skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The difference to rust is that this happens with rust compiled binaries also at run-time,

The list of issues you linked in an apparent attempt to support this claim are almost all (or maybe even all) compile time crashes not runtime crashes...
The hacker news post doesn’t even link to the article about what’s new in react 18: https://reactjs.org/blog/2022/03/29/react-v18.html#new-stric...

> To help surface these issues, React 18 introduces a new development-only check to Strict Mode. This new check will automatically unmount and remount every component, whenever a component mounts for the first time, restoring the previous state on the second mount.
This is an important point:

The app cannot lead to drivers receiving speeding tickets. Since Speedcam Anywhere’s algorithm has not been vetted by the Home Office, it is not legally a speed camera, and cannot provide sufficient evidence for a police force to issue a prosecution for speeding...

If you want to make the roads here safer, what we need is more resources to put real traffic cops on patrol, with proper training, the ability to deal with the full range of traffic offences, and proper equipment that creates admissible evidence.

What we don't need is more wannabe heroes who have very strong opinions but often very little understanding of what actually makes the roads safer, wasting some of the few resources the real law enforcement authorities do have on complaints that cannot possibly lead to a successful prosecution even if they're otherwise accurate, which inevitably they won't always be.

Obviously there are also legitimate concerns about vigilantism, road rage, and excessive reliance on laws creating absolute offences that might be easier to enforce but aren't necessarily the best ways to penalise actually dangerous or inconsiderate driving. However in this case those are largely academic discussions because there is no way an app like this is ever going to clear the hurdle mentioned above anyway.
https://www.jsm.jsexmed.org/article/S1743-6095(15)30695-0/pd...

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20562024/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19341803/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10843193/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7477289/

http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/2010to2014/2013-t...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4987404/

https://academic.oup.com/cercor/article/18/8/1900/285954
I just wish there was a good way to have something like Zeal[1] for PDFs. Navigating a big pile of huge datasheets and manuals (a processor TRM can be 5000 pages!) is such a huge pain and that's assuming they have decent TOCs, which many do not.

[1]: https://zealdocs.org
Don't follow people who can't do basic statistics.

That source for New Zealand completely misreads the data.

The left side of the first chart (and mos shows cases per 100,000 population total, NOT per population in each specific vaccination class.

You have to adjust based on the population in each class.

https://www.health.govt.nz/covid-19-novel-coronavirus/covid-... shows that 95% of the population are fully vaccinated, and 4% are not vaccinated. That's a ratio of about 20-25x.

Your reference states that for every unvaccinated person with a case, there are 6 fully-vaccinated people with a case.

Which means the unvaccinated are about 4x likely to have a reported case than the fully-vaccinated. But that's "ONE FOURTH the Infection Rate", not the almost complete opposite "SIX TIMES the Infection Rate".

Now, I can wrong about the numbers. The above is a back-of-the-envelop calculation by someone who knows little about the specific NZ details.

But they are enough to point out that the stated "SIX TIMES the infection rate" is a drastically wrong understanding of the data.

Going back the main link (to boriquagato.substack.com), I also read "i took the raw data from the vaccine reports and compared cases per 100k population" and "by dividing cases per 100k in vaxxed by unvaxxed".

Is it really the same miscalculation?!?

Why divide "cases per 100k population" instead of "cases"? Otherwise, as the number of unvaccinated people goes done, their case numbers go down, even if the infection rate is higher.

And the linked-to sources even say "Comparing case rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated populations should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 infection. Vaccine effectiveness has been formally estimated from a number of different sources and is summarised on pages 4 to 14 in this report." (quoting https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... )
That's a DOA product. ISP's are notoriously terrible at everything; especially firmware. They can't be trusted with something like this.
For some value of “correct”. Actually, it's often more like skipping a few tokens until some kind of synchronization point (e.g., a semicolon) is reached. It's good manners for a compiler that does this to refuse to produce a binary.
would not recommend

not only can you not sign up to many services, customer support can often get confused when you need to email reply to them and you cannot email from your aliased email. they see you as a separate user not in their system, or the wrong person replied to the support ticket, etc.
Clearly acting suspicions and trying to run away from the scene of the crime. I say we give him a beating and claim it resisted arrest.
Yes but that costs quite a bit more than PV. Lazard puts it at $126 to $156/MWh.

https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-...

That overlaps with Lazard's range for conventional nuclear. And there are lots of reasons to think molten salt reactors in general would be significantly cheaper. Thorcon thinks it can get their cost down to $30/MWh.
Agree the best is both. Your source pertains to Bangladesh, not sure the results necessarily carry more generally, due to the different society/demographics/etc.

