skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think the issue is that many people are emotionally invested in not understanding things, in other words you assume people want to understand things. In my experience there is a significant portion of the population who doesn't (and that crosses through all social and political spectra).
China More and More Beyond ‘Inflation’
To be fair, his brother Squarepusher is bound to be different from MOST musical artists. Brilliant stuff, though. He’s a fantastic artist. In particular his ‘Ultravisitor’ album is a work of remarkable depth and forward thinking. Strongly recommended.
I checked it out and the number seems about right(like up to 2x but not too much). So, to beat an airplane on fuel efficiency you need to be at least 2 persons on an extremely fuel efficient small car.

Surely, the actual costs calculations will need to include the infra and operational costs however if you check the energy consumption per passenger per distance[0], rail transport is always on the more efficient side of things.

Unless the infrastructure and operational costs of trains are higher than airplanes, I don't see how airplanes can be more competitive. Is the rail infrastructure that much expensive?

Maybe the argument can be made about convenience but on efficiency, trains look more efficient.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_efficiency_in_transport
Yes, managing webaudio nodes is pretty hellish. If you're interested I maintain a small library for abstracting them - basically you pass the library an object describing what oscillators and filters you want, and what timing envelopes you want attached to their params, and then the library creates and destroys everything. It has no concept of plugins or processing, but it makes it convenient to play around with arbitrary configurations of basic nodes.

The library is here: https://github.com/fenomas/wasgen
> Answering questions like "did fleet battery life get worse with yesterday's update?" get really really hard when you start managing thousands of devices.

To me that only seems like a question you could answer by managing thousands of devices. Not that it would be easy, just that you couldn't really answer that very accurately with only a handful of devices.
> Once Fusion is solved, we will have the ability to sequestrate carbon to offset everything we do on earth

There are lot of IFs in your statement. Sure, it's theoretically possible to harvest so much energy that we can regard it as freely abundant without any real external costs. But this is not the case today, and probably won't be the case for hundreds of years - if ever.

* > Successful governments should be responsible for running sequestrators on tax funding. *

There's no such thing as large scale carbon sequestrations. It's unclear if this is a sensible solution to climate change in general. It makes much more sense to switch to renewables as quickly as possible and to limit emissions as much as possible. THAT's what a successful government should be responsible for, not for investing in false promises.
The issue being that you're operating in good faith, while they're putting on a show. You're immediately at a disadvantage because they can use any tool at their disposal, whereas you have to stick to truth and rationality.

Unfortunately, the latter two don't typically scale all that well, especially as the bad actor hones their ability to put you in a rhetorical box.
“Fast AF inc” chuckle
To be fair, when deciding how to implement CLI options, it's probably advisable to run as far away as you can from drawing any sort of inspiration from openssl. Even git looks like a paragon of UX compared to the openssl CLI.
You can't control the outcome of a conversation, and cynicism goes hand in hand with bad faith. Communication is still the most awesome thing that humans do, or will ever be able to do!
I have realized when browsing some twitter culture war exchanges that people almost never respond to the opposing party's arguments. They imagine a set of arguments that uses some of the same words and then argue with that. This type of exchange never results in agreement -- or even the exchange of information! It's unhinged from any communicative act. It's merely inflammatory.

I do think this is extremely problematic in the long run.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79775

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91138
My understanding with how TLS was originally intended to be modelled, is that Certificate Authority-ness was supposed to be delegated as well; or at least, more and smaller entities were supposed to be CAs. (About the same kinds of entities who got IPv4 /8 allocations, really.) Big companies like Microsoft were definitely supposed to be their own CAs, enabling them to assert the authenticity of their own zones' subdomains' certificates without the help of any external CA. Generic commercial CAs were supposed to be for the use of regular contractors, not enterprise megacorps.

For some reason (probably industry collusion), X.509 Name Constraints were there from the beginning to enable an extensible generalization of this, but we really missed the boat on supporting them, until eventually doing so became very very hard. We're still making progress toward enablement, though!
Fucking love trains. I live in Berlin and visit Zurich often (that's where I'm from). I can just get into the train in the monrning, work, eat, drink and by the end of the workday I'm in Zurich. Extremely convenient, and not really more expensive than a flight if you book a couple of weeks in advanc, even for first class.
Seems like an unusually simple exploit, essentially using an advanced postgres feature as intended. Impressive though!

The fact AWS overlooked access controls allowing a customer to reach system files, let alone the STS token, on a multi-tenant service is worrisome.
Ironically, although you accuse your parent comment of this, I'm not sure what the intended takeaway of this comment is.

You call it "romantic" but the rest of your comment is just restating/affirming two random points?
> Ironically, from a neutral outsider view, what happened on the 6th of January can also be described as "a bunch of morons thinking they could get their way and being absolutely obnoxious".

