skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They don't, and after nearly 14 years of relationship & marriage & kids, I don't think women really care. But it gives confidence, and confidence makes you attractive.
Yes, but to make one that works when plugged in takes some extra considerations and might cost a bit more

For example, having the port in front would change the overall design of the magic mouse, would mean that it would be thicker (at least in the front) and might also fight for space with the click switch

But yeah, given it charges to usable in a couple of minutes, it's a non-issue
The comment I replied to wasn't referring to complaints about work, they were referring to complaints the dating game.

There is nothing wrong with being condescending towards men who talk about "women" like they're a different species.
> I’m not rude

One word Danes (and other N.Es) often get in trouble for is 'fuck'. In Denmark it is no problem to use this in many business meetings but will often spell trouble when we participate in a meeting with people from USA. We simply do not see using it as something to avoid.

(and pupils in Denmark will absolutely not be sent to headmaster or parents contacted if they use it. At most it will be a glance from the teacher if they use it too much).
> ordering [..] importing [..]

So block financial transactions with the sanctioned entities - problem solved. Unless your real intent isn't blocking money, but speech.
Perhaps his personal experience. Which is the same as mine.

When I was still working in the office pre-pandemic, everyone with a cordless mouse kept it plugged in all the time, presumably out of fear that it would discharge.

They turned a cordless mouse into a corded mouse. The only difference being that instead of plugging it into their computers, they were plugged into their monitors or hubs.
Roughly the same thing happened to me on a much much bigger scale. I was making an estimated income tax prepayment (as required by law) on the ridiculous IRS direct pay site. There was no way to undo my error that I could find on the IRS websites. I foolishly thought that when the IRS web page said something like “system problem try again later” meant that I should try again later.

I feel like the agencies should just let Visa or Mastercard handle billing and collection.
I realize there’s a lot of cultural differences at play here. Still, some of these professionalisms are blatant lying in my opinion and should be discouraged. E.g. ”I totally forgot your email” vs ”thank you for your patience”.

Owning your mistakes is what pros do and deflecting blame is not.
You’re mixing up two layers of uncertainty. There’s an outer uncertainty. This would include things like I made a mistake, this is all a dream, etc. This outer uncertainty pervades all problems.

It’s often useful to ignore that outer uncertainty. We create a framework where we take certain things as true (shared reality, mathematical axioms). This framework may or may not have uncertainty inside of it, which we could call inner uncertainty.

Questions of probability have inner uncertainty. Questions of geometry do not. This makes them qualitatively different.

If you frame the initial task as something like “do your best to lead people to believe your sequence is random”, that makes sense. If the task is “make it so they can’t tell if it’s random”, that’s a bit off in some way. At the very least, it’s because you’ve presented the spotting of randomness as something that can truly be done to a logical conclusion (random/not or true/false). This violates both the outer and inner uncertainties of randomness.
I've seen it happen often enough that someone's concerns are summarily ignored that I don't think you can always blame the person raising issues for not being loud or visible enough.

The way this often goes down is that someone who is perceived as more senior will push something through, steamrolling right over well-formed interjections. If someone lower on the org chart tries to make more noise than the steam roller, the consequences can be quite bad for them.

If something then fails as predicted, why shouldn't that be noted? If someone has expertise that was ignored, that should be taken into account in the future, and part of the post mortem should be figuring out why their expertise was ignored.

The thing is, it should probably be noted by management or whoever is in the chain of responsibility and probably not by the person who was ignored, but management often doesn't want to admit mistakes of this type.

So what do you do then? How is it constructive to ignore a glaring issue in your planning and decision making process?
They tend to either live with multiple roommates, commute from faraway places (like Stockton, Los Banos, and Salinas), or live in their vehicles. I remember reading an article (https://www.kqed.org/news/10467044/long-commute-to-silicon-v...) about a Stanford cafeteria worker who commuted from Stockton on public transportation.
I disagree. There is a ton of low hanging fruit in applying SOTA ML techniques to niche problems. It just requires a bit of business sense, but there is a lot of money to be made there. More than what I was making as someone doing ML research at Google Research.
Missing Oxide Computer
Ah, the joy of open source.

