skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> A few years ago, John Ioannidis (RIP) published an article on conflicts of interest in nutrition research. The conflicts you get in this field, he said, are different from those in, say, Big Pharma-funded trials of new drugs. Not only are there those usual kinds of financial conflicts—some research is paid for by the food industry; nutrition scientists have diet books to sell—but there are “nonfinancial” conflicts, too. If you’re a strong adherent to the particular kind of diet you’re researching (vegan, Atkins, gluten-free, etc.), Ioannidis argued, you should disclose this at the end of the paper, so readers can be fully informed about how the research was produced.

I find it's common to see forum comments like "we know this researcher is a big advocate of X so this study is bias". I find this critique is usually very shallow and sets an impossible standard.

Where are you you going to find researchers pouring years of their life into researching a subject they have no interest in or opinions of?

If you were studying vegan or Atkins diets for example, it's an ongoing personal choice in your day-to-day life if you're going to switch to/from that diet or not, where either choice could be used to imply bias in your future studies. And after a few years of research, how could the evidence you collect not impact your personal choice? And if it doesn't, what would that say about your belief in your own research?

Researchers are trained to be aware of their biases, to devise experiments that reduce these biases, and peer review helps identify problems here also. Another part of peer review where the media jumps the gun is that other researchers should be able to replicate the studies themselves to check the results - if you become known for producing highly biased research that can't be replicated this is surely going to impact your career (e.g. less citations, less funding, distrust from peers) so there's a very strong incentive to keep this in check?

I think in general, the real problem here is the dysfunctional click-bait approach the media has with scientific reporting (exaggerated, sensationalist, premature, lacking any nuance/caveats/details) and the public's understanding of the scientific method is very broken e.g. the notion that scientists are always changing their minds, little understanding of how to evaluate how strong evidence is before accepting it as true, which includes dismissing everything about a study because they can create a story about one researcher being bias.
Apparently not. It's a long-time since, but I remember adults largely couldn't hear it (not too surprising) but I had friends my age who hadn't a clue what I was on about either - a sentiment shared by at least one other neighbouring commenter.
With regards to optimization passes, does it matter if the analysis is infeasible? We agree the optimization/transformation from the first version to the second isn't valid, so I think it shouldn't have been done.

The original version with two stores and one load doesn't seem to have a problem. Having the optimizer punt when it gets confused by integer to pointer casts seems acceptable.
And what do you suppose is the ratio between train stations + shopping malls vs actual street level tobacco and magazine stands/shops is in most European countries? 1 to 700? 1 to 1000?

Any way, the whole argument is redundant. Go head to your nearest newsagent and see if they stock it. If you live on top of a train station or a supermarket then you’re due both congratulations and commiserations.

For everyone else… you can’t buy them at your nearest kiosk.
What's the problem? If you don't like it, go build your own platform right?
I used this combo for a while, but there was a period of time where VSCode updates would break the vim integration. This was a few years ago, and I’ve recently reinstalled VSCode for use with F#, since Ionide seems to work better than in Neovim.
The MariaDB packages for Debian and Ubuntu are similarly tiny.
Are we losing optimization on x86/arm due to mere existence of other hardware (like symbolics or CHERI) that handles things differently?
Question: what is the state of thinking behind managing external dependencies in C? This project appears to just check them into source, which is pretty simple, and I am tempted to do so on my own projects. Is this the preferred method after years of not-so-popular attempts at package managers and various issues with things like CMake external sources, github submodules/subrepos or custom scripts to download source?
Or they'll block land value tax just as they so zoning.

But you seem to be agreeing with my point that it inherently is designed to affect choices (eg changing land usage to be more productive).
> it has always been puzzling to me why actually blighted properties, essentially abandoned by owners not living anywhere near the area, werent taxed at ridiculously high rates.

Because the governments don't want to take possession o the houses.

If you tax them high, the owners default, because taxes exceed the property value. Then the government is the owner of a low value deteriorating asset that nobody wants.

This is beside the point that such high taxes would essentially be justifying government taking property from those unable to pay because of aesthetics.
I don't think it makes a difference for cars at intersections. It only gives cyclist additional options if the cyclist already has right of way.
Almost everywhere it is illegal for bicycles to ride on the sidewalk without dismounting but everybody from parents to judges and police make excuses for this behavior.

Cyclists crash into pedestrians at high speed all the time going down hills and going around corners.

In my mind it is a perfectly fair bit of judo to firmly grab the handlebars and dismount them forcibly if they are endangering the public this way.
> Could not the same be easily claimed about Iraq and Bush?

Yes, to an extent. The harm to America was far less than what Russia's facing. And the benefits to Bush et al less than what Putin hopes to reap.

