdict, ex parte determinations, etc), and the public seems to have an appetite for increasing those actions depending on one's political bent (red flag gun confiscation or TX abortion law).

It would be nice to see more protections under civil law, and restrictions on which rights can be signed away.

Edit: it appears that people are disagreeing. Care to add to the discussion?
Designing a Card Slot Modular Z80 Computer
I think this is more of a dead mans switch and not replacement for individual authority. I would not be surprised if something similar exists somewhere in the US defense system actually. I'm sure there were individuals in the Soviet Union who could fire a nuclear weapon.
I thought the meaning of the 2nd amendment is now not solely understood as needing a well regulated militia. It is presented as an example of the benefit. So a modern sentence would be something like

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. For example, it is required if a well-regulated militia is to be assembled.

Thus disconnecting the "well-regulated militia" idea as the sole justification.
As someone who has worked with extremely intelligent and skilled system engineers, who have all checked each other's work, but still a critical infrastructure issue slips by, this scares the shit out of me. The hubris of thinking human beings can design a robust system that, if it fails, kills everyone alive in short order, is insane.
It seems like there'd be a lot of volunteers to help with building their own. On that scale, I'm not sure if/which FOSS option might be suited. But the sheer technical challenge of scaling a system to > 100 petabytes along with a compelling mission would attract a lot of talent. Heck, if they'd just worked with Flickr long enough to extract the metadata created surrounding these images so that all that effort wouldn't be lost then I bet there would be ample volunteers just to reimplement a way of utilizing it. To discard all that work... I can only.hope that no actual data is lost and they will be able to do something with it in the future.
And to perhaps better refine that comment. I think that if you are going to engage in any form of censorship as a platform, you simply need to be consistent to the TOS you are operating under. I don’t think Twitter is consistent and tends to overlook TOS violations when it involves entities whose politics they will agree with.
The unit is a drop down menu that is empty :(
The bottleneck is both CPU and memory bandwidth. Doing kTLS in software (or in a lookaside accelerator, like QAT) doubles memory bandwidth requirements because something (CPU or accelerator hardware) needs to read the buffer to be encrypted, and write the result into a new buffer.

And doing TLS in userspace, rather than kTLS is even worse, because it disables sendfile. That means you now have extra copies across the user/kernel boundary.
My experience is a bit old (2008 ish) so things might have changes.

I had the GI Bill. I submitted paper work each month that showed I was taking a certain number of credits towards my degree to the VA dept at the school. Money was deposited into my bank account a couple weeks later. I could use that money for anything I wanted. Sounds like this is what your friends had/have.

There are other programs such as paying off student loans when you join up, but I am not familiar with them.
Important to note that tort law apportions responsibility (aka liability) for damages amongst all parties to the tort, so Ralphs would have been on the hook for at least some of the damages since their employee was the proximate cause of the accident (i.e., their driver's actions most directly led to the accident), even though the decedent was impaired or asleep.
No, that wasn't it but thank you for the link. That article is also great!

It's funny how a boiling toad (or an employee) can be psychologically and even spiritually flogged into a mass delusion of oligarchic profiteering masquerading as universal benificence.
One solution is adding the attributes you expect to be modified to ignored_changes in a lifecycle block[0], which instructs terraform to disregard changes to those attributes when calculating diffs for plan/apply. That allows you to specify a value for that attribute at creation time and allow for its subsequent manual/non-terraform-managed modification without causing "drift".

[0]: https://www.terraform.io/language/meta-arguments/lifecycle
> The two are not mutually exclusive. What you're describing is physicists being science writers

That is of course true, but I was trying to point out that it's a much more dangerous situation when writers, presenters, etc. are scientists themselves (whether active or perceived as active), because it allows people to say "well, that's how the experts talk". It's somewhat expected of popular science writers who are not active scientists to speak in a loose way. I do agree that popular science writers need to tighten up their publications, but scientists need to be especially careful when they write for the so-called laymen.

I'll take this as a moment to again push my favorite science writing ever, and that's the Scientific American Library book series. It's some of the best written scientific literature for the interested amateur out there, that I know of, written by experts in the fields in very honest (to the source material) ways.

https://www.thriftbooks.com/series/scientific-american-libra...
I hope city/Bird wins, him being irresponsible without helmet and riding illegally on sidewalk is not tax payers fault.

Too many people want Bird/City to loose just because they hate corps.
I tried to make it easy to read between the lines of my comment. I wasn't talking about his medical care. I was talking about everyone's medical care. And regarding that, there is a quote that has turned into somewhat of a meme that goes "I don't know how to explain to you that you should care about other people." Either you care about people in this situation or not. If you don't care, nothing I'm going to say will convince you to care.
Rymdport is now avaliable on Flathub
For me it's quite situational: I am able to get a beefy laptop that has a higher spec than the standard issue desktop, so I just use the laptop with docking stations at home and in the office. If I have to travel, I fall back to just the laptop.

