skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"Literary value" is a hard thing to define. It's a famous book that has inspired (negative) real world events. It has comparable Google search traffic to "The Black Flamingo", one of the books listed in the article as being available, despite being written in 1978. It captures the thinking of an under represented group of people - by which I mean white supremacists, not the kind of "white supremacists" who think affirmative action is bad, but the kind who literally explicitly want to exterminate non-white people.
If you’re some random dude who shows up off the street, proprietary software vendors probably won’t share source. But for large contracts, it does happen. Even MS has been doing this for over 20 years.

This type of proprietary licensing is called “shared source” licensing.

And for more customizable B2B software, shared source is very common. (Or, basically, anything delivered in an interpreted language)
And yet, after all these years, mod_cloud_notify is still a community module and not even mentioned in prosody.cfg.lua.dist.
For most applications, developing quickly is more valuable than correctness. That is why formal methods will likely never have widespread adoption.

As for law, a judge always makes the final decision and they are not a formal method. It doesn't matter how tightly the law is worded if a judge is in the loop evaluating intangibles like intent.
You can have personal development without being productive.

There are many hobbies where you don't produce or monetize anything, but they are still better watching TV. For example, playing a sport, learning an instrument, reading books, learning a new language, etc.

The distinction being whether you are producing something or learning something just for its own sake.
My ethernet is also capped at 1 Gb/s for most of my computers. The 10 Gb/s connection is still useful as it makes sure that things running at different devices won't affect each other. Streaming won't affect games won't affect work-related video calls. It's great.
But you should be empirical. Does this change meaningfully impact public literacy? If it helps even a few kids, that’s great. Let us see if this moves the needle. There are opportunity costs with public policy, and so we should try and try to be results oriented when deciding what constitutes “good change.” Look at all of the problems in the world right now which can be directly linked to frivolous and performative policy moves, made with little consideration for the actual impact they have. I will be, very pleasantly, surprised if this does anything more than sow greater cultural division in a hot election cycle.
The obvious problem with Blockchains is that they can only manipulate things that exist inside of them. This means even something as basic as the interaction between blockchains is troublesome.
> as you have just attested to: your friend got his/her money back

Missing the point.
OpenTitan: Open source silicon root of trust
Russia has recently shown, fake information is anything a dictator doesn't approve of.

This isn't an issue of "limits on speech", but rather, another reminder that one shouldn't enable folks to become dictators. Not having some reasonable limits on actual misinformation makes us all less free, however, because we cannot put our trust in some organizations.
> 99% of the time, bandwidth is a nonissue. Latency, very important

Indeed. And I'm speaking as someone who downloads most visual media before I watch it, so bandwidth matters to me. But not that much. With 100-200 Mbit/s I am good.

Cookie prompts, newsletter pop-ups, scrolljacking and ads constitutes the majority of wasted time for me, by a long shot. Latency to sites in other parts of the world can cause problems sometimes, since number of round trips can be quite high with TLS neg + progressively loaded content.
I’d say my main concern isn’t strictly “banning books” but open access to information.

How do you determine literary value? The catcher in the rye at least was considered risqué and had been banned. It isn’t some great novel unlike any other — it’s about a teenager complaining. Even still why ban it? Let people read.
The types of games I'm thinking about are actually non-trivial Indie/niche games.

I won't name it but there's a simulator game I play thats very detailed but technically just screams like at some point they either didn't know or didn't have time to care about architecture then just winged it so now you have huge amounts of logic dumped into a basically single-threaded program.

I trust game engine developers a lot, I trust game developers in general not all that much - making games has a very tight feedback loop so a lot of them don't sit back and do it right rather than passing "tests" (not that games have tests most of the time).
I don't think I misunderstand her position. She seems to take the position you give:

"However, if you come up with a theory that makes the exact same predictions as QM and GR except for the BHILP, then your theory is not very interesting, since we will never be able to test this theory, and there are other inconsistencies between QM and GR that you haven't solved, so we can't just rest on our laurels and say physics is over."

I think this is wrong. There are non-empirical reason reasons we might prefer the new theory to the old one. For example, we know QM are GR are inconsistent, so if I give you a parsimonious, consistent theory that captures both QM and GR in the appropriate limits, then that's a great reason to prefer it. In principle, we could prove theorems (and some theorems of this form have been proved) that pin down the possible resolutions of the GR/QM inconsistency. If we tighten the net so that only one theory remains, then obviously we should choose to believe that theory.

Now, will that actually happen? I don't know. But merely waving your hands and going "not testable" is not enough, because we all accept that mathematical consistency ought to have a huge influence on theory choice. You need to make some argument about BHILP specifically saying that theoretical arguments will never produce productive physics.
Reminds me of the Culture series book "Look to Windward" - in which a composer creates an almost everlasting symphony whos finale coincides with the arrival of the light of an ancient supernova on his planet (IIRC)
I also like recycling electronics but some stuff is just not worth keeping powered on. If you can sell electricity back then your switch has an opportunity cost of (assuming 11¢/KWh, which is US avg for 2021 and 5W idle for the replacement switch) ≈45 USD/year, which is almost 90% of its value.
When everyone’s settled on maximizing the diversity of their investments, I wonder if the strategy loses viability as an effective hedge.
The IOUs would be more private since your transactions aren't public. Likely faster with better user experiences too, per Moxie's argument for why blockchain systems already look more like that.
> People have predicted its collapse for 40 years or so, to no avail.

Weird timeframe to claim nothing happened. They collapsed twice since then: 35 years ago and 13 years ago.
This will never happen during such a stable and highly adopted period of Ethereum, FUD.
As part of a mental diet, to fill in availability-gaps in public libraries, this resource makes sense.
Unrelated, but I live in Poland and there's similar thing related to names.
Stereotypical Janusz and Grażyna are boomers, Karyna means a poor woman that's not exactly educated, and so on. It is not only American phenomenon.
Related: I would recommend people look into cocotb and uvm-python which let you do verification of SystemVerilog designs in Python. This has been a game changer for me, and it is much more productive than writing tests in SystemVerilog in my experience.
Wow that is awesome. Queens Public Library offers this too but to my astonishment NYPL does not. Here [0] is a list with a few around the US.

Apparently, Orange County Florida and Queens Public Library even offer library cards to people outside of the US.

[0] https://www.aworldadventurebybook.com/blog/libraries-with-no...
I've never seen proprietary software licenses not have an AS-IS clause. The license presented will be offered by no sane software house.
A lot of complexity is hidden behind the term “information”. You should be careful not to just use your existing intuition/definition for this word, it’s extremely specific Quantum Mechanics jargon here.

This is talking about quantum states and how they describe the world. Each state corresponds to physical (quantum) reality, conforming to the laws of physics. So it’s not like you can just twiddle bits to make new representations.

I think this is an area where appealing to the lay reader’s intuition is counterproductive. If you haven’t solved the Schrodinger equation before then you definitely shouldn’t be trying to intuit things about quantum systems; they are just weird and kind of irreducibly complex from the mathematical representation.

Let me attempt to go against my advice above and give you some intuition for why encryption doesn’t parse here. It would be like you have a program with some static types, some classes, and then say “what if we just encrypt the memory location for this object on the heap and run the program”. The program is the thing that is running (laws of physics), the variables on the stack/heap are the state for the current execution, and it has no concept of decryption, so it would just produce garbage and crash. In the same way, the quantum physics description of a system has superposed states that are all valid configurations of the physical system, and no notion of “encryption”. So there is nowhere in the model of physical reality (and therefore unless we are missing some new Physics, nowhere in the reality that is modeled) for this information to “hide”.

Or taking a different tack, “thermal entropy” means it’s just a bunch of gas buzzing around randomly at the same temperature - there is no physical place for structure to be “encrypted”. Where is the “key” in your model of the world? It’s just a cloud of gas. What physical process performed the encryption? That would require a complex structure, yet we are talking about a cloud of particles emitted when one half of a particle-antiparticle pair is captured by the black hole’s event horizon. There is no place in a workable physical model of the world for an entity that performs encryption on the quantum states (whatever that might mean).

All this just points to why you can’t encrypt states in this way, not why the black hole information paradox is a problem. For that you really do need the maths; eg see https://www.cs.umd.edu/class/fall2018/cmsc657/projects/group... for the Physics here; while that requires graduate-level understanding of QM, hopefully the intro will be useful.
The digital ranging system that measured the distance to the Apollo spacecraft
In quite a few of the critiques I've read, it's described as a valuable perspective despite the ahistorical bits -- some of which have been corrected. Should the entire project be censored?
Non-newtownian/non-classical/non-relatistic Quantum effects are truly random. That's the core axiom of what makes "quantum" mechanics not Newtonian/classical/relativistic. It's fundamentally different from Newtownian statistical mechanics.

Hawking radiation is purely random.
Worth noting that political ads are already banned on Twitter and have been for a couple years:

https://twitter.com/jack/status/1189634360472829952?ref_src=...

In practice, this leads to weird scenarios where Exxon can run promotional ads but climate groups can't run ads in opposition.

I'm not saying this is the wrong policy necessarily, just that "politics" is a tricky thing to define. Labor unions can't run ads saying workers should demand more pay, but Amazon can run ads saying their jobs pay good wages.

Edit: Also, I tried to find the original post but the blog is down, at least for the moment for me. https://blog.twitter.com -- anyway, here's a cached version: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ADXc6W...
This is basically a good thing, but I'm always annoyed by the use of "science" like this, making it into an institution with a unified voice. If they used the word 'consensus' or 'studies' the claim would sound weaker, and they want to give it the weight of a quasi-religious absolute.

Which is great for the tactical, rhetorical power of their argument, but plants the seed of their strategic downfall. If you do this enough, "science" is lowered to a political device commanding the same respect as sociology did in the Soviet Union (or even in the US, at this point), ie less than nothing.
Years ago, PayPal had donate buttons and my recollection is there was text somewhere on the site indicating that if you hit $10k in donations, they would want a copy of your 501c3 or some such. It's one of the reasons I stopped using donate buttons.

These days, there are other monetization products but I'm not sure the IRS would approve of you calling it whatever you want for reasons of avoiding taxes.
I had read the portion you quoted and found it interesting as well.

I've always been fascinated by long running processes. I'm sure you might have heard about the Clock of the Long Now [1] (Wikipedia article [2] seems more useful than the official website), which is meant to work for 10000 years. It's under construction, but their strategies to handle adversities over a 10000 year period worth looking into.

Related to that, I've read about an attempt by a software engineer presumably named Brandur who, inspired by the aforementioned clock, has attempted to build a software that would send out tweets for the next 10000 years [3]. While I personally feel it probably wouldn't succeed because there's too many things that can go wrong, it was nice to read the considerations that went into the program. Perhaps more than tweeting for the next 10000 years itself, Brandur was really trying to point out that it's difficult to build long lasting software products.

Writing software that endures for a long time without too much additional maintenance is something I'd like to do.

Another long running — though in comparison to the above much smaller — group of equipments are the space probes Voyager 1 (launched in 1977), Voyager 2 (1977) and New Horizons (2006). Unless I'm mistaken they all continue to function in limited ways and continue to send back data to the earth. Isn't it mind-blowing that something that left Earth about 45 years ago still works?! (Or maybe it's not mind blowing because I guess space doesn't have as much distrubances as the Earth).

I also like long running processes in nature. Comets are one of them. Isn't it just so cool that some of them actually (very likely) come from Oort cloud and their orbits can take hundreds or even thousands of years?

Halley's Comet — which has an orbital period of 76 years, and whose appearances have been recorded by various people in various places over the past couple of thousand years — will show up again in 2061, nearly 40 years from now. I sincerely hope I can see it then. Infact I have a calendar reminder set up for it in 2061 July. Just in case I forget. (The calendar program I currently use might die first. Or I could be dead).

[1] https://longnow.org/clock/

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clock_of_the_Long_Now

[3] https://brandur.org/10000-years
People have a lot of home equity because of prices taking off. I expect most of the cash in these offers is from equity in the buyer’s previous homes. It only takes little money injected from outside the real estate system to cause a bunch of these transactions between incumbent owners.

Houses are thought to be worth X. One house is available and one labor-rich renter buys it for 2X. This is now the market price of a comparable house. Two houses are available and their owners swap. This is a cash transaction at the same 2X price.
So apparently Bill Gates hit up @elonmusk to discuss “philanthropy on climate change” but Elon asked if he still had a half billion dollar short position on $TSLA.

Bill said he hasn’t closed it out, so Elon told him to get lost.
We met some guys in San Diego who ran a (definitely illegal) business doing this with scooters. They wanted to sell us one of them for $200 (against market price of $6-700); we declined.

Basically, around about 2016 (maybe?) the number of electric scooters in San Diego exploded. We had like 6 different companies dumping them by the pallet load, I guess as an availability tactic.

I imagine what they were doing was taking them off the road and into someplace where they looked accessible on the GPS but couldn't actually be accessed, depleting the battery by winding them down, and then deconstructing them enough to get them into Tijuana, where they would be stripped and the brain of the scooter replaced. Apparently, they had a guy in TJ who could basically "de-GPS" the scooters. Then, they would ship them back up and sell them cheaply.
> "The commerciality of those plants will be determined by mainly the market".

Or the government. Certainly they have a feel for how much the government subsidies petroleum. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to see those monies being shifted to CO2 removal (or simlar).
Media gets it wrong on Elon Musk and Twitter
Swiss 26 Gbit/s symmetrical… while in US getting 1Gbit/s down is a minor miracle and anything resembling that up is downright impossible. My area in a major VHCOL metro area has a wonderful choice of 1 cable provider and maybe 2 fixed cell providers (may be because they can’t tell you if the tower will give you a decent speed until you unpack and install the system).

How US gets so little for so much spent is really beyond me.

So excited that at least somewhere sanity and quality prevail!!!
Not in Australia.

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_property_bubble
If you’re some random dude who shows up off the street, FLOSS devs will share source.
Give the projects to me for double
At very least Apple have the process budget and dollar budget to have really expensive DRAM, huge caches, and huge pipeline/big buffers (big ROB etc.)
It seems like all of the benefits named here are a result of paying developers...
not a result of software being proprietary.
>Note the lack of the pattern "new" anywhere in there.

Er... it's literally the name of the site, 'Hacker NEWS'. A 16 year old article is not news. No matter how interesting it might be. The custom here is to put the year in brackets after the title, when posting an old article
Shouldn’t that be no issue as long as either both clients use the same key, or the messages have been encrypted for both keys?
Inventor resurrected his imaginary friend with AI – then it tried to murder him
Yes, in that sense you'd have a "dedicated" 1Gbps for each device. But realistically, how often do you need that?

I don't know about you, but the only time I would reach such a peak would be in case I download something huge while watching Netflix at 4k (which I don't have) and while at the same time downloading an update for my phone and a game for the PS5 (which I don't own).

I would argue that the likelihood of all the above things happening at the same time is quite low, at least for me :)
> Twitter says it will no longer allow advertisers on its site who deny the scientific consensus on climate change, echoing a policy already in place at Google.

Maybe someone should tell twitter, google, etc that science isn't supposed to work on consensus. Politics works on consensus. And when you mix politics with science, you get social darwinism/scientific racism/etc.

> Twitter said it would provide more information in the coming months on how it plans to provide “reliable, authoritative context to the climate conversations” its users engage in, including from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The U.N.-backed science panel’s reports on the causes and effects of climate change provide the basis for international negotiations to curb climate change.

The good old authoritarian, I mean authoritative sources. It's amazing how the entire establishment political/media/tech/etc all rallied around "authoritative sources". It's almost like someone flipped a switch and it's become a national mantra. "Authoritative sources", "authoritative sources", "authoritative sources".

A UN backed science panel. Great. If there is one thing we all know about the UN, it's that the UN isn't political. An institution ruled by the US, Russia, China, Britain and France. Seems very trustworthy to me.
Gigabit internet is quite widely available through different cable providers in Germany nowadays. Also the country side seems to be moving up, the very rural place where I grew up (and where my mom still lives) had a max of 2Mbps DSL for the last 20(!) years and now the whole area is being upgraded to fibre and will enjoy 10/1Gbps by the end of the year!
By the way, I'm kind of surprised you didn't use 4-letter names for your stub section at the bottom. How can you suffer the inconsistency in such an otherwise consistent grammar? :-)
Crypto once again showing it’s a solution to a problem that hasn’t been found
> I simply cannot fix bugs in, say, GCC, and it would also be pretty hard for me to pay someone

This is like saying free speech is not important because you have nothing to say.
I try to only give advice when asked, unless it's an unusual context and I'm certain I have a vast and specific experience advantage over the other person (and they appear to be in dire need of the advice in question; some people are afraid to ask for help, and sometimes people don't know they need it).

Narrow, specific, experience-backed advice is generally the best. I have found that most people will give you their opinion-as-advice, and it's most often worthless or worse (harmful). Only a very small fraction of people that will give you advice on a subject, are likely to have very relevant experience to offer you high quality actionable advice. Narrow, specific advice is good, general advice not nearly so much. General advice is better picked up on your own by living life, whereas narrow, specific advice can really jump you ahead in your thinking and learning curve (often you can plug it right into your puzzle, or at least see where the piece fits, and then grasp the broader picture better).

Advice that comes from a personal experience place will be drastically better received, along with the story that relates it, the story from which you learned the advice. It humanizes the advice, helps the other person relate, and makes it seem less pushy or judgmental (sometimes advice can rudely come across as telling the other person they're doing something wrong and should do it such and such way instead). By telling them your story, how you arrived at the conclusion you did, you demonstrate that you were in their shoes once.
Client to server protocol is unimportant, you could as well roll your own that suits your use case. I do feel like XMPP is a good server-to-server protocol for federated instant messaging though. The only other one I know is Matrix, and it takes a much more convoluted approach by adding the requirement that each "room" is fully distributed across all participating servers. While it's something that's nice to have, it's not worth the hassle, imo.
Thermal radiation from a classical object looks "random" but still obeys (and in fact inspired) quantum theory. The information about the past of the object is there, it's just unfeasible to recover. I suspect Hawking radiation is the same way.
Those are uncompressed sizes, not download.
Sorry, I wrote poorly. I don't mean to say that GR or gravitational waves were in some sort of indeterminate level of credence. I mean to say that our credence in gravitational waves in the absence of experimental confirmation is justified by exactly the kinds of non-empirical evidence that Hossenfelder rejects. So it's clear that she's being too restrictive in what she believes is worthwhile theoretical physics.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31135278