Of the 20K issues on https://github.com/vector-im/element-web/issues i can only find one where someone (indirectly) asked for this: https://github.com/vector-im/element-web/issues/17072. And it has no upvotes at all, and simply isn’t on our radar.

If this is a showstopper for you, please upvote it. (It’d also be a fairly easy PR if anyone wanted to help out).
I could play it again maybe, but the price feels bit steep for not that much new content.
I do this a lot on PRs, especially for small fixes. I’ll make sure to put a comment explaining my changes and link to the relevant doc about why the change was made.

It doesn’t make sense to ask contributors (especially new ones) to spend time going back and forth on such small changes. It’s better use of both our times if I take a few minutes to make the small changes and merge in.

For more complex PRs, my guiding principle is:

- Make those changes that might require a lot of back and forth and harder to explain or might be subjective.

- Request changes that are objective.
It would be interesting to try to turn the randomness tests themselves into additional loss functions, supplementing the GAN loss.

Production-ready GANs in my experience are trained with a lot of auxillary losses. For example: HiFi GAN (for audio generation) uses four different discriminators to detect problems in the spectrogram and fine structure of the waveform, and the losses are more about matching the discriminator features than the actual classification result. Works great, but is hilariously 'impure.'
Oh, I think the email is ambiguous! I had a totally different interpretation, although I absolutely see yours now.

I interpreted "refund of the excess purchase" to mean that it is a refund of the whole purchase. If it were a partial refund, they could have just written "refund of the excess".

By adding "purchase", they made it sound to me like there are two categories of purchases (excess and non-excess) and that this purchase belongs to the excess category. That is, I saw "excess" as an adjective that says why the refund is happening, not how much is being refunded.

The more I analyze the wording, the less I'm sure which interpretation is right.
There is no race condition.

The order won’t actually matter here - but even if it did, the “right” thing will happen either way depending on which interpretation of the email you have.

The third transaction got the same response as the second. Which would actually imply that the common reading of that email (he’s getting $25 back from the second deposit is correct, and he’s going to get the entire $9,975 back from the third.)
>Reneging on a debt is not theft, theoretically because the two parties at some level consented to the relationship.

So should I assume that when you eat at a restaurant, you leave without paying because the restaurant at some level consented to the relationship?
In my last performance review, the primary feedback is that I'm too blunt in emails, so I've bookmarked this site. Thanks for creating this.
All the other comments here seem to be criticizing the OP whereas I thought this site was pretty funny.

That's a professional way to say: I'm pretty sure this site is satire.

Just look at the source Instagram, it's meant to be funny/relatable. Not actual advice. https://www.instagram.com/loewhaley/
The 8.6mpg was with Aircon on. Also a ford transit van gets 24 mpg city. So let’s just call it 14mpg if the thing was designed more economically and didn’t use any aircon.

That brings fuel cost to 2500/year.

Your EV costs also need to include the cost of battery replacement, cost of charger install, and a manufacturer actually capable of delivering this volume of EVs.

After all said and done. I doubt EVs will be drastically cheaper on a TCO basis. Now if we take into consideration cost of pollution removal, then yes EVs are cheaper. It’d also be smart if the government to make the switch to encourage domestic EV manufacturing capabilities
This is wonderful. Plenty of software does not support the sort of rendering necessary to support multi-color emojis. A single color emoji font has been sorely missing.

- I can use these in any terminal that supports Unicode.

- Any rendering engine that can fill a path can trivially take the output of a freetype parser and rasterize. Instead of having bespoke monocolor icons I can just use standard emoji and make them available to my users.
It adds little value and is annoying to hear.

