skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Oh this has been well studied. There’s a whole swath of papers teasing out the confounding variables, and wealth is not the only one. These papers estimate the correction factor one would need to assign a portion of causation to the degree, and a portion of causation to the inherited wealth, and basically nobody is claiming that wealth is the complete reason, and nearly all papers assign a healthy portion to the degree after controlling for wealth, for two reasons: one, because unsurprisingly 5 years spent studying actually results in learning a few things and gaining some skills that are useful to industry, and two, because industry relies on credentials, and people without PhDs cannot get research jobs, regardless of how good they are.

There’s no doubt in my mind that things are biased for the wealthy, none whatsoever. But consider patents - they have no degree requirement, and the number of patents granted to people with a bachelor’s degree or less is in the low single digit percent, it’s a landslide for people with formal research experience.

> The reality is that for a lot of people getting advanced degrees leads to nothing

What does “a lot” mean? Do you have a source for this claim that passes statistics 101?
> fear it ending suddenly without resolution

I don't mean to sound like some "well akshuallyyy"ing Comic Book Guy figure, but you must realise it's not real life? If it's a Poirot-type mystery where the entire payoff lies in the resolution, then I totally understand, but for a regular TV show I can't see why you would enjoy the episodes any less simply because it might end without resolving all your questions. There's no real suspense - it's not real people, it's just a bunch of people performing in front of a camera. Being distressed about 'what happened to them?' seems, well, puzzling to me.
> I think I have clearly demonstrated how every concurrent algorithm is parallel, and vice versa.

You have not "clearly demonstrated" anything. You are merely pointing out a weak truism that holds in parts, which is the banal truth that all algorithms feature non-contended segments for a given executing thread. The fact that the distinction between these two types is not 'crisp' and precise does not mean a meaningful distinction does not exist.

If your position was valid, we would call e.g. a multi-producer multi-consumer queue a "parallel" data structure but we certainly don't. Sure, the producers are all producing in parallel before contending to enqueue, and the consumers do their thing in parallel after they contend to dequeue. That parallelism is a banal fact in this case, given that what we really need to address are the concurrent attempts to update the queue. Conversely, applying a filter to an image by tiling and performing the application in parallel has some minor contention bits but the main business is doing something in parallel.
It’s pretty weak critique. For my entire time on earth, the threat of missiles like Exocet is a material threat that is only countered by marginally reliable SAMs and point defense. Missiles and drones only get smarter, and defense challenges get more challenging.

Even speedboats with rockets or explosives strapped to them are a threat to warships, who were mostly protected by obscurity - finding ships at sea is hard. Drones negate a lot of that.

People will wave away the obvious by saying “The Russians are idiots”, “The ship was old”, etc, but the reality is a defender only has to fuck up once. The Russians should have (and may have in other scenarios) shot down that drone, but obviously failed.

Even the mighty US Navy has trouble teaching sailors to steer ships. Operationally the US Navy is exponentially more capable than the Russians… but remember, you only need to screw up once. Fundamentally, the current operating model of big navies is on a path to irrelevance. Nerds can argue if the early ironclad battles were truly relevant, but the fact remains that whether that moment was key or not, the end result was the same.
"Is he wrong? What is "Web3", except a trendy marketing term to make the old seem like it's new?"

I honestly don't know - I'd assumed there must be a lot more to it, given all the chatter.
The courts haven't even determined whether anyone even "owns" an NFT, so no.

--

For the downvotes, I'll add some further explanation: you have access to the keys in order to perform a sale of "your" NFT, but no US court (I am unsure of other countries) has yet ruled in a case that clarifies whether a person actually owns an NFT. For example, they have not ever ruled against someone who has "stolen" an NFT. Therefore, there is no case law that says whether a person legally "owns" an NFT.

Don't just take my word for it:

> Ultimately, an NFT owner has access to the underlying asset, but they may lack exclusive access to or control of the asset, let alone ownership of the asset or any intellectual property (IP).

https://www.lawyer-monthly.com/2021/05/nfts-and-ip-law-who-o...
She listed a drug she (allegedly) doesn’t take in the application field meant for drugs she does take, and it confused the system.

