skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> While the author clearly feels bad about the fact that they've lost his community and that GitHub couldn't restore it (which is honestly what any of us would've felt under similar circumstances), they're also focusing towards the future and using their personal experience as a parable all of us can learn from.

Also, writing a solid blog post about a customer-service corner case and getting it to the top of news.ycombinator can be a great, if somewhat last-ditch, opportunity to escalate a problem.
No, because I don't have a family of my own really, but I do intend to manage it similarly to how I manage my own.

- run my own DNS and tunnel into the home network,

- no TVs,

- no smart devices,

- networked devices in communal spaces only.

I think all the rest like password managers and such are personal choices, but those sorts of behaviors will be encouraged.

There's a line between trying to control the behavior of your family and keeping the environment they're in healthy and safe. I wouldn't want to have a master password or access to all their personal accounts.
Yes, but it is an industry that selects "treatment of symptoms" over "cure of illness" because the former is more profitable.

That's an immoral way to shape demand, one that keeps human beings in states of illness rather than providing cures.

Research into cures isn't funded as much as research into treatments that keep "customers" on the hook for their lifetime.
That's straight up fucking stupid. 100% tax is not a tax. That's theft.
Minor children are actually not legally autonomous. Usually practically either. They rely on their parents for safety. This seems like a weird place to apply personal freedoms.

"Before crossing the street, look both ways. Or don't. But you might have to get a job to pay off your hospital debts. I'm respecting your autonomy."
I’m curious which statements from the article carried that tone?
> I feel like I've hit my zenith already and it's just a slow decline from here on out.

20s: Where your future is ahead of you.

30s: Where your future is behind you.
No. The F-35 has modern tech that the enemy likely hasn’t (fully) seen.

That makes it worthwhile to try and prevent the enemy from seeing that tech.
The rail corridor parallels I-405. In fact, it crosses over it and under it. What more could they want?
Yes, GPT-3 still has a slow review process and it's hard to get stuff approved. That's why the GPT-3 mode in this app is not using my API key, instead it requires users to input their own API key.
Both PBS and ABC are independent of the ‘state’ though. They’re public broadcasters funded by public funds, which are administered by a federal agency (Dep of Industry in Australia).
Oh, those are regulated, for sure.

Try to steal from them and the cops will come after you, plus the risk to your physical integrity.
The difference is less the CIWS and more the amount of displacement that they have to spend on capabilities and the generality of those capabilities.

Even LCSs, effectively overpowered corvettes, have CIWS. They don't have the radar which can deal with threats further out than the 10 miles or so that their SeaRAM can deal with.

Frigates have more room to fit larger radars, power plants to feed them, and missiles to fire with them. Smaller frigates usually have 8-16 VLS tubes with ESSM or SM-2 to deal with threats 30+ miles out. Bigger ones, like the planned Constellation class, will have 32.

Destroyers are where you get enough room to start having strike and long range defense capabilities. The radar is now powerful enough to track ballistic missiles coming in from space, and they have missiles that can intercept them like SM-3. They also have extra VLS to store strike capabilities, like Tomahawk missiles. US Arleigh Burke class Destroyers have 96 VLS cells.

Cruisers have an interesting role. In the US navy, we don't really need them. We have a slightly larger destroyer hull with extra room for a fleet command center that we call cruisers to make congress happy. In navies that don't have carriers, though, their role is to be the main strike platform for the fleet. They'll have mounts for the largest mobile missiles in their arsenal, like the Russian P-700 Granit, which NATO called "Shipwreck".

Carriers are the most important part of the US Navy. Their power projection and sea control capabilities are unmatched. Each one carries their own airborne radar squadron, as well as 44+ strike fighters to not only defend it but to strike back at their foes. The carrier allows the fleet to know everything that happens within 500 miles, and destroy anything that it doesn't want there.