Pretty much any coup attempt in history can be described like that. You can insult those people or underplay attempt to overthrow election as "being obnoxious" pretty much always.

That does not lowers significance of it.
Note that it's still four hours compared to one for a flight - and flights are still cheaper. Even if we assume two hours for arrival, boarding and an hour for local transportation in Berlin, flight would still win on price.

(I just checked for "Munich to Berlin next monday": 120€ cheapest for trains unless I want to sleep in them, 105€ for a flight, with more choice of time.)
It's rare that it's achieved without bloodshed: consider the partition of India for the worst example, or the war in Kosovo, or the wars between Ethiopia and Eritrea. It's true that the breakup of Czechoslovakia into two countries was peaceful and smooth, but that's an exception. The problem is that how to divide or even whether to divide is a complex and controversial question and people tend to fight about it.

I think your guess is backwards: attempting to split up countries makes war more likely if you look at the record, at least, a local war.
You need a government with enough heft to take on a corporation that has decided to ignore the law. If you think you can get heft via "better", go for it. History doesn't give me much reason to be optimistic.

"The problem with corruption, inefficiency and stupidity in government is corruption, inefficieny and stupidity, not government."
Covid Smell Loss Linked to Damage in Brain, Study Finds
I don't see why. There are billions of people around the world who own phones, and certainly not all of them are iPhones.
Every user necessarily needs their own frame buffer. Or they’d all be looking at the same screen.
Is "bad faith communication" always in bad faith (ie, socially undesirable)? Some people are just wrong because they are talking out of their arse, and need to be put in their place.
If the question is "how did they get that valuation despite being a very bad business", it's simply that investors gave them too much forward credit against the very big risks they had to surmount, the biggest of which seemed to be the Founders lack of discipline and inability to execute properly.

>> So they hired a massive team of oncologists no expense spared, but their abiilty to deal with cancer isn't good enough

The Fast founders highlighted their team at every turn, showcasing trophy hires from larger, successful companies. Investors bought into this hard especially at the Series A and B fundraises, and believed that a strong executive and engineering bench de-risked the business more than they had.

>> Well, they wouldn't be risks otherwise.

Not to them! The issue here was the high degree of self-delusion and spin amongst their team and investors. They downplayed the challenges at every turn, and tried to convince others (and themselves) that they had already gotten past all the hard parts. As it turns out they had not.
Please share the ways, thanks.
i would imagine intentions could be derived from resource scarcity or abundance.

If aliens intend to invade over resources, the cost of such an invasion (from an energy consumption perspective) is so prohibitively high, that harvesting from a closer body seems way more feasible.

If aliens intend to invade over not resources, but some other factor, then we cannot guess it. May be there's what amounts to religion and the invasion is a defacto purging or converting of alien species over to their "god". Or to exterminate any possible future competition (aka, darwinianism at the galactic scale).
Youre skipping the criticism of his guest list. He's had Bernie Sanders on what, once, twice? Then he's had no other major leftist political figures or commentators but has has loads of extreme right wing figures including crackpots like Alex Jones.

Joe Rogan can claim he is a moderate leftist all he wants, but his guest list on JRE does not support that
I'd guess that it's probably just that `-i` and `-n` were used for other options, and `-v` is the next letter and a fairly prominent sound in the word.
Buried lede at the end of the abstrac: They got execution on the Titan M.

That seems like a BFD.
Yup I'm of that vintage too but not of that culture specifically. He's definitely at a different level than "Hackers" was, but Hackers really typified a culture that didn't really exist except for perhaps a one-off here and there.
Tech journalism is more dependent on clickbait than most. I think they think tech is boring so they need to spice it up with manufactured controversy. Science journalism has a similar issue. Very sad.
Oh I agree with the projecting and I appreciate how you described it there, helped clarify it more for me.

> So in the case of your ex, I would say she was engaging in bad faith communication (though possibly without consciously being aware she was doing so).

I think it's mostly the label of "bad faith" that frustrates me. I don't like the communication techniques that she used, but I still question how it could be "bad faith" if she doesn't believe she's acting in bad faith. It's almost as if she believed I was communicating in bad faith. So bad faith communication is assuming the other is communicating in bad faith? I don't mean to run in circles, I really just don't think labeling communication as bad faith will help me resolve most conflicts.
His public actions his entire life.
I don't think so.

Yes, the "first" Evernote had great features, but it was all over the place. No clients had the same set of features, and web side was even worse.

When they ditched everything and rebuilt all clients from the same base, they've lost some of the cool features, but I find it much easier to use and rely on.

Only after that point I bought a subscription, fully went into it, and currently building my knowledge base inside it, and collaborating on some stuff.