If you make a prediction correctly, and it is ignored, then that's an indication that you should either make it more assertively next time, or you just can't work with this person.

And anyway, some humbleness is due -- sometimes we think we've given good advice, but it ends up being somehow inapplicable to the problem for reasons that are outside our scope.
> but the battery lasts for several weeks if not months; i

In my experience, this is exactly why it's an issue.

All my less tech savvy family who use this mouse forget to charge it because "it never needs charging" ... and then it runs out of juice whilst they are in the midst of something and now they can't use the mouse.
Zig doesn't even have a string type. It's not an alternative to Rust, which is meant as a safer C++.

Nim has a huge stdlib.
And zero loss as I watch my unvested FAANG RSUs drop by a third. I’m glad at least the first two years were mostly a signing bonus I could use to stabilize my finances - pay off debt and build a cash reserve. My RSUs vest heavily on the back end.

Yes I know, how do you tell someone where you work without telling them where you work.
I can't downvote or flag, and I don't really care to moderate my language. So I'll use the tools I'm given I guess?

Sad to see so much focus on a discussion of moderation, rather than the sexism and bigotry I thought was so evident.

So tell me, what do you think? Is shortness really that much an impediment in the dating game? And what is the solution, if that's the case?
I don't know if this is satire or not but rather than "professional" this is passive-aggressive wording.
The only time it was an ever an issue when I used one, was I plugged it in, I went to the bathroom, I got a coffee. And it was charged enough to use it until I could charge it for hours later.

The sleep cycle of a mouse microprocessor is 99.9%+. A few minutes charge will get you hours of use.
I understand, I am asking why the gender roles being "built in" is exclusive to patriarchy. Suppose we replace patriarchy with matriarchy. Are there no built in assumptions about gender and everyone treats each other nicely?
If you don't like money more than freedom and honour
that's an action item for you to make sure your interjections are more visible next time.

Takes a certain skill to be tactful and deliberate enough to do this.

Yet it takes mastery and wisdom to know when to say your peace and rest on that.

It's been my experience that even with a sufficient and proper amount of CYA, visibility and otherwise intentional effort put forth so that your actions and words toe the line and dutifully provide context, one can still find themselves on the pointy end of the blame stick being wielded by the more powerful, persuasive or otherwise popular trying to cover their own asses.
I wish I could remember where I saw this UX, but the best is when they not only don't let you paste, but also treat the bank account number like a password field and don't let you see what you're typing in... and you have to do it 2x.
Extracting Skill-Centric State Abstractions from Value Functions
Its a separate game, so you can play this version without resetting the clock on the original
Yet here you are replying to a comment.
Exactly, he wrote it as if it were more of a minor and semi amusing nuisance than a life altering mistake.
The payments might not be tied to the rights.

(I would expect the initial contract to give Lucas as much of the rights as would have been possible at the time)
Nice. What kind of device are you using?
That's what I was paranoid about with wireless mice: what if the battery runs out while I'm in the middle of a competitive, time-sensitive game? With my Logitech mouse, I can plug it in from the front, so it's a minor inconvenience.

Of course, just thinking about using the Magic Mouse for FPS games hurts my wrists, so it in particular was never a real consideration anyhow :P
I should probably add this to the site.
With the example of the charger-on-the-bottom, where does the break down come from?

Was this never even considered an issue? As in, did it just never get considered as something bad? Did it never get focus grouped in a wide enough range of users for someone to question this? Was it noticed, questioned, decided it was works as intended?

It just seems like with a company the size of Apple who all work under draconian NDAs, why not have an internal employee focus group? Hubris of the design silos?
Hm. It's a way to make a good hash, not a good random number generator. A good hash is one where you put in nonrandom key values, maybe from a small set, and what comes out passes tests as random. For example, change one input bit and half the output bits should change.