(Edit - may not have been her fault, strictly. Sounds like the system needs a “taking” vs “for others” flag, but that also sounds ripe for abuse… I’m sympathetic to insurance companies erring on the side of “you have it, you might be taking it”)
What do you mean "by default"? Unless you have resistfingerprint enabled (not the default), webgl/canvas should behave as expected. If you're the type of developer that takes offense to this (ie. the user agent acting in a manner that the user would like it to act), I think that's going too far for you as a developer, and would only lead to the dominance of your competitor ;)
Anecdotal, but my friends who are teachers report a marked decline in student reading ability (vs. even just 20 years ago) in middle and higher grades. The main problem seems to be that kids have trouble parsing sentences that aren't very simple and short, with the result that most of the students—including "advanced" students in accelerated classes—have trouble following the basic narrative, let alone anything deeper, of works that weren't regarded as difficult when they were written. I don't mean Shakespeare or Paradise Lost or something, but works aimed at younger readers from as recently as the late 20th century. They lose track of what's going on by the end of a sentence having more than a small number of clauses.

This trend pre-dates the lockdowns. Web-induced changes in reading behavior is my #1 suspect for the culprit, though I'm also suspicious of the YA book genre—I have an unconfirmed hunch that, as it's risen to prominence, it's also chased more and more "palatable", if you will, writing styles, in the name of greater sales.
This bookmarklet is a little jewel.
I dunno, Coral Castle was built by one man, (likely (IMO) using the method rediscovered by Wally Wallington.)

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wally_Wallington
Dev-boards like this are to show-case the core chips.

They aren't meant to be, nor would Xilinx want to be in the business of, producing these at scale.

They want to sell the core-chip, dev-boards make it easier to assess without actually exposing any business-side ips.
Credit card data.
I don't know what most of those words mean, but I do know that Aave is not being used in any popular sense, beyond people speculating that the price of the token increases. I was hoping someone would provide a link to a "popular and useful" example.
"Dear Valued Customer, your browser does not appear to support our online banking application. Please use Google Chrome. Thank you."
I'd say laravel wasn't really worth using until 5.1. 2012 sounds about around 4.0, which is when I started using it.
Klarna lay off 10% of workforce due to downturn in eCommerce
Nothing has any value if it’s completely destroyed and whisked away 3000 miles and to the bottom of the ocean.

But you can insure a car and get paid in dollars and provided with a rental car until you purchase a new car if such a disaster does happen. Nobody is paying out insurance claims in bitcoins or for bitcoins—why that is is a total mystery. Truly bizarre that insurance companies steer so far away from crypto.
Feral Concurrency Control: An Investigation of Modern Application Integrity
yet for most the inconvenience of having to port over all of their profiles, history, cookies will be enough to keep them on Chrome. Most can't be bothered with installing another browser or even aware that they can import Chrome profiles into Firefox.

Even for me for some stuff I keep on Chrome since its too connected to all the business/saas/hosting logins and etc.
For what it's worth, I burned out sometime in the late 90s just after video cards came out around 1997, because I could see how they would drive video game design towards a narrow branch of DSP/rasterization and building derivative games with cookie cutter libraries. At the time, I was more interested in getting away from all of that and exploring stuff like ray tracing and artificial life. My interest in video games never fully returned in the same way. And if I'm being truthful, I've been burned out ever since, approaching 25 years now.

But after two lost decades, I've noticed a shift lately. I think that people are getting fed up with centralized control of the supply chain and are maybe looking towards things like FPGAs as a way to get to a level above the current imperative programming paradigm, rather than working at the level below it in the glorified DMA transfer and shader paradigm we have now (vertex buffers).

For something as esoteric as quantum computing, I think it would help the world a great deal if someone would go back to first principles and explain it how it is. Not with complex notation, but with counting principles from probability and statistics. I had a great teacher in college who taught it just exactly that way, by imagining small groups of apples and bananas and how we could count them and detect larger patterns to get to stuff like Bayes' theorem.

So for example, we can imagine cubits as coin flips that we haven't looked at yet. If there are relationships between multiple unseen coins, then we can map out that potential solution space like a big tree. Then look at the tree with random sampling of the superposition to infer where the answer probably lies. Which is a lot faster than iterating through all all of the permutations with a computer. But I suspect that convergence will end up taking roughly the same amount of time as brute force, due to noise or some fundamental aspect of the universe we don't understand yet. But I'm probably wrong about that, because I haven't gotten clarity on how any of this stuff actually works, because nobody bothers to write it this way from first principles.