So, why don't we want to just have lots of cruisers? A mix of survivability and flexibility. While offensive capability scales linearly with tonnage, survivability falls to the cube-square law and only increases as the cube root of tonnage. Carriers are a special exception to this, because their aircraft are such a force multiplier. However, they're extremely expensive so very few countries can afford more than one or two. The US, however, is required by congress to have at least 10. For flexibility, it's often nice to have more platforms with less capabilites in more places than one platform with more capabilities in one place.
I think his argument about Falcon 9 was about reliability vs reusability and he partially acknowledged he was wrong:

https://nitter.net/thunderf00t/status/961312911393218560?lan...

About the claim if he is smart or not, you might want to watch this then reevaluate your opinion:

https://youtu.be/5Hyy1zRZPiQ
> The aggression against georgia was due to NATO. Just like the current aggression against ukraine. NATO's existence is a threat to world peace just like the soviet union was. Any sane person would be for the elimination of NATO.

A complete inversion of reality. Post-soviet states want to be part of NATO because they are afraid of Russian agression, and Russia is afraid of those states joining NATO, because that means it cannot agress against them. Hence, Russia starting border conflicts in countries that wish to join NATO in order to secure Russia's ability for further aggression later.

If you don't mind me asking, do you think the invention of the nuclear bomb was a mistake, and the world would be better off if nukes wouldn't have existed (1945-)?
How does the touchpad and the 2 finger scroll compare to the MacBooks? Having used those I haven't found anything matching those.
I love Wine, and use it regularly for other progs like Netscape, but W97 works better this way. Even emulated, it is more responsive and cleaner than GDocs and LibreO
Plan B makes sense if Musk was actually serious/determined (I have no idea but I doubt it). Especially once the stock gets volatile while going down after he sells [part of] his stake before re-buying privately.
You're repeating some of the excuses the article addresses.

- The author says they studied nuclear in grad school, and are probably therefore an expert.

- They quantify the additional risk of meltdown due to delaying new safety regulations. It's negligible compared to operating plants according to the new regulations.

- Their proposal would increase Germany's stockpile of nuclear waste by 3%, which is surely within engineering tolerances, ignoring the fact that the disposal facilities were planned before they decided to prematurely close the plants.

I don't see how it matters which political party made which political decisions in the past. Conditions have changed.
What an astonishingly poor design decision by GitHub. The intelligent design decision to making a repository private is to have private be a flag, and to have that privacy setting propagate down to the watcher level. Then, when a repository is made public again, all the watchers etc return.

Want to give users a way to remove all watchers? Great, make that /a separate action/ -- in no world and in no other application is it an intuitive UI/UX pattern to have make something private mean it gets deleted. That's absurd. Make private means "hidden for the indefinite future, but available to be made unhidden when I as a user see fit." That is the only reasonable definition I have ever seen (Instagram for example).

Whether you want to show a user that they watched a repository which is no longer public or simply have it disappear is up to the user, but I cannot understand why anyone thought that the straightforward solution was to /simply delete the data/. Between this and the now common downtime, I'm increasingly worried that GitHub is simply asleep at the wheel.
My favorite example of this is that the cloudflare.com web UI has some extremely scary buttons, like a little "bypass CDN" button with a cloud on it that will rapidly increase traffic to your site 2-100x if you accidentally click.

I mean this isn't exactly how it works. But it's a bit scary.
You forgot the aliens.
> Nuclear is less safe than grid solar, it slightly beats rooftop solar because standing on roofs is dangerous and most solar installs are new.

Yeah and making the solar panel, how green is that?

I would like to add that they should bring in bouncy castles around homes when installing solar panels, the kids can play on them and primarily will definitely save the installer from falling. You could also package them together, like "Daddy daddy let's install solar panels" and kids could play in different places in the neighborhood that installed them one after another.