For my personal use, however, I use a desktop.
I think a better way of explaining "sticking to your principles" is to not succumb to temptation or social pressure to do something wrong.
In the 'Electric Koolaid Acid Test' they'd call this 'being out front.'
The unfortunate truth is that humans derive status from belittling others. Being highly educated is apparently no defense against this common weakness.
Yeah I think it depends a lot on the nature of the work. Writing documents and researching? Sure. Writing code? No thanks.
> Well, WHY did they fail. I agree with you that all your proposed solutions look and feel good and should work. But they don't work if we have right-wing power structures alongside them.

It's not that they don't work adjacent to right-wing structures - it's that right-wing structures lead to powerful people with vested interests in maintaining dominance, and those people will do anything they can to collapse anti-hierarchical change. When Allende was elected in Chile, he took over the factories that US corporations were using as cheap labour. In response, those corporations (including Pepsi) petitioned president Nixon to enact a coup.

> But typically they work for the people employed there, a working product is only "byproduct" of their working. They don't stand a chance with companies making products to make best product out there. Alas, most companies making products now optimise for money given to CxO's and shareholders, so they have crap product anyways. Both pure communism and capitalism are bad.

I agree that the flaw of market entities is that they function in a self-serving capacity and thus making the best product will never truly be their primary goal. I think that's so-far unavoidable, unfortunately - and in either case, a corporation only cares about its shareholders where at least a cooperative cares about its workers.

> No, it's because my father worked in companies with strong unions from unionization start to bankruptcy and he told me how it looked, I have talked with other people and did my own thinking about this. Sorry, but I can't remember all those stories now, typically it goes like with all assured working conditions, where you can't fire worst performers because they have good connections, so they drag your company down. This is typical downfall of all communist-like companies and systems. Working people just work and don't care about politics. Those who don't want to work, just care about politics, are voted in and from then on, they are only parasites. You can't get rid of them, because they hold positions of power. If working people try to remedy this, they are fired until there are too many parasites for workers and whole system collapses.

This is where I think it's so important that organisations be as democratic as possible. If your union official becomes a parasite, you should be able to elect a new one. All organisations should be beholden to all of their members in a way that maximises their autonomy. This is the reason I also like Stafford Beer's VSM model: it constructs a larger company out of smaller, independent companies who operate semi-autonomously while still being structured to pursue a strategic direction. Mondragon is a working example of this.

I believe that any leftist project that eschews democracy is bad, so I think we're on the same page there. Of course, these aren't magic tools - unionisation is not a one-shot change where you get to stop fighting afterwards, as unions can be corrupt too. But generally speaking, opening up the economy to greater democratisation is a good thing in my eyes.
>If she says, "I'm going to Hawaii for vacation," it's not asking which island or deep details. It's saying, "That sounds nice." You care but you don't really care. You're emotionally detached.

That's not really "emotional detachment", though. It's not very different from actually running away the moment you see her, it's just less obviously cowardly. If you were really emotionally detached you would ask for as much detail as you could and it wouldn't affect you in the least.

Incidentally, not asking any follow-up questions to such an announcement is an obvious sign of disinterest. It's just a more polite "I don't care in the least about this thing you're telling me and I don't want to hear any more about it". Everyone knows you're doing it because that's exactly what they say when they don't want to hear about some topic.
The compile time loop fusion is also particularly nice.
Astro 1.0 Beta Release
At one point you could get a whole keyboard like that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimus_Maximus_keyboard

Apple has a patent on the concept; maybe there’s still one in our future:

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20080001787A1
The tax payers are already on the hook for it if he is awarded damages from the city.
This is the insane part of the situation, and what everybody should be outraged about.

You can make a great argument that the rider wasn't following the rules, perhaps was impared, and that taxpayers shouldn't be on the hook for damages (in any case, they aren't, since part of the agreement between Bird and the city is that Bird has to cover damages).

HOWEVER, it is extremely unfair for the terms and conditions of an app to say, "If you use this, you can't sue us, and if you sue us anyway, you have to pay for the cost of our defense against your lawsuit."

That essentially circumvents the entire civil legal system in the United States.

It's a shame that this has come to light in a case of such questionable liability. But don't let that cloud your perspective on this part of the case.

Let's imagine a case where Bird was clearly at fault, and the rider was following all the rules.

Should a company be able to indemnify itself against any liability as a condition of using its products?