Even if the author isn't going to be doing quantum mechanics in academia, it would help the world a great deal to share what they've learned so far!
Tried it on my 14" M1 Pro (10-core) now, got 264 on native Chrome and 286 on Safari.

EDIT: noticed the author's comment saying extensions may lower the performance, so tested again in raw chrome and got 304.
> My salary as a Unit-18 lecturer with a 100% appointment was about 100K annual compensation until our union's strike and new contract brought it to be about 107K.

I cannot muster a lot of sympathy for people choosing between 6 figure careers.

It's not reasonable to expect a university to be able to match rates of one of the highest paying careers in industry. If universities try to match industry costs for all of their employees, those costs will just be passed on to graduates in the form of more student debt, which is already enough of a crisis.

She should take the higher paying opportunities available to her, and the university should find someone who is happy with what they can afford for the position.
IMO it's a pretty good mic _for certain situations_, but those situations are rare and it does not set you up for success in actually achieving them.

You need a quiet, ideally treated room, and you _definitely_ need it closer to your mouth than the included stand could possibly achieve, and away from your desk noise which again the included stand can't do.

By the time you consider all that's needed, you're almost certainly better off with a different setup entirely.
I can imagine a semi-disposable drone-like device being used for fast and cheap reconnaissance. If cost of something with a camera and rough lidar can be brought to $200, then why not turn it into a 'consumable' item that can be deployed from out of a briefcase?

I feel like assuming that the device will be lost/destroyed can help optimize for short-term performance. Why not add a few grams of C4 to it, to make sure that it and its silicon are absolutely unrecoverable and in many pieces after its operational lifetime?
Saying wouldn't it be nice without proposing how such a scheme would work without picking winners and losers is naive. The devil is in the details as they say.

Ubitiquious cross platform apps, sure! Just 3x your development team size - will your app still make sense to make with those costs? Oh don't worry - just replatform to a cross platform toolkit (and stop working on new features for 6-12months and retrain the entire team).

I just don't see why it's worth bringing the blunt hammer of government intervention here - let alone a reasonable path for regulation implementation.
I once had the idea that something like an erotic text-adventure could be a killer-app for AI powered NLP. Or at least it could produce hilarious results?
Why "seriously"? I checked it out but was underwhelmed, maybe I just woke up and am missing something?
Recovering optimal responsiveness on an Acer Chromebook 15 (2019)
So, in your closing example Tennessee would be a “gated palace”?

I don’t buy it and I sympathize with the people that are saying “enough”. Enough human shit on the sidewalks, enough destruction of our shared public spaces, enough not being able to go into certain areas after dark, enough open hard drug use, enough car break ins and armed robbery.

The people in these makeshift homeless camps are not homogenous in their background, needs, etc. But I think one thing we can all agree on is that these sites DO attract an outsized group of extremely antisocial people that decrease the quality of life for everyone. Many of them not mentally ill, just opportunistic criminals.

If some other states (or you) want to support and foster this, I say fine. Let these people go there. The differences in our states and free movement is part of what makes the US great. But don’t tell others what they have to tolerate where they live.
Doesn't this just prove the fact that the US education system was never good in the first place (especially for the lower and middle class)? There's absolutely nothing scientific or moral about forcing a kid from age 6 to sit in a classroom for 8 hours straight twiddling their thumbs longingly looking outside the window. Forcing them from a young age to do regimented work that is clearly meant to be done at a later developmental stage will just cause them to hate it and zone out, which is what caused the problem the author is describing. If you're not truly engaging with kids, how will you get the results you want?

None of those suggestions will solve the fact that the education system itself is incredibly flawed and near collapse.
I've started using the Simply Static plugin a lot because you can get content-aware cache invalidation and also have nginx serve the files directly so you can avoid hitting any php. You do have to configure nginx properly though or else it won't work, but I didn't find it terribly difficult to do (although I'm already pretty familiar with nginx). Adding varnish is something on my list to try as well, though so far performance has been beyond "good enough" so it's hard to justify the time investment to adding varnish :-)
I’ve been using the Samson Go Mic for years. It’s been game changing in the post-zoom era.
What are your(/her) thoughts on gifted programs? I can say personally that gifted programs saved me from this fate of slogging through high school during these pandemic years. For some reason some gifted programs get dragged but having actual difficult assignments instead of just crap I can google, honestly 100% saved me from mediocrity.
> It sounds like there's something on your mind! We're going to do our best to take care of it.