And then you get a better image for the kids, plus you get to lower down the "people falling off roofs" statistic and make solar panel look even better.
If you click on configure, you can see the price of all upgrades.
Do you have a LinkedIn account? Login and start talking to recruiters. Ask for contracts / consulting. Consider offering 1 off services that can be executed especially quickly.

Though any method like this works better with time.

It is annoying that there's a slight lag on being able to monetize software skills. Especially with the amount of demand. I've never really heard of anyone having good luck with marketplaces like Upwork. Seems like a lot of low paying gigs and scams.
So basically just get the ones that have a higher end i7 or i5 it sounds like, upgrade RAM if necessary + SSD ( I am guessing its mSata or NVME) and then turn that little screw for write protection?

This has to be the best kept secret in PC's lol
This is a well-written blog post describing a real issue with GitHub's privacy mechanism.

But it is also a little silly for the blog post to show graphs extrapolating the hypothetical number of GitHub stars several years into the future. Their graphs' X-axis goes up to 2028.
I suggest you read "The Field Guide to Understanding 'Human Error'". You'd learn a lot.

https://www.amazon.com/Field-Guide-Understanding-Human-Error...

My view is that expecting humans to stop making mistakes is much less effective than fixing the systems that amplify those mistakes into large, irreversible impacts.
Makes a ton of sense. I almost bailed for the same reason. It was such a ridiculous downgrade. I just barely (today actually) got back a super important feature to me that Play Music had years ago: Save a queue as a playlist. If this private API gets a C&D or gets aggressively broken, I absolutely will bail too.
Putting aside the way these figures are calculated (addressed in sibling comments), I'm always surprised at the lack of interrogation of the charitable contribution deduction in these conversations. The way that the tax code is currently structured, everyone who doesn't itemize their deductions effectively subsidizes the charitable preferences of the ultra-wealthy. If we wanted to promote charitable giving in a more equitable manner, why not simply eliminate the charitable deduction entirely and then use all the extra revenue to give each individual a "charity voucher" which they could donate to a charitable organization of their choosing?
Judges usually hate this "well actually..." reasoning when you try to go against the spirit of the law in the US.

I assume in China where they can just jail the CEO on bull shit charges they'll definitely put in a good faith effort.
I don’t know for certain but I feel like this could allow something like 1. Takeover/inherit public repo with lots of stars 2. Take repo private (retaining stars) 3. Replace repo code with some malicious/offensive code. 4. Take repo public again 5. Inherit the trust/prestige of the old repo.
> Carriers are the most important part of the US Navy. Their power projection and sea control capabilities are unmatched. Each one carries their own airborne radar squadron, as well as 44+ strike fighters to not only defend it but to strike back at their foes. The carrier allows the fleet to know everything that happens within 500 miles, and destroy anything that it doesn't want there.

Modern US Carriers are pretty absurd though. Do they really need 2 runways and 4 catapults?

I get it, in combat, you really want to launch your aircraft really fast. But it does show how building one-ship with 2x runways is considered better (by the US Navy anyway) than building 2x ships with 1x runways each.

There's a lot of decisions that went into the design of these ships. I'm not sure if they all made sense... it all comes down to what modern naval combat is (and frankly, no one really knows what modern naval combat is... there hasn't been a clash of major powers since WW2. Falklands War IMO doesn't count since Argentina isn't really the same kind of power as United Kingdom)

------

I think everyone knows that our Carriers are vulnerable to enemies. But they're so useful for power projection that we keep building them...
My main struggle is more broad: I dislike modern crappy and archaic IT toolchains. For instance I see no points in using Meet/Teams/Zoom when we can do the same without a central service, but so far beside few limited software like Jami or classic, buggy and expensive stuff (classic VoIP gears) there is almost nothing and more important nothing spread so even if that's theoretically perfectly possible avoid those modern platforms I simply can't: being able to talk to myself alone is not much interesting.

Similarly I hate when people send .docx instead of a pdf with proper forms (and when people print then scan documents, or take photos of their screen to send them instead of a screenshot) etc...