Please provide sources for your other studies - "far superior" is quite a strong claim
Show HN: Caloree for iOS First Beta
Hi all ,

around a year ago after becoming frustrated with existing calorie counter/diet tracking apps mostly due to the fact that you have to pay a monthly subscription fee. It seems like these days everything is subscription-based. Another annoyance was that some apps didn't respect my privacy and/or forced me into becoming a part of their own social network.

Hence, today I am happy to announce that I am releasing a first, early beta version of Caloree.

What is Caloree?

Caloree is a simple calorie tracker that respects your privacy and does not try to sell you a subscription. Instead, once we launch Caloree, we will offer 2 tiers of one-time in-app purchases:

* Pro: you will get access to hundreds of thousands of products, be able to scan the barcodes of these products
* Ultra: you gain the ability to plan several days in advance and in the future you will get nifty features, such as image recognition, Apple Watch support, Widgets, etc.

What to expect of the beta?

As mentioned, this is an early build, so there will be rough spots here and there. I am also working on additional features as I am writing this. The product catalog is still quite raw, currently lacking basic foods such as eggs and milk, which will follow in later beta versions. The weight screen still needs some love and also data entry could be better.

Participating

If you would like to try out Caloree on your iPhone or know some friends who would like to try it out, feel free to install it: https://testflight.apple.com/join/65dEEqFM.

I'll be scanning this post for any comments or feedback that you might give. If you would like to participate more actively you can also join my Discord server (https://discord.gg/h4XCmkPq) where I'll try to be available at least once a day to discuss feature requests, learn about any issues that you found or anything else that could be useful regarding Caloree.

I hope you like this early release of Caloree. Happy testing!
Rudy
I think it makes sense as a place to expect bugs. It's a rarely used feature which interacts in a unique way with some pretty core parts of the compiler, in a platform dependent manner.
Don’t count... much like those prisoners who are generous organ donors.
Some containers go right from boat to rail, or maybe moved around the yard at the port to go from the boat to rail. Amazon may also have warehouses serviced by rail spurs, and not have to use trucking to get their containers from a rail terminal. I don't know if they do, but certainly some containers don't see any road on the way from the shipper to the receiver.
It's also just a stupid idea. You "can't criticize" many groups of people who hold no real power. The quotation was devised solely to apply to criticizing "the Jews" (and by extension implying they "rule over you") and laundering it through Voltaire just puts the flakiest of intellectual veneers on top of this nonsense statement.
Magic Ink: Information Software and the Graphical Interface (2006)
In addition, all communication is context sensitive. When a politician who needs nei-nazi votes to get elected says something questionable, it's not unreasonable to assume it was intentional.

Dog whistles are why we can't have nice things.
What's wrong with subscription fees?
>Commons sway votes, which sway policy in a democracy.

Evidence suggests otherwise[1]. In the US (and really anywhere else) public policy is elite driven, and if anything public discourse and public opinion is amorphous and shifts as a response to whatever is passed down by institutions, be that corporate, academia, the media or what have you.

This very intuitively is visible in the 'topic of the day/week/month' nature of American discourse where everyone seemingly synchronized goes into a frenzy only to move on to the next thing a while later.

The 'commons' are a giant entertainment machine where people who have practically zero influence on anything meaningful can spent their time, that's about it.

[1]https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli...
Why should it be socially acceptable to generate misinformation? It's in the end harmful for everyone. (I don't mean obvious parody and fiction, clearly labeled as such).
Yeah, but it would still be stuck at supporting something like DirectX 8 and OpenGL 1.3 (like the GeForce4). It would certainly be faster and more efficient but modern games and other software wouldn't run on it.
Too old to change careers into software dev? Probably not, a very good friend of mine started out as a nurse and then retrained at 30. But too old to compete with others in your age bracket for senior positions when you show up as a 60-year-old fresh from a 6-month cybersecurity diploma after not coding since the 80s? Yeah maybe a little. It's important to set your expectations according to current relevant experience.
6TFLOPS would be competing against 3050 (9TFLOPS), lowest tier current-gen GPU from nvidia.
You mean like, someone else read it for you?
For most projects, there's at most four hours of storage, just enough to shift peak daytime supply to peak evening demand. That's not the same as getting through the night, or having enough overcapacity to meet demand in cloudy winter weeks.

Lazard puts the wholesale cost of solar PV plus four hours storage at $165 to $296/MWh:

https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-...
I was implying consistently good. As in, the ~ 90% protection was relatively uniform
Compression doesn’t imply decompression… see JPEG, H264, etc…
> I am saying that people who are seemingly opposed to that stuff are the first to shout that Twitter is a private company and thus can manipulate its userbase however it wants.

One thing to consider is that this argument is being used rhetorically to force interlocutors into an uncomfortable position. If you are a famous politician who has been championing the unrestricted free reign of corporations to pollute, abuse employees, abuse customers, etc. for decades, but now all of a sudden you're upset about certain decisions those companies make regarding their own products, people are going to throw that in your face.