Simpler is not always worse. Yes, the old Evernote was a "road warrior's utopia", but the current incarnation works much better on a cross-platform perspective, and I'm a happy camper.
trains are weird because most European countries they are sorta nice but carry some kind of sizeable cruft. be if general disrepair or weird privatization incentives
Good question. Research suggests providing removal explanations [on posts] results in less work for mods [1]. And more research into reddit moderation is on the way [2].

The first time silent removals were discussed on reddit was apparently in 2007,

> "A better idea is a silent ban. Let him post comments" [3] (found via [3.a])

In 2010 reddit's CTO said he supports silent bans [4] after a blogger discovered they had been silently banned. And the CEO in 2017 said it was necessary [5], then in 2018 said,

> If we knew everything everything we know today about spam, enforcement, and transparency, we probably wouldn’t build shadow-banning. It’s use is really limited to spam, and I think the downsides (false positives, lack of transparency) outweigh the benefits.

> That said, it was useful in the early days when spam was more of an arms race, we didn’t have moderators or reporting, and our content policy was limited to spam. [6]

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/duwdco/should_mode...

[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/tk7xl1/meta_c...

[3] https://web.archive.org/web/20070604141333/http://reddit.com...

[3.a] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20647592#20650370

[4] https://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/bbc58/silently_...

[5] https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/5q4qmg/out_w...

[6] https://www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/8k5qh3/if_y...
Exactly. This explains why those in the middle receive the most aggression: they're traitors AND hated by both extremes.

Whether you want to or not, as things get more polarized, it becomes ever more difficult to maintain any kind of nuanced position.
> I didn't hear that as the pretense for invasion either.

Then you didn't read the translation of Putin’s speech announcing the invasion, or any of many other things not targeted by the Russian government primarily at Western audiences.
> Maybe without those bumps in the road, he would not have put enough effort in the craft to actually reach this quality.

I thought you said you weren't saying this applies to him? This sentence seems like a non-sequitur then.

I take your point about child actors losing acting skills, but why project that on him? We don't know if that was the cause in his case.
> But if the greed is not coordinated, it's not going to pull an organization in a unified direction.

Greed won't direct an organization in a unified direction, but that just exposes a vulnerability where an outside party can exploit the greed at an individual level to direct the organization in a unified direction of its choosing.
Instead of an authoritarian government forcing "ungood" into our vocabulary, we've got companies pushing "unalive" into our vocabulary, at least in online discourse. If this fervent content blocking becomes an industry-wide practice, there won't be much that separates us from the language regulation in 1984.

So what, we just hope that Twitter doesn't give in?
Their scale. Other news sources may be guilty of the same behavior, but Fox News has the largest audience so its natural it has the largest amount of criticism.
Mid-year 2020 is not what I'd call running a service for "a while". That means its been GA just long enough to drop out of college.
That's part of it, but as the article points out many tanks have been captured undamaged: tank gets stuck in the mud or runs out of fuel, drivers run away.
This isn’t really specific to ACME; most CAs are happy to sell domain-validated certificates only for subdomains. It sounds like this is a quirk of DigiCert mostly only selling org/extended-validation certificates, or them trying to make future sales easier.

ACME-supporting CAs and other CAs are all held to the same compliance standards in the end, so nothing prevents the other from doing what you want.
It's highly, highly uncommon, which is why the "Ponzi scheme" label falls flat to anyone who is close to venture. Seed investors will typically not exit their positions until very late in the company's life, either in later growth rounds (C, D, etc.) or at IPO.
Ugh this is shitty. If you'd like happy to help you find a new home - I'm a co-founder of routable.com
Hasn't it happened many times throughout history? It might not appear natural as we can identify a direct cause of it.. But who's to say it wouldn't happen in some other form with different actors if it didn't happen with Putin?
Find some of my favorite Visual Studio Code extensions here, including screenshots and explanations why I think these are worth downloading.
I think they didn't cash-out on social capital. They grew, and became "enterprise first". The recipe is to limit free services and increase the price of paid service, so only big customers and serious users get attracted to you.

Trello did the same thing. They killed their single-user friendly features and moved to enterprise first, gouging serious solo users in the process.

I'm still subscribed to both, but I'm not as happy as before.
I'm Deaf and I Have 'Perfect' Speech. Here's Why It's a Nightmare
I suspect engaging in bad faith communication goes along with not being too interested in understanding things. These tactics seems to say "Your perspective is unworthy of consideration. I want to ridicule or destroy it."
Quite odd indeed, maybe there are some legal reasons not to mention it. If they could, I feel the whole article could be condensed to "we just shipped a LetsEncrypt alternative gated to Google Cloud customers".
It seems pretty inhumane to see the victimization of minorities in China purely through the lens of US domestic politics, but ok, sure. It’s not about the human rights issues, it’s about…upvotes from American HN readers?
The value of your work is what clients will pay. Clients are not a social cause -- they are consenting, for-profit businesses. If they agree to pay 3x what you think they should pay, you should graciously accept it.