Certainly not, at least if you believe in the core principles of the American civil legal system.
Not defending Ivermectin, but what do people have against trying alternative therapeutics for COVID? I rarely see articles bashing the "other side" for being wrong on many COVID decisions:

CDC flip-flopping on masks

CDC flip-flopping on how vaccine prevents spreads

Airplanes being the safest with high quality filters, yet they are the only place where masking is still required (which even the airlines disagree with)

CNN calling Ivermectin a horse dewormer, when Ivermectin has been administered to a large percentage of the global population

... the list goes on and on

*edit for formatting
Thanks, this is really great. I'm in the US Navy reserves and it's fun comparing the similarities of our experiences.
> big discussion in the legal world

I guess this is only big because there are lots of cases that rest on this? Is that because injury rates on scooters are rather high and there are lots of injury claims?
The problem is that this is what people say even when it does have something to do with you.
Fixing transit costs from the inside: an interview with Eric Goldwyn
There are varying levels of accuracy in his post.

For the GI Bill, I put in $1200 ($100/month for the first year), and I while enrolled at an accredited university I was paid $400/month. I could use that however I wanted. Early 90's, that didn't come close to paying for much, but it was certainly something.

I was in the Marines, however. The Army, Navy and Air Force had matching funds and paid a lot more (like triple). This may have all changed or become consolidated.

I've also been through the VA for something and it's very much a government bureaucracy. If you have things documented it will run smoother, and it may run slow at times, but there is certainly no policy of denying everything.

The poster above just has an axe to grind and isn't concerned with reality.
There are limits to your ability to take leadership roles in political parties and to make political statements while in uniform or where there could be reasonable confusion about whether your activity is as a private citizen or as a member of the military.

That is a far cry from “sign[ing] away all your citizenship rights (free speech, etc.).”
Easier to defend than a satellite maybe?
I find myself in the weird position of agreeing with the desire for computing power, general purpose computation, software freedom, and ergonomics, and being baffled by the rest of this take.

Platform availability: Others have pointed out that UEFI hasn't even been a minor hindrance to the linux ecosystem for several years. But also, the post author's argument against the numerous efforts to make linux-first laptops is "They're overpriced", which is not only barely true, but also nuts considering their other positions. Price-fixing is the classic monopoly play, and if you're not willing to initially pay more, you're not serious about fighting Microsoft, period. Also, the Framework Laptop has gotten a ton of press in tech circles, and exactly solves the problem of laptops not being upgradeable. Yes, the basic consumer market is going the direction the poster claims, but alternatives do exist and supporting them is not that difficult if you care.

Ergonomics: SSH provides a perfect way to run your own "cloud" computing solution by having a powerful desktop that you access through a portable laptop (not to mention having a built-in protocol to make a secure tunnel for any service you can imagine). Barrier makes this even more seamless with the ability to ad-hoc treat multiple computers as multiple monitors which still run separated userspaces. These two pieces of software alone give you the best of both worlds, and are simple to configure and available in every linux distro there is. I've repurposed numerous old laptops into workspaces with their own monitors, which I can then use as a dynamic multi-monitor setup with my tower and any laptop I currently use, and I tend to aim for either ridiculously cheap (Like the Pinebook Pro) or ridiculously portable (Ultrathins. I honestly really love having an effectively weightless computer I can put in a backpack I'll be biking with without a second thought about weight, and will totally pay a premium for it) for those. Also, maybe I just have tiny hands, but I don't find laptop form-factors that annoying unless doing very specific tasks that need a real mouse. Even typing on chiclet keyboards with acrylic nails (not something I'm used to having) was a 5-minute adjustment at worst

Throwing up your hands and saying "the battle for general computation is already lost!" strikes me as premature doomer nonsense, given how many people care about this and are creating solutions to all these problems. Hell, the solutions to the problems the author mentions aren't even hard to find
America has one.
This is what I was going to say.

Don't reward Wall Street by taking it private at a fat premium for them.
I just bought a Dell Optiplex built in... I think 2015, on Ebay for $120. Gonna upgrade the memory and storage, then see how it goes. If I like it, I might pick up a few more for the kids. Everyone in the house right now has laptops, and they just sit in the same place, always plugged in, all the time.
A person willing to spend time, trying to understand nature, rather than wasting countless hours on scrolling pages is very noble, even if one did not get or missed opportunity in earlier years of life.

Who knows who ends up being a role model for a bright kid who otherwise would not have taken interest in physics, science or nature, and then goes on to become next Einstein or Tesla or Edison.

Also, I am deeply impressed by the group who are continuing spread of knowledge, giving better direction to the fellow explores without judgement. I wish more professionals could spend an hour or two a week/ month in such a way.
yes. my jit which does the same thing was 10x faster on windows than on Linux. apparently the elf hash lookup beats the linear or whatever primitive search on coff.
Can't say the same for Firefox on Windows, on a powerful PC :/