skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I wish that was true.

In my country taxes on gas are incredibly high, they account for more than 70% of the cost at the pump, still we have one of the highest number of cars per capita in Europe.

for comparison in USA gas costs around 70 Euro cents per liter, while here is close to 2 euros per liter (depending on the brand between 1.79 and 1.89).
Came here to say this. Up and comer, adding new services every quarter, while attempting to innovate.
Check out this company if you haven't already heard of them! Nano-dimension https://www.nano-di.com/
> But ask a new car buyer today if they are willing to part with rear passenger doors to save $1500 on their car and they will look at you like you are crazy.

Oh man, I would totally do this. I have so many other things I want to spend $1500 on.

(Not saying the average car buyer would do this or trying to dispute your point. Just sayin' I would.)
Next.js, because that's the easiest way to create a full-stack React project, with great hosting options (Vercel or self-hosted).

Auth via Keycloak or similar.

Postgres DB.

Everything dockerized.

CI/CD (I like Gitlab, Github is cool too).
Differing sensory preferences are worth organizing around to make sense of the life-altering patterns. Different people get depleted by stress, allergy, noise, or hardship differently. Homeostasis is lived differently. If you don't find anything in the conversation for you, that's okay.

You can choose to emphasize "illness" if you get a kick out of it, I guess? But sometimes the "treatment" is just eating food that works for your body.
You can buy a bunch of small cars around or even under 10K€ when accounting the discounts...

Dacia Sandero, Fiat Panda, Mitsubishi Space Star, Renault Clio, the Hyundai i10...
WTF, it's not a victimless crime. You have a much higher chance of getting in an accident and killing someone when you're drunk. Someone dies every 50 minutes in America from drunk driving accidents.
ARPANET and GPS come to mind. Both were developed with large military impetus.
I don't think anyone is arguing who has greater modern power. I think people are just arguing if the preferences are created through upbringing or do they come from something more innate in our biology.
Thanks for that link. I've done a bit of work with the Common Crawl data (and proposed moving to ZSTD with a proof of concept and performance metrics in C a few years ago).

I'll send you an email later this weekend to connect.
Yeah, managing to do that is ... almost impressive.

The more common failure mode I've seen is a library bundling and inlining an old version of a database API in a way that means it overrides the shared object I was expecting my code to link to, and alarums and excursions resulting thereby.

(I don't imagine SQLite would -break- in that situation, but I doubt my application code would be any less unhappy than in the cases of that problem I've encountered in the wild)
They do that in the article too.
Though this isn't precisely typed:

let dict = ["a":[1],"b":["c"]]
print(type(of:dict["a"]))

=

Optional<Array<Any>>
There is a webcomic that mirrors your experience: https://poorlydrawnlines.com/comic/nice-notebook/
Various amounts of social conditioning. In fact, that's how all our preferences are shaped. Some people like ratatouille, some people like sushi.
Should be clear: not every advanced meditator experiences this and is not a prerequisite to be “advanced”. It would just not be unusual if it did happen.
Population replacement seems to had been significant but in no way total, the ancestry of modern the population of eastern England (which was conquered/settled first) is around 40% Anglo-Saxon/Continental Germanic (however the influx of Germans continued well after the 5th century and we can't really genetically distinguish the Saxons/other Germans and the Vikings/Norse whose came centuries later). Of course we don't really know what happened to the local people, many might have fled west or to Armorica, there are some hypothesis that the native Briton population was more heavily hit by the plague and/or that south east England was already significantly depopulated during the 4th century, many were undoubtedly murdered however it seems that the majority (or at least a number exceeding that of the invading Saxons) survived and were integrated into the new Saxon society one way or the other.

There is evidence that there was at least some degree of peaceful coexistence between Saxons and local British at least in the early periods of settlement. There are burial sites where both genetically British and German (or mixed) people were buried together, with identical grave goods and seemingly with no distinction. This would indicate that at least some local people adopted Saxon customs and language and were accepted as equal members of their society. However this is not exactly conclusive, there are also many segregated burial sites so the type of interaction between the local Britons and the German invaders/settlers varied by area and time period, it took them well over 200 years to almost fully conquer the territory of modern England.

Gildas and St Patrick were members of the Romano-British landowning elite which was displaced by the Saxons, I'm trying to dispute their authenticity but their experience might not have been representative of the majority of local people (who were never fully romanized or integrated into the roman society). It would not be completely surprising if local Britons decided that they would be better off by 'switching sides' and adopting Saxon/German culture. Of course we don't know how widespread and voluntary the process could had been, however according to genetic evidence it must have occurred to some extent.
> Oracle Cloud - good alternative for bandwidth heavy products (used by Zoom)

please don't.

I have nothing but the worst experiences with Oracle Cloud. Granted, I was always a little biased against Oracle as a company; but I have a friend working on OCI and assumed that since what I needed was really basic it would be fine.

It really wasn't, it was awful, confusing and opaquely and egregiously expensive.
It brings up a valid concern. If the media (acting as the experts' proxy to the public) continually fail to distinguish between actual experts and political hacks is it really reasonable to expect other non-experts to do better?
See my other comment for usa vs world ; and names keep changing - after lupo there was fox, etc etc. But as golf grew there were always smaller models.

Toyota corolla grew and was replaced by Yaris which became echo or other way around which was discontinued but then corolla got the iq and other small hatch versions.

Nissan sentra grew but then we got micra etc. My whole point is forget specific names - models and Renaming aside, tiny cars keep existing.
It seems to me the problem with the footprint model is much the same as the previous model holding "trucks" to a different standard: it's treating size as a good reason for people to buy less efficient cars.

Size is occasionally a good reason. Someone who needs to carry 15 passengers needs a van, and someone with a heavy load to haul needs a truck. The trend in the US, however has been for people who only need cars to drive trucks and large SUVs.

Outright telling people what to drive seems like government overreach to me, but there may be another way: adjust the standards so that large vehicles don't get special treatment. Selling too many large vehicles would then hurt a car manufacturer's average and they would be incentivized to stop making such vehicles as appealing for everyday use, e.g. by removing luxury options.
> but also was responsible for tying together multiple plot arcs at the end of episodes.

In writing terms this is called the "Harold format". David didn't invent it, but he might have been the first person to bring it to TV.
Airbags, crumple zones in frame. Here’s a whole list of US safety regulations and the weight they added through 2012, https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/Publication/8123...
That's just untrue. The claim is that there is "really no difference" between discriminating against Blacks and short people. There are several important differences, and they relate directly to the historical treatment of Black people.

You are arguing in bad faith, just like the OP.
The gas engine should be able to handle a mountain pass in hot or cold weather, closer to 150KW. That avoids needing to carry enough battery for that use case.
I'm 65 and started a new job as a programmer a few weeks ago. I can relate to your brain elasticity issues for sure. I am really enjoying the new team and the work is fun but it does take its toll on my brain. By the end of a full day of coding or troubleshooting my brain feels... depleted. By friday I find it more difficult than in the past to quickly remember things.

I am doing well in the job and, due to a long career, have experience in a lot of the things they need. I am also still excited about learning new skills and toolsets and I'm in the right place for it.

But I do feel that the brain depletion, it feels like I have used something up - glycogen or something, is noticeable.

Any OTC recommendations would be appreciated.
Yeah, the problem is inherent to two copies of libsqlite, their being both the same version just makes things marginally less horrific.
I think they actually change faster than most would think. While that specific reason for preferring big guys is out-dated, more recently malnutrition and destitution have been a black mark on short people.

The reason I think societal trends move faster than we think is that I think it was only in the middle of the last century that we still preferred fatter bodies.
For simple compute there's many options; everything depends on what you want.

Been using Tilaa (if you can tolerate being hosted in Netherlands) for nearly 10 years, I'm quite happy with them.

Vultr is not as good, but it's decent enough.

But what separates a cloud provider from a VPS/Hosting provider?

I might argue some kind of object storage, as that's the differentiating feature AWS had when it came out. In which case, I'm not sure what there is outside of AWS and GCP, sadly.
In C a pointer is a version of the optional type, implementing an explicit version of it is therefore pointless. In other languages you could enforce that a pointer can't be null or even forbid it to be uninitialized therefore you need to have an optional type for the cases where you want to allow null, so if you get a pointer you can trust it a little more.
> Except that in dating, women overwhelmingly prefer men over 6’

Is this actually true?

> if you are short, you are very likely to die alone

This also seems like nonsense.
Ah. But this is writing C++ in Go instead of writing Go in Go.

In C++ I'd write something like

std::vector<T> vector;
vector.reserve(10);
for (auto i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
vector.push_back(...);
}

but in Go I'd write

vec := make([]T, 10)
for i := 0; i < 10; i++ {
vec[i] = ...
}

Just like in Rust I might use iter().collect() or whatever.
I perfectly agree it make sense evolutionarily speaking, I just wonder how that subjectively manifest in a woman mind. I don't think it's the same perceived stimulus vs the consensual sexy perception of a hypertrophied 6 pack.
I also agree that if I had the full IDE like power everywhere, then that'd be great. And having those tools in more places is also great.

Ctrl-f being limited to a single file is a downside, but it degenerates to cases where you may have to ctrl-f in 5 other files in the folder up to maybe 50 files in the folder for a huge package. And from there, it's narrow-able based on things like names of files.

However, allowing any package to modify any other package causes that number to explode well past what is ever humanly tractable. It goes from "inconvenient" to "impossible".

Language designers, please design your language so we can read it with our mere human eyes.
oof, we don't discuss intelligence == genetics == success here, too bad those three are hardly correlated without addressing other factors, edit too bad as in too good, because without the other factors they aren't related. No straight line for you here
"a 2006 study on online dating found that a man who is 5'6'' needs an additional $175,000 to be as desirable as a man who is approximately 6' tall and only makes $62,500 a year."

I guess I appreciate the brutal honesty. Wealth and height. And not to forget social status, as one woman in the linked article explained how she broke up with a short guy because of what others (might) think of it.

Not a word is wasted on actual love. The stereotype that women barely ever date "below" them, in wealth, height, status, remains true. Your character still matters, but only after checking the above boxes. Men are selected by utility, with disastrous consequences for those that get left behind, as there's no mercy for them.

You can't explain the harsh "be 6' or keep moving" requirement or the open ridiculing of short men on evolutionary selection alone. It's a US-dominant cultural trend. In many other countries no woman would have such exact and absolute demands. It might be a soft unspoken preference at best. Making it a "do or die" requirement is cultural.

Similarly, wealth is not an evolutionary selector for the simple reason that wealth didn't exist until 10K years ago. You could make the point though that wealth is a representation of security, in an indirect way.

In any case, I just find it disturbing how superficial the matchmaking is. When you use a criteria, it's supposed to increase your chance of success, meaning a "happily ever after" story. None of these criteria do that. Beauty fades and none of us are beautiful in the morning. Wealth doesn't buy love. Height does absolutely nothing for a relationship. And yet women insist on it.

The female version is equally disturbing but different. I've never met or talked to a man that finds fake boobs, duck lips, botox, fake bums, fake tans, an inch of makeup in any remote way attractive, or a "selector". So the depressing reality is that women largely do this in a competition towards other women, and this perverted rat race knows many victims.

For the cynics that may think that I'm coping, I'm not. I'm 6"4 and in a loving long term relationship. That doesn't stop me from caring about the perverted mate selection dynamics of today that are downright cruel and throws good people aside as if trash.
Verbose symbol names aren't a problem unless you need your text editor window narrow. I find the problems are verbosity in # of symbols and punctuation, which Java also had.
Many of the rules of HN aren't published in a straightforward list; you learn them by following the log of moderator comments. That, too, has been has been explained innumerable times on HN: it's a common law system, not a civil law one, because if you build a site for nerds around a rigid set of enumerated statutes, the nerds will spend most of their time looking for clever loopholes (I'm not disparaging them; I'm one of them).

From the way you've written on this thread, it seems pretty clear that you're not the kind of message board nerd that makes 'dang's comments a daily read. That's fine! You have to be a pretty extreme nerd to do that, and there other, probably better things to spend those nerd points on. But you should take 'pvg's word for it on this stuff. He's not messing with you: he's trying to explain to you how the site works.
Is that really why humans are getting taller? Most increase in height has happened in the last 70 years and linked to increases in nutrition. Selective pressure seems implausible as an explanation for any measurable increases in height in historical time.
In major metros it's even worse than that, the people with the longest commutes are those who can't afford housing in the city.
I think having the Go runtime be specific to Go is what makes it such an effective runtime.
> Will the next collider solve climate change?

This is an irrelevant appeal to emotion, try to engage faithfully
This is the tldr for me:

"the mean value of the new measurement isn’t so different from earlier data analyses. The striking thing about this new analysis is the small error bar. That the error bar is so small is the reason why this result has such a high statistical significance. They quote a disagreement with the standard model at 6.9 sigma. That’s well above the discovery threshold in particle physics which is often somewhat arbitrarily put at 5 sigma."

"What did they do to get the error bar so small? Well for one thing they have a lot of data. But they also did a lot of calibration cross-checks with other measurements, which basically means they know very precisely how to extract the physical parameters from the raw data, or at least they think they do. Is this reasonable? Yes. Is it correct? I don’t know. It could be. But in all honesty, I am very skeptical that this result will hold up. More likely, they have underestimated the error and their result is actually compatible with the other measurements."

I think it's great that someone can tell me about the nature of the difference in the mass and whether it's likely to hold up under more scrutiny (no). I believe Sabine's judgement here as other small discrepancies have disappeared in the past.
That's not even stack ranking - managers being assigned a fixed pool of $ to give out for raises and bonuses across their reports (or their branch of the org tree if director or above) is pretty standard at any big company.

It's pretty reasonable if you "ship your org chart" and can easily measure each team's contribution. It's much trickier and more prone to unfair allocation when people switch teams a lot or contribute outside their team, i.e. if one of my engineers went above and beyond and boosted some other team's profits by a bunch, I'm probably not going to get extra money to allocate to my people as a result since the higher level execs don't usually follow credit assignment at that level.
I am actually pleasantly surprised at the openness of this response, and their taking responsibility of mistakes and detailing what will change in the future. It's not just corporate speak. I think that speaks well for the company and it improved my view of them.
> we still preferred fatter bodies
how widepsread?
And how much of it was physical attraction vs social reasons attraction?
I take notes on the lowest-tier Strathmore 9x12" spiral-bound sketchbooks. I strongly prefer totally blank paper for math and diagrams. The paper is plenty high-quality, you can tear out pages without ruining the appearance, and they are cheap.

However, I don't view those notes as a permanent record. Anything really important gets transcribed to LaTeX (math) or text files (TO-DOs, etc.)

The transcribing takes extra effort. I'm not sure it's worth it, but it's a good opportunity to distill things to their essence and double-check logic. My future self doesn't need to wade through as many dead ends when looking back later.
https://urbanfootprint.com
You mean like we do at CERN?
What do you mean with changing psychology? I see that all your "successful" projects involve making someone else happier/helping them. Was it about noticing your impact on them?
Maybe we can deorbit it over Russia.
It's in the link, but for convenience:

“I think the people of this country have had enough of experts with organisations with acronyms saying that they know what is best and getting it consistently wrong.”

I don't think the full quote changes the essence - after all, experts typically belong to organisations with acronyms, their job is to say what they know is best, and 'consistently wrong' is a matter of opinion likely not supported by any evidence.

Turns out everything the experts said about Brexit was in fact correct.

The latest news is that we are delaying import checks until at least 2023 - our farmers have to go through mountains of paperwork to sell a turnip in Turin, whereas Belgium beef sails straight through onto our plates. But we have also had enough of exports (and farming I suppose), so that is all ok.
Hah, it works for both I guess :)
> Was the orbit of Mercury (or any other astronomical observations) important for the discover of Relativity.

For general relativity, yes.

> My understanding was that experimental impetus for relativity was the Michelson–Morley experiment

This was one of the results that pointed the way to special relativity. It had nothing to do with general relativity.

> General relativity was then developed on a purely theoretical basis.

No, it wasn't. There was a huge body of experimental evidence already about gravity. It was true that all of that evidence, except for the anomalous precession of Mercury's perihelion, could be explained by Newtonian gravity; but general relativity, as a proposed new theory of gravity, had to also account for all of that experimental evidence. In other words, in the appropriate limiting case (weak fields and low speeds compared to the speed of light), general relativity had to reproduce all of the correct predictions of Newtonian gravity. That was a huge, and very important, experimental constraint.

> Almost by definition, a theory that is ultimately useful can be confirmed without need of astronomy.

Not if the differences between its predictions and the predictions of the previous theory (in this case Newtonian gravity) are only measurable in astronomical observations at the time the new theory is proposed. That was true of general relativity in 1915 and for at least a couple of decades afterwards. The differences between GR and Newtonian gravity for earthbound experiments were simply too small for the technology of the time to measure. So astronomical observations were the only way to test GR when it was proposed.

> we could probably get GPS to work even without relativity

Technology can of course be developed on a purely empirical basis, if you're prepared to make a lot of mistakes along the way that you wouldn't make without a good theoretical foundation. If it hadn't been for the knowledge of relativity on the part of the scientists involved, the GPS satellites probably would have been launched without any capability for adjusting their clock rates. Which would have meant that, once clock rate drift due to relativistic effects was seen, there would have been no way to adjust for it. So those satellites would have become expensive but useless toys, and a new constellation of satellites would have had to be built and launched.
I think the stats you are referencing about humans getting taller are from improvements in childhood nutrition. I don't think genetically we've been selecting for taller people, as that is harder to conclude (plus, even if woman select for taller men, men do not necessarily select for taller woman, and woman are part of this too let's not forget).

> Women usually marry the millionaire, but have sex with the pool boy. This dual-mating strategy is instinctive.

Yea and the man has concubines, and the prenup? Pretty sure the woman usually doesn't have the pool boy's children in these stories.

EDIT: See here for a study showing after 1980 people have actually been getting shorter (at least in Japan, which can be considered almost a post-modern society when compared to the US) [1].

[1] https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/02/12/national/scienc...
There was a history of Standard ML published as
part of HOPL4 a couple of years ago - https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3386336
I was particularly interested by the more recent history, after SML '97, where there was plenty of interest in improving the language and its
library, but Milner insisted that there would be no further changes, and the Definition was non-free so the others could not build on it. (It has since become Free though its source code was lost.)

Despite that there is/was an SML Basis Library project, and a Successor ML project, but it looks like even the die hard fans have drifted away
https://smlfamily.github.io/