Google by itself does not sell anything more crappier then it's competitors, so I "hate" them equally seeing not much differences between them. Beside that in corporate terms, it's not only a matter of internal choices stakeholders choices have to be taken into account and in the present time it's no less tedious avoiding Alphabet than using it, unfortunately...
$930 buys you a heck of a good used thinkpad as well with great Linux compatibility.
It’s possible. It depends on how the thing is covered.
this is ridiculous. It can genuinely believe that lockdown is the best approach, even if said approach turns out to be the wrong move. Which is hardly even a settled point.

In fact, it seems like the height of arrogance to think China is making decisions about its greatest city with Western opinion in mind.
(Whether it's a good idea or not,) people often use stars as a quick-and-dirty proxy for "is this repo reasonably well trusted?" and "how big is the community for this project?". All else being equal, many people would default to using a repo with 20,000 stars over a repo with 20.
Oh, you mean a symbolic lowering at the end of term to get votes? Yes that happened. But rates were not zero at any other time during that term. One can speculate that they would have gone right up again had the election decided differently.
No, that's not how it works :).
Please see the link I attached in my first post. Again, what I'm saying is pretty basic well accepted economics.

Think about it in the extreme. Suppose the cost to produce the product goes up above the current price. Obviously the price will have to go up.

Or imagine the cost goes to nothing. Then depending on the elasticity of demand, you might make more money selling more for a lower price.

Stop trying to reinvent economics.

http://www.sanandres.esc.edu.ar/secondary/economics%20packs/...
You can do that without the “making it private and public again” part anyway.
Just showing the two screenshots feels a little disingenuous though. It's not like that dialog just pops up randomly and asks if you want to delete a random repo, and the only way for you to know which repo it's talking about is to read that line near the bottom. In each case the path to summon that dialog had to go through direct interactions with the repo in question.
> I specifically dislike the "Lessons" section, as it throws all the blame on github and doesn't mention the seemingly obvious advice: "make sure you're not on autopilot when taking potentially dangerous actions, on github or any website".

I don't know. Github employees themselves have made this mistake as outlined in the post, and they were easily able to recover from it, which probably lowered the priority on changing any UX.

Essentially, it's a complete non-issue depending on whether Github cares about you.

Would you like the police in your area to behave in this manner? I think not.
FIFO? First in first out? The blockchain is essentially the timestamping machine. The timestamp of a transaction are untrusted until mined into blocks, even then a fork can rid them.

The blockchain is essentially solving the ordering problem, one big timestamp machine. The solution you propose would require a timestamp machine in the first place lol.
Autopsies suggest Covid’s smell loss is caused by inflammation, not virus
Along with pointers to current and historical information as to why arriving at PoS has been such a long and interesting road to hoe, while also being an open/source process involving teams and individuals all over the world.
Nah, people will just sternly say “I need to leave” and go. They’re not ants.
No, but by the wonders of a moment's consideration we can surmise that leaving an example of the US's newest stealth technology, in the backyard pool of the power it's primarily designed to be used against, might not strike someone in the US Department of Defense as the world's cleverest idea.

(For what it's worth, I don't love linking to Less Wrong for this or any reason, but I couldn't as quickly find another reference for the point about Bayesian search theory. If not for the fact that I've seen it mentioned elsewhere in, let's say, less breathlessly wide-eyed technopositivistic contexts, I wouldn't have included it at all.)
Open Source Mobile Assistant for the Deaf (iPhone Only)
He will sell 42000 NFTs to his followers.
On the plus side. 54k know and use this project not because they have it starred. So it will regain the stars rapidly, and it will again hit all the trending metrics, so new people will discover it also. No biggie
My point is that Twitter or Facebook or whoever can exercise their own free speech to not propagate what you say, whether that be for the reason of “misinformation” or for the reason “contains the letter X”.
Not if the candidate incites violence - there should be no difference on these social media platforms for how they treat us and the elite.