Bush could retire in peace. Putin can't. Risking his country's destruction for a few more years in power wouldn't make sense for an American President; it does for Putin.
My TCL 4K HDR Roku TV turns on in 2 seconds. I hit the power button on my Roku TV app on my phone in the remote section and I count to two and there is an image on the display and then I hit right once and then okay and then one second later I see my Mac desktop. Amazing!
Prior to Oregon's passing of a similar law, I lawfully stopped at a 4-way intersection on my normal bike commute home and was rear-ended by a car who "didn't see me" and was presumably planning to blow through the intersection. Given my experience, I see laws like this as a safety thing rather than a "reduce the physical burden" thing.
One easy answer is that something being ineffective doesn't mean people won't try it anyways.
I always try to give cyclists a wide clearance when passing them on the street and slow down behind them if it’s not practical to pass at the moment. I don’t really mind sharing the road with road bikers, they seem to be thoughtful about the impacts they are having on other traffic.

The cyclists that bother me are the ones riding fast and recklessly on the running trails around town. They can be a significant hazard to the joggers.
The one who is mistaken here is you, although I shouldn't be surprised that someone can dismiss what is relatively deep semantics work in compilers on the basis of misunderstanding what's actually going on.

The first fundamental issue is that pointer provenance is an area where people have (historically) dealt with the issue as essentially a requirement of data-dependency: for a dereference `p` to access an object x, then p must be at the end of a chain of arithmetic computations where &x is one of the inputs. It turns out, however, that compilers do not preserve data dependency, and there is pretty unanimous agreement among compiler writers and specification writers that they should not* do so in general.

What this means is that the challenge we have is how to specify something that generally follows the data-dependent rules while still allowing compilers to do their non-data-dependency-preserving optimizations. There is a working group in the C committee that is doing this. The current leading candidate for a specification is based on the idea that you track provenance (i.e., data dependency) via pointers, but not via integers.

This means that now we need to pin down what the actual semantics are where you convert a pointer to an integer or vice versa, and this blog post is part of the effort of trying to pin down sane semantics here.

So, yes, restrict is a promise from the programmer to the compiler... but what is the programmer actually promising? That's what this blog post is exploring.
It never happened for lunch for me. It happened while overhearing a discussion a few desks down during working hours.

And please, lunch is hardly a privilege. You can make lunch for $3. It’s a benefit for the company masquerading as a benefit to you. Coffee is so cheap it’s almost free. I buy it at Costco for around $20. I don’t know exactly how many cups I get, but it’s so cheap it’s not even worth calculating.
Oh right, Dominic, sorry about that! Thanks for the reply.
Oligarchs owning media and having it run PR is not new, both locally (Orban, Babis , Berlusconi) and globally (Kochs, Murdoch, Bezos).

What is new is the free speech angle - but that seems to be just Musks ego. Musk is doing what every other billionaire is doing, but has to spin it as saving the world, somehow.
We still run it today; they had a major release last year, I think. Its key feature is that it remains email-first. Customers never interface with the website, for them it's all just like they're emailing a human, with some extra tooling and tracking on top.
I don't get the trap problem here. So I start with A, compute -B as A dot A, then continue my way until I decide to stop at E. So I had to compute the whole path, right?

Now you give me A and E, why can't I just compute the path from A until I hit E? That looks like the same effort, so what did I miss?
The bike lane that suddenly doubles as a right turn lane always makes me nervous, but having said that ... I haven't ever actually had an accident with one.
Are there any TVs that are rootable? If we can't have dumb TVs, we can at least install Cyanogenmod and hack them to work properly.
That's not them caring about politics, that's them not wanting a repeat of "but her emails".
And that's a MAJOR contingent of people against remotework.

Most middle and upper management can't do it. They fail. They're impediments. They're also the ones who want glass "fishbowls" to show off their employees' toil, AND to "supervise" professionals for the lack of appearance of work.

In reality, companies would do themselves a LOT of cost-cutting to getting rid of ineffectual managers who get in the way of process and progress. But then again, its that class of workers is why we're dealing with anti-remotework all the time.
They did, it one of the larger parts of systemd that motivated its adoption and ubiquity.

A bunch of commercial UNIXes sprung init replacements/extensions with process lifetime management systems in the 2000s, systemd is visibly influenced by many of their design choices.

OS X natively uses launchd (uses plists for config, has a weak dependency system) , Solaris uses SMF (uses XML for config). There were also the daemontools/runit family, s6, and a couple others that sprung up from open source quarters.
Ed25519 is defined over the 255 bit field GF(2^255-19) and thus has fixed size keys, so having key size recommendations for it is silly. (The underlying EdDSA can be generalized to other sizes).