A good hasher coupled to a bad input looks like a random number generator, but it's not. If you feed sequential numbers, say in the range 0..2^32-1, to a good hasher, you may get something that passes standard tests for random numbers. But you only have 4 bytes of key, and such a cryptosystem can be easily broken by brute force.

Now, if you make a hasher which takes in input, folds it down to a short value, and then generates an output value with a good hasher, you have something that looks like a crypto key generator, but isn't. This neural net approach offers a new way to automatically develop plausible, obfuscated, but easily breakable random key generators.

So it's useful as a way to generate backdoors.
> In this comment, it appears you took the word "expert" and defined it to mean "people who aren't actually experts" and then used that to dismiss them. I hope you can understand this isn't a useful way to approach the conversation.

Who exactly did I dismiss? Can you provide an example?
What’s so wild to me about this, is that the Magic Mouse design is 100% evident there was meant to be a flush charging dock sister product that got nix’d just like the recent wireless charging pad — there’s intention and a continuity one can follow, but recently has been cut at the knees for operational efficiency.
> pattern matching expressions,

nothing intrinsically 'functional' about this, though it's nice

> syntax for partial application

<https://docs.python.org/3/library/functools.html#functools.p...>

> and composition,

Hmm, to my surprise I can't find this but TBH it's trivial to write, here's an eg <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16739290/composing-funct...>

> a typing system which can express structural types,

typing is orthogonal to FP (though very nice to have)

> a generalised list comprehension

IDK what this means, what's ungeneral about comprehensions currently?
I’m not sure I understand this argument. Why can’t users simply use the mouse wirelessly even if it’s possible to use in a wired way. Are you claiming that people would end up leaving the mouse plugged in, like they do with the trackpad? If the point is that using a wireless mouse is a better experience, then why wouldn’t people use it wirelessly except to charge?

I have an Apple keyboard and trackpad that I use at my TV wirelessly but have benefited from the ability to use while charging a few times when the battery died. Doesn’t stop me from using it wirelessly 99% of the time because the experience is better.

By the way, I have an older phone I leave plugged in all the time by my bed, the battery life on it has deteriorated but it works perfectly for music.
Hey, out of curiosity, why did you choose a 20-sided die? I assume it was just to match the "ten bucks" bit. I'm not snarking, I just began thinking about 20-sided dice.

I do not believe there is a solid with 20 faces, and all faces congruent (I haven't checked). So we end up with a solid that is roughly ball-shaped, with faces of different sizes and shapes.

[Edit] I checked; I suspected I'd made a fool of myself. An icosahedron has 20 congruent faces, of course.

A ball-shaped die is much more likely to topple, and so more likely to be influenced by small differences in weight distribution, selective corner-shaving, whatever.

I can't think of a way of judging the fairness of a 20-sided die other than casting it many times, and analysing the results. I'd be much more confident in my ability to judge by inspection the fairness of a 6-sided die.
For squash merges, GitHub will autofill the Co-Authored-By in the merge commit, but it is up to you to keep it there.
I use the wireless Apple keyboard and trackpad, which both have similar battery lives, but when the battery runs out it always somehow happens to be right before a meeting where I really need to plug it in and use it right now

(and these days when everything else is USB-C, instead I'm scrambling to find where my damn lightning cable has gone)

Although I get why they would not put the port on the back - their Lightning cables are not built for the repeated motion/strain of a plugged-in mouse. Anything more strain than plugging your phone in and setting it down causes the cables to break down in months.
Insurance costs are based off claim probability. So if say a Tesla is more expensive to insure than a Honda. It likely means self insurance costs of a Tesla would be higher than a Honda.
These are great, but a few still have some "sting" on them that would set off people who are very attuned to language.
I used to get annoyed at that, then I caught myself doing it to someone else (accidentally). It's surprisingly easy to do, especially if you get distracted midway through reading an email.

I've had much better success numbering all my asks, that reminds people that there's more than one question to answer. It also helps to cluster all the questions at the end of the email, when possible.
> I’m sure “rural America” would love that. The same for Amtrak.