We would get kicked off and they should too.
It's unlikely something like this was (or will ever be) successfully pulled off. But there are well known supply chain attacks where firmware of various devices was compromised.

There are also some (unconfirmed) tales of extra, tiny ICs soldered on to existing connections on a PCB at just the right spot to spy on a data bus (those would definitely be more plausible than compromising an IC at the Fab).

It's also possible to add trojan hardware into an IC at the design phase (most likely with the "help" of the owner or otherwise forcing them via lawful or unlawful means by government entities).
But couldn't the same be achieved without taking it private?
It will deter people who are accidentally telling on themselves.
Also sometimes supply or production is inelastic and not possible to scale down and up. Thus to have chance to generate money in future they had to accept loss now.
But that would almost certainly trigger nuclear retaliation... if they drop conventional bombs on nuclear plants, the retaliation level is is much less clear.
Proof that it was censored by the United States government is what decides if it’s legal censorship.
the source I was looking at contradicts that, but w/e. a further consideration is that for solar/wind you have to consider energy storage associated mortality as well but I think that's besides the point. they're all on the order of 0.1 deaths/TwH. the public perception is that nuclear energy is dramatically more dangerous than other methods of energy generation. data says, it isn't.

there are a lot of reasons why dramatic expansion (of the kind needed to take the edge off climate change) of hydro power isn't feasible. for one most of the suitable sites are already used. and the environmental impact is substantial
No, the only use case is not illegal activity.

NFTs, smart contracts in general, gaming, defi/lending/staking, DEX, DAO, Filecoin/IPFS, and a few more in itself are not illegal. You may consider them to be useless, but that's not the same thing as illegal.

Even if you scrap all that, there's the remaining core use case of speculation. Which in itself is also not illegal and an incredibly important use case, if not THE use case.

You may be frown upon speculation, look down on it, judge it anyway you please, but it does not change the fact that 100M+ people with an exponential growth rate are into it. I guess growing your money is popular, who would figure that.

The point I would like to get across is that instead of judging, you should have a deeper look at the WHY. Many people think that these risk takers are plain dumb, selfish, irresponsible. If only regulation would protect them against themselves.

That's not the situation at all. They're fully self-aware. They are young people born into an economy that is plain broken to them. Burdened by student debt, stagnant/unlivable wages, unaffordable housing, zero or negative interest rates, high inflation, no job security, unaffordable healthcare.

They barely get by and have no outlook of ever getting ahead, owning any asset or wealth, and the very simple goal of a basic middle class life has become unattainable.

In a backdrop that cruel, why not throw the little money you have into a shitcoin? It might do a 10x. It might also go to zero. Who cares? You didn't have any meaningful wealth to begin with.

And that is the appeal of crypto. It's not fueled by greed for the sake of greed, it's fueled by desperation. Nothing to lose, everything to win. Crypto is an asymmetrical bet, and the only one available to everyone.
> it wouldn't be a free speech issue

It really hinges on what you mean by the phrase "free speech" when there is no clear context.

It is true that in the context of US lawmaking, the free speech rights specified in the 1st Amendment are in play.

But there is the concept of free speech outside that context also. For example the editors of a newspaper being inclusive of viewpoints in the "Letters to the Editor" section or a radio show being inclusive of viewpoints from callers or a website operator being inclusive of viewpoints in public comment sections.

I think there is value in advocating for inclusiveness in those (and other) contexts and labeling that idea "free speech" but I don't think it has to be "absolutely no moderation or restrictions". There is room for an editorial policy in those places and there is room to criticize any particular policy that some entity might put in place as not being supportive of "free speech" even when there is no 1st Amendment context in play.
I feel like a parallel universe has suddenly intersected our own.
…at maybe 10g, not 10,000g.
Ah I wasn't aware. For what is worth the gueswork does seem accurate enough to be useful on the videos I tested last time.