256-bit ECDSA is fine, it offers the same theoretical security level as Ed25519. Its main problem is that historically implementations were fragile (relying on high quality randomness for signing) and not resistant to side-channel attacks.
Dell doesn't
Here's the real life flip-side from someone I know very well. She was propositioned by her creepy, married supply chain manager. Didn't report to HR. When layoffs came around her name was pulled most likely because her creepy manager was embarrassed. Other insecure women in the office viewed her as a threat and tried to silence or embarrass her. Oh yeah, she also got an award from the supply chain VP for a perfect year of all on time deliveries (which never happens), but was still laid off...
> It's on most of the smartphones on the planet.

Sadly enough, probably not for long: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuchsia_(operating_system)
It's not an assumption, it's very obvious in his rhetoric that he prioritizes cars and the laws built for those cars over cyclists and any potential laws built for them. Hence, cars-first.

Even if he rides his bike everyday, he still views the world from the perspective of someone driving a car.
I think it is simply, intersections are the most dangerous place for a cyclist to be.

This new law reduces the amount of time cyclists spend at an intersection.
This should extend to all pedestrians as well.
RE: traveling to socialize with distributed coworkers:

As a person with three children and a working spouse who's busier than I am, and as a person managing a distributed team, the notion of convening my colleagues in one area for a team-building event is stressful. I recently have been given budget to do so and have been volun-told to organize such an event. Many of my direct reports are eager to meet up in-person. I value their happiness so I will to oblige them. And I'm not going to lie, it sounds like fun - I really do like the people I work with. However, being away from my family for days is a hardship for my children and my spouse, who already has enough stress and is unaccustomed to being the day-to-day caregiver. Since those are the people I value most highly, it's hard for me to justify the time, expense, and effort involved with traveling for the sole purpose of socializing with my coworkers.
> Not saying its a bad idea, but I'm still struggling to see the full logic of it.

If you don't have to stop at an intersection, you get through the intersection much faster and are therefore in less danger. This is true for all vehicles but especially true of bicycles, which don't always accelerate as fast.

Here's a video demonstration https://youtu.be/42oQN7fy_eM?t=71
My guess would be that there is not enough unified Hardware
This is laughable. Social graphs are not trivial. It may not be as complex as landing a rocket booster on a platform, but it’s definitely as complex as monitoring a car.
To head off a whole lot of fallacious assertions, personal anecdotes, and so on:

https://cyclingfallacies.com

Specifically, the page about red-light running, which if you scroll down lists numerous sources showing people on bicycles do not break traffic laws more than drivers: https://cyclingfallacies.com/en/11/people-break-the-rules-wh...

People think cyclists break traffic laws more because cyclists are a minority outgroup, and like any other minority outgroup, negative behavior and attributes are exaggerated. A whole slew of observational biases come into play.

The absolute favorite thing drivers love to shriek about is cyclists not obeying stop signs and stop lights. Except that in urban cities, the most common cause of crashes is usually doorings and "hooks" - where the driver passes a cyclist, while braking and turning - something that is almost impossible to avoid because a car can out-turn and out-brake someone on a bike, and the situation was initiated by the driver. Doorings? You can tell people "ride outside the door zone" but that usually ends up subjecting you to all sorts of abuse by drivers, including "punish passes", which turn into collisions when drivers misjudge the distance and hit the cyclist instead.

The amount of hatred drivers have for people on bicycles is astounding. Even people like the head of the British Automobile Association described the attitude drivers have as being similar to racism: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/11/16/cyclists-abuse-r...

There's also the ever-popular self-loathing bicyclist who loves to criticize and victim-blame other cyclists. It may come as a surprise, but victim-blaming by members of a group is done as a psychological self defense mechanism. Being struck by a driver is something that by and large you have no control over; cyclists obeying the law, riding prudently, in a straight line, on a straight road, wearing high-visibility clothing, etc still get plowed into. That's scary, so people invent reasons why the victim was at fault - reasons that coincide with steps the victim-blamer takes that they think protects them.
>It's not possible to build back up another token before the ban expires.

I think you fail to realize how slow low end devices that can use wikipedia is compared to the latest high performance processors.
>>If you want anonymous editing, providing it to some is strictly better than providing it to none.

Objectively: Not always. You're creating a tiered society. The argument is saying "Why do some people deserve freedom but not others?" It's great if you're part of the in-group, but exceedingly unjust if you're non-vandal bycatch due to the blanket bans. You can't have some democracy, it's all or none.

I'm unable to anonymously edit by default because I have T-mobile for my phone and internet services and there is a blanket ban on T-mobile IPs. This is the 3rd largest telcom in the US with about 108 million users. I'm going to assume that less than 1/10th of them are Wikipedia vandals, but a blanket ban has been put in place.