As for why our work is so well-paid, it's because we automate things, and automation kills jobs. That's the sad truth: you can measure our value in how many people our software saves our clients from hiring.

A good example: one of my clients was struggling to find $160k/yr financial analysts. Their jobs were 90% copying and pasting data into Excel.

We automated the copying and pasting, and now that client isn't hiring any new analysts.

We spent $30k on the software and our client saved at least $800k. They pay us somewhere in between.
I think it's not quite so simple. I previously believed in some of the strong ad honimems against him (and I have revised that position). However, I am very critical of some of his behaviour, he himself has used bad faith communication (often adopted from right wing pundits) strategies to criticise "his side/the left" and had the same time goes onto shows like Tucker Carlsson and does not use it to engage in critical dialogue with him, or call out his constant bad faith arguments, but instead "bash the left".
I work on this space a lot, and maintain a couple of libraries you might be interested in. They are very much focused on light quick "good enough" web audio music/sound effects.

https://github.com/fenomas/wasgen - a declarative abstraction layer around web audio oscillators and filters

https://fenomas.github.io/wafxr/ - a GUI front-end demo for the previous
That was not the case here though! Fast's primary backers were Index, one of the leading valley firms, and Stripe, which, while not a professional venture firm, is highly sophisticated and deeply knowledgable in this space.
I think digitization, specifically the commoditization of attention in advertising-supported social media, has strongly incentivized bad-faith communication. It turns out that outrage and conflict are a great way to get attention. So systems made to profit from keeping attention have inadvertently started promoting conflict and outrage to capture the value of the attention produced.

This has been profitable enough that these social media now dominate a large part of public discussions, and other platforms have followed suit either by choice or by selection pressure. Hence a large part of public communication is happening in a context that is (inadvertently or intentionally) built to encourage conflict and outrage. This rewards bad-faith communication, so that is what we get.
> Seems like the folks at Stripe didn't do very good diligence

Perhaps, although given the market they're in, success for Stripe may look very different to most others investing in Fast.

Fast weren't going to create their own payments system, so being entirely or substantially backed by Stripe payments would have been valuable to Stripe once Fast scaled. Investing in them as a mechanism to encourage this could have been quite beneficial.

It's also quite possible that a desirable outcome for Stripe was potentially buying out Fast and integrating it into Stripe. At that point Stripe would already have plenty of inside knowledge, being on Fast's board, and already owned a significant proportion of the business.

Investing ~$100m to get this might sound like a lot, but if you make 10 investments like that, and get one success out of it that can generate ~$2bn of revenue at some point for Stripe down the line, that's probably around break even, assuming 50% margin. Very rough approximation, but at Stripe scale, that sort of business is entirely possible. TaxJar is another example, not sure if they were investors, but they acquired the company and it'll probably end up contributing that sort of revenue, possibly more.
i took your comment as on literal value and nothing else. I get the same wild wild west feeling in deep areas of USA, maybe west virginia. How I as a reader would understand your intentions if you write like NYT or BBC about how "exotic" this foreign land ?
How can you assume resources scarcity if energy isn't conserved? At this point all bets are off.

How do we know that traveling closer in the same time takes less energy than traveling further? We can't assume that anymore.

And so on. This is my problem with most sci-fi. They take some crazy assumptions and ignore most of the consequences so the world is recognizable.

This is like people in ancient Greece hearing that one city in 21st century has more population than the whole world in their time and wondering how we feed our horses :)
0% chance that Germans would tolerate these in their landscapes. Also, how do you think this would work with a train going 400kmh+?
It's not just help. The example shows this

$ podman -h
Error: pflag: help requested
See 'podman --help'

The program recognised the flag. But instead of running the intended functionality, it tells you to re-run it. And this maddening behaviour is pervasive. You already have the code processing this, you've coded the functionality to output "you wanted X, but typed Y" because apparently this is a common thing for people to do, why don't you just run X?

(Looking at `brew upgrade/update` in silent fury)
How long did we have writing before the median person could read and write?
Really quite infuriating as a founder hearing stories of nonsense projects getting handsomely funded while meeting with time-wasting VCs that insist on taking less-than-zero risks on you.

Can't help but think the famous VC concept of "pattern matching" is a euphemism for something more sinister.
Most passenger rail in Europe is electric though.
The private companies that do have incidental root certificates in trust stores, like Visa, are endemic sources of compliance issues.

If any company should operate a CA, it should probably not be random enterprise companies.

For one example: https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA:Visa_Issues