The argument will continue to be made until those arguing for tighter controls over corporate free speech agree that corporate power in other areas must be checked as well. I'm all for greater oversight of Twitter that would lead to more free speech. But I'm not going to start arguing for it until there's a broader recognition that corporate power writ large needs to be reduced, not just at the corporations which make things politically uncomfortable for certain politicians.

To me, it seems like some politicians would like to pass laws against e.g. Twitter specifically that would help them politically, but they would like to preserve corporate power in general where it benefits them. They want corporations to be people when it benefits them, but they don't want corporations to be people when it's politically inconvenient.

That's not how this works. Until conservative attitudes about corporate power and corporate personhood shift generally, Twitter will retain the power they have now, since they are people according to conservatives.
Tonight we're gonna log on like it's 1979 (Telenet, Dialcom and The Source)
https://emojied.net/stats/%F0%9F%99%80%F0%9F%99%8B%F0%9F%98%...

Neat.

Emoji domain would have been fun.

[edit: less fun since you can't put emoji's in HN comments (thankfully i suppose)]
https://reflect.app/

Always open on 1/3 of my screen.
I noticed the first day this was down because I was using their API in a demo. Bad luck
If you get married, you'll find yourself solidly in that intersection, don't you worry.
and ffs don't close existing ones that can continue to operate to replace them with gas "temporarily" like the dimwits in Belgium are doing

Actually, Belgium has decided to keep open the two plants that are easy to continue to operate (easy is relative, they will still require a billion euro in maintenance work). They’re still closing the five that would require extensive multi-year downtime and costly renovation (like pouring new concrete) and replacing them with gas plants, but there’s not any real alternative anyway as they would have to shut down for multiple years so new gas plants are unavoidable.

An interesting fact is that a few years ago there was a constitutional court decision that prevented keeping the plants open on anything less than a five year timeline from the moment of deciding, unless there is a risk of blackouts. The only reason the plants will be able to stay open in 2025 is therefore because of Putin.
Considering that China controls most of the NIC supply

If you're referring to Realtek, that's Taiwanese.
The comment you point to is in a different thread. Not every point I make in life is the same point.
> Why (aside from creating jobs) is it good to discover that the universe is more complicated than we knew, or that we were wrong?

Because this would give us hints to new degrees of freedom in the current models that seem to contradict each other but otherwise work extremely well in their respective their domains.
Finding a crack in those hermetically closed models would be wonderful.
I've been using this for years and can say it's very nice.

Caps2esc under Wayland and I think I used to use xcape under x11 though it's been a while. (caps2esc has a configurable framework so you can use that for a different key and it should work nicely for you)
That's why we need underground nuclear power plants.

War in Ukraine showed how fragile surface infrastructure is.
Where's the outrage and incentive debates when fully formed human babies are "aborted" and sent to be burned for biofuel? All done by for-profit companies all the way through. I definitely didn't see it here in HackerNews.
> belief without evidence maybe?

Huh, "religious" people also like give plenty of evidence before they burn/shun/deplatform anyone. Evidence can be a thing whatever mob tries to enforce. Main thing is people look evidence in support and not contrary to their beliefs.
I think that the cost of maintaining a site over 200,000 years is a fair point. That said...is it better or worse than coal? Because practically speaking, that's what the choice is here, as far as I can tell. I'd love to say we can quickly convert the whole world to pure renewables, but it's very likely that we can cut our GHG emissions fastest using a mix of multiple approaches rather than ruling out the good in favor of the best.

And note that when you consider costs of something that you have to make a payment on in perpetuity, we don't calculate that as an infinite cost[1]. To say that we'll have to safeguard this nuclear waste in, say year 100,000 of its lifetime, is a lot less of an ask, simply because we have no idea how advanced human technology will be then, maybe making the problem trivial, or whether humans will be completely gone, etc. I agree it's important to think about future generations and to have a very long term view, but the problem of nuclear waste seems much less urgent than the rapidly mounting costs of climate change. Even if we end up using nuclear for, say, 100 years while we transition to completely sustainable, renewable energy, that would be a win over continuing to use fossil fuels. And I don't think it would even add that much to the existing burden of dealing with nuclear waste. Maybe in 200 years we find a spot and put all the waste there with big warning signs etched in stone, and then the main cost is only one of ensuring that we main translations and records of the danger of the site as language evolves. Dealing with solid waste, however careful you need to be with it, seems much easier than trying to collect gases that have mixed into the atmosphere.

[1] https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/fi...
This is interesting in that it seems it may be possible to download all of my comments from all threads and put into sqlite and then be able to search for old comments without have to go scroll page by page, click more - ctr0f - scroll - more repeat.. going to have to try this!
A Science of Buildings That Can Grow–and Melt Away
Or ... conspiracy to commit murder, fraud, organized shoplifting, or an insurrection on the capital, e.g.?