Explain how it's "good" that a random AT&T user can make an edit, but I (or another random T-mobile user) can't? Follow up, explain why making everyone who wants to edit register an account is a net bad if it's the only choice for millions of people?

*edited for typos
If you have ever said the word "bloat" unironically on your computer with 64G of RAM, built in might be for you.

I really just want one config that works on:

* Yes, my Ryzen 5 with 32G of RAM

* My Pinebook Pro with 4G of RAM (and like 3.7G accessible) (and limited storage as well)

* My jump host / gateway VM with 512MB of RAM (and even more limited storage than the PBP)

So pulling down and running node.js to use coc.nvim has never been something I was interested in. Before nvim-lspconfig I used LanguageClient-neovim (a Rust client).
Oh that's actually the point of the exponentiation trick: I choose the private key first and then compute the path from it.

Got it, sorry xD
> an IP address meaningfully identifies a single editor

I'm fairly certain that the GDPR believes an IP address is PII and imposes a bunch of fairly onerous restrictions on how network administrators are able to log and analyze them. So it doesn't seem like that ship has sailed at all. If anything it's been reinforced by actual law that it _does_ meaningfully identify someone.
Ease of installation is definitely a fair criticism until juliaup is made the default way that people are told to install and update on the website. We should change this sooner rather than later.
In context, it should be clear that kernel development is a niche.
The properties of curves make certain protocols safe/unsafe in my opinion. For example some curve might be a good choice for BLS while being very bad for ECDSA. Therefore the choice of the curve is really tied to the encryption/signature scheme I think. I am not an expert though. Contact the cryptographers they are really friendly (not a sarcasm)!
I think a situation like this can be similar to the kind/nice distinction.

Your hot coworker may never get the respect (or have the chance to earn it) because people only seek them out for their surface level traits and work-irrelevant things like having access to attractive women.

The behaviour is not hard to reign in either: I work with a few very attractive women with whom I have great chemistry and could probably lure into long conversations and yes, build subtle sexual tension.

However, it’s way more mutually beneficial that our relationship is based around their competence in engineering, or HR, or sales. As you pointed out, the easy route for many men is to baby or pester such women, which can even kill a company if it gets too pathological.

I’ve even seen well meaning male personalities at work cut off or talk over the more soft spoken (and IMO smarter) women. I actively try to fight that tendency when I can- without being imposing- and see surprise/appreciation when I do so.
cool story bruh
Then grade accounts by more than one metric. I've my account for years and made plenty of edits but it's treated like some newbie account that may be a bot? Because I value my privacy?

I use Britannica for anything that isn't celebrity/pop culture based now, I thought Wikipedia had killed off "proper" dictionaries but they're going in reverse. I enjoy the irony of that.
Certainly, significantly less than bikers killed by drivers.

Bikes and pedestrians are low-speed, low momentum, and low likelihood impacts.
You're advocating a form of feudalism, only the key differentiator is "expertise" rather than land ownership or the ability to field an army.

Any time somebody says something like "Trust us, plebs. We're the experts." I know I should, in fact, not trust that person.
I spend most of my time inside a terminal and have my shell configured so line editing is as much like Vim as possible. Also configured Vim modes everywhere else possible.

Also, although historically that hasn't really been part of the Vim ethos (compared to Emacs at least), you're expected to mold your editor over time to suit your needs exactly.
> a world in which people are very bad at estimating their own skill, therefore, statistically, *people with lower skills tend to overestimate their skills, and experts tend to underestimate it*.

I think the correct conclusion is that if a cohort is not good at estimating their own skill, you can conclude that the variance in their predicted self-assessment will be high (since they’re concluding things without strong evidence), but you can’t assume that their estimates will be biased without additional evidence.

That is, indeed, what was shown in the last panel of the article: freshman (and undergraduates in general) are much worse at assessing their own ability than professors, but no group has a strong bias towards over- or under-assessing their own ability (recalling the “my guesses are much better than your guesses” from “The Death of Expertise”).
And what are the dazzlingly original ideas that the world does not let you work on?
>a performance clearly above his rating

His live rating takes his performance into account. And it's more likely that the high performance was luck, since every player has good and bad streaks around their rating. A few wins does not magically make one a solid 2800 player.

As such, since Nak's current rating fully accounts for his last performance, and even with that (which even he says was simply good luck, not some fundamental new mastery of chess), Nak is currently live rated at 6th of 8 candidates (assuming Ding is the last one, which seems likely)).

So, given that it's more likely for a player to have random ups and downs (as borne out by millions of games of chess evidence across all players, including Nak), Naks performance last month is most likely above his rating.

You can argue all you want about what you feel. The ratings are a much more solid prediction of performance than all the good feelings in the world, especially since most of the Candidates have performed at the current level of ratings for years and years and years, including Nak.