How much of "rural America" is using Amtrak to get around? Their route map seems to indicate all their stations are in urban areas. It's not like they stop in every one-horse town.

As I understand it the ones really using it to get places are the Northeast Corridor, and the rest is mainly rail fans taking the land equivalent of a cruise ship.
Are we confident that this is the best solution or are we still exploring alternatives?
> Putin (and all of Russia) would be very happy now if he bought Bitcoins from the US dollar reserves a few months ago.

Bitcoin: a great way for war criminals to avoid sanctions
Sitefox: Node and cljs back end web framework
I can't find the original thread that had a specific example of a sequence of instructions where the desired/actual result wouldn't be guaranteed by the documented behaviours, but was decided to leave it as-is. The closest I can find[0] is lacking specifics, though does say somewhere that better docs would be nice. And the 'great care' warning/disclaimer is still in the docs.

I found it while using sync.atomic to make some implementation faster, then wanted to know exactly what the language/runtime behaviour/guarantees were and was surprised but not shocked to find the 'for the go authors but not thee' attitude of the conclusion. It did have some reasonable founding where they mentioned that by formally defining it, it could be over-specified precluding future optimizations on even newer processors/architectures.

I would have preferred if the documentation explicitly listed the parts that are not fully defined with reasons for doing so given. That's better than a generic danger signpost. The irony here is that Go was supposed to be not-Java but has the same 'for mainstream' mindset rather than being the sharp tools for the sharp developers.

[0] https://groups.google.com/g/golang-nuts/c/0uPDCRiBWqc
you get that money back in 2-3 weeks though.
My niche is pure JS widgets. That’s 100% Vanilla JS (old or new). No libraries or frameworks. I can create self-contained, state-aware, datastore driven (using session/application storage) interactive mini-applications, tools, widgets, and even games — often with just ONE JS file (CSS and HTML embedded), and fancier apps using maybe just a few supporting resource files. In fact, I am the only dev in my entire project of 100+ devs that has this skill and maintain quite a few of these widgets that I primarily authored. Thus is good and bad. Bad because it means I am stuck with these (and similar maintenance) forever and often get passed up for the newer stuff, but good because I’m almost irreplaceable.
I think your way of looking at it requires an explosion of alien civilisations to find one in which our random 1000 digits is their special number. If you generate 1 extra digit, you'd need 10x as many civilizations to expect a match.

Getting back to the experiment, obviously it's measuring the human mind so the context is the person's mind. They might enter their bank account number which looks random to the researchers but is actually cheating because they're not using their brain as the source of randomness.
Quite frankly it does not matter. Oracle has demonstrated that their cloud can not be trusted, full stop.
This is really cool! I hope this gets more traction
I agree, I get downvoted merciless on r/personalfinance when I say that my only conceivable true “emergency” is a job loss. Anything else I can use credit to income smooth and cash flow. I keep one month of bills in savings

More specifically, I have a HELOC and I’m always getting low and no interest balance transfer options from my bank.
Well, xfig does its job well without getting in the way (like for example the new MS Visio). And twm was looking old some 20 years ago. Now, compared with Windows 10, it looks modern.
It is truncated for some reasons, the document is:

From Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 11 June 1807

This one, even if it is truncated in the view on HN, seems to be working:

https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/99-01-02-5...
I think the two versions here should say rude vs. passive aggressive. I don't see any professional or collegial in most of the answers. The only difference is that passive aggressive versions are harder to understand and see through
turn these into a browser extension
Yeah? So? This is the hubris of the designer assuming the thing will always be used exactly as the designer intended. However, in the real world, people tend to not know the designer's intended use or just don't care what they intended. Users will use thing however they want/need. There's nothing wrong with that. In fact, I put the "wrong" as "hmm, didn't think of that" on the short sitedness of the designer.