>Set a timer for 15 minutes, and work on a solution. If it's something you can change, then great! If not, do your best to reach out to someone and talk about it.

>Remember, 15 minutes and only 15! You can go back to whatever it is after we're done working through this together. We're just taking baby steps in the right direction.

> Okay, I did my best.

Some how I dont think a corrupt global criminal elite is going to be fixed in 15mins!
This article is from December 14, 2018.
Meanwhile, spotter drones are getting smaller and more stealthy. How do you detect, much less shoot down, a drone the size of a small bird or even an insect?
> I'm wondering what other advantages anti-home-schooler central planners need, in order to force their sub-par solution on parents?

I'm not anti home schooling. Is home schooling illegal in some places? If it is, I wasn't aware of that. Otherwise, I don't see how there's any forcing of parents.

I'm not trying to invalidate the outcomes of home schooling. I'm merely suggesting that teacher training is useful and probably necessary if you have to teach a larger number of students and not just your own few kids.
My apologies, that was meant to be cognate to The Fine Article, I was referring to https://acoup.blog.
The fact that Ukraine seems to have had, or had access to, uncannily accurate intelligence does seem to be the signature fact of this war.

Arms without targeting are at best areal suppression weapons. Russia's impressive-looking mobile rocket-launcher batteries appear formidable, but their effect seems largely to be producing a few seconds of terror over a few hectares of land.

Ukraine's ability to target individual generals with precision, to distract and destroy naval flagships, to down helicoptors, to drop munitions on or through tank hatches, to land artillery and rockets with precision on massed troops and materiel ... has been tremendously effective. The shot:kill ratios seem to be extremely high.

At the same time, the US has telegraphed Russian moves, plans, and force structures with precision as well.

What the state and source of this intelligence is varies. Part clearly comes from near-theatre sources such as the Poseidon, other AWACS assets, and probably other capabilities in Nato Europe, Turkey (itself both part of Europe and Nato, though notable for its position on the Black Sea and control of the Bosperous). Much all but certainly from satellite observations. And I'd suspect a considerable degree is based on signals intelligence.

Russia does not control those domains, and has been unable to establish clear control within them. This is unlike, say, any major US campaign of the past 30 years, whatever other concerns might have as to their legitimacy, with the exclusion of satellite capabilities. To date, Russia has not felt it has the ability to move against those intelligence assets. It certainly has the ability to do so should it choose, and a more general conflict might result in that. But for now, it is pinned down in a fishbowl.

Effect here though seems to be a combination of intelligence as to enemy position and operations, the ability to deliver force to specific points of need, invulnerability of observation posts, and a general popular support within the theatre of operations. As well as remarkable material support from outside entities.

This will be (and all but certainly is being) studied in war colleges and curricula for generations.
The burning question of Bonfire Night pollution (2020)
Again, you keep making claims about "most of its armaments destroyed." This is clearly not the case, instead it should be reversed and say that the Russians have lost most of their tanks... They've lost over 1000, and with 10 per BTG, that's 100 BTGs that are without their most powerful weapons.

The Russians have also used up most of the precision guided weapons and are having to resort to using unguided bombs and rockets for the majority of their attacks. With sanctions in place, they won't be able to replace these weapon stocks due to their reliance on Western electronics.

Russia didn't go into this war trying to liberate the Donbas; and if fact most of the Russian speaking citizens of Ukraine have turned against Russia. Russia wanted the entire country and failed.

And Russia will shortly have two new NATO members on its borders. That's a huge geopolitical failure. Russia has instantly strengthened and rejuvenated NATO with its invasion of Ukraine.

But you keep pushing that Russian Success Strategy. We'll see how things pan out by August.
This contributes another ethical quality though: if the other person can shoot back, you have a right to go all out in order to defend yourself. The same cannot be said for unmanned warfare, where the immediate danger is asymmetric.
It's annoying when articles like this blindly repeat misinformation:

> On March