Or ... falsely smearing people and companies, potentially anonymously?

Or ... doxxing journalists, government officials (including judges), doctors that refused to give Ivermectin, or rape victims?
> Does Locutus have a facility for something like payments?

It should be possible to build a cryptocurrency on Locutus, using the arbiter mechanism to prevent double-spending.

> So you have some mechanism for sharding, or are all computations repeated by 100% of the network? Also is there a mechanism for sharding data?

Computations are not replicated across the network. There is a mechanism that serves a similar purpose to sharding but is more "organic".

Peers are assigned locations in the network when they join (a number between 0.0 and 1.0). Contracts also have locations determined from a hash of the contract code itself, and peers store contracts that are close to their location. The more people using a contract the more widely cached it will be, as a form of auto-scaling.

Locutus uses a small-world network to allow contracts to be found very quickly in an entirely decentralized way.
True, but I think allowing potentially UB-invoking code to not use "unsafe" (e.g. because the use is in the context of FFI, so the unsafety is thought to be "obvious" and not worth marking as such) might be even less advisable. This makes it harder to ensure the "social rule" mentioned by GP, that every potential UB should be endowed with a "Safety" annotation describing the conditions for it to be safe.
Stanford education prof calls cops on Berkeley prof who exposed $5000/hour fee
It doesn't seem that vaccines can be the complete answer - due to waning and variant mutational avoidance. Unlike measles vaccine. Hence other measures may be necessary if we wish to control Covid
I think, in your second paragraph, you kind of contradicted yourself. If "weaponized victimization and othering" are the problem, well, victimization doesn't weaponize itself. Somebody is doing those things. So now we're at "a group of people are causing these problems".

That means that, yes, we kind of do arrive at an us-vs-them mentality - even you do, if you think a step or two further.

Now, you could be pleading for the Christian "love the sinner, hate the sin" idea - people are doing these things, but we need to not "other" the people. And that may be a real point - if "othering" is what they are doing, and we think it's wrong, then we need to be careful not to "other" them. At the same time, while we try to figure out how to help them not destroy society, we still need to keep them from destroying society.
No they are not, most marriages are not between people with that different IQ. Most people are not that different even. What a weird thing to say.
Sidorenko’s work is a good place to start, as it demonstrates the significant amount of effort (relative to NATO forces) that went into creating a Soviet doctrine of nuclearized ground warfare. But Russia has actually leaned more aggressively into limited nuclear use (starting with the 2000 MoD doctrinal review), since they’ve lost the relative advantage in conventional military mass that the Warsaw Pact had over NATO; in current Russian thought, the use of tactical nuclear strikes to control the political progress of war is a more important component of their perceived correlation of forces than in the days when they could overrun NATO in the Fulda Gap in hours with armor and artillery. (NB, prior to JFK’s New Look retool, the US policy in Europe was nuclear retaliation against Soviet conventional assault, so for a decade or so the US, and very much its European allies, were much more willing to use nukes than the Soviets.)

Over the last decade, Russian leadership has repeatedly floated public hypotheticals (including the Zapad military field exercises) in which nuclear threats (or, in their war games, simulated nuclear strikes) are used to deter NATO from operations “beyond the edge of the Russian empire” (such as majority-Russophone regions in the Baltic states), which is in keeping with an evolving strategy generally termed “escalate to de-escalate” in the West. In fact, where Western game theorists developed an intricate theory of nuclear deterrence vs compellance, the Russian literature refers to both using сдерживания, seeing threats to compel and threats to deter as functionally identical, strategically speaking. (Compare with the PLA’s “Science of Military Strategy,” both editions of which discuss the PLA’s nuclear arsenal in deterrent terms in the event of a general war in East Asia against Western forces.)

This is what unnerves game theorists about the Ukraine war and Russia’s poor performance there — if it weren’t for global public opinion (crucially China and India at this point), their doctrine certainly encompasses an escalatory demonstration strike (a tactical-yield weapon on a largely uninhabited area of farmland, for example) used to quickly “de-escalate” the war, freeze the lines at a position of relative Russian advantage, and force Ukraine into negotiations.
Most parties are currently torturing and killing civilians, but some have better PR departments. Guantanamo Bay, Iraq, Aafghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Venezuela, and the list goes on and on. Nobody cares until white people die though.
> aggressively conventional minded

An aside:

One thing I love about VCs is the perfectly fitting, memorable terms they coin. This is a perfect example, I can't stop laughing.
Oh please!! everyone just clicks 'accept' blindly . What exactly did this achieve?
The 'fun' part about minimal addressable memory sizes (assuming hardward supports) is this :

if addresses are 64bits, and only 48 bits are used for addressing,
there are 16 bits available for other use!
Are you sure that was the actual sender? Email allows you to write whatever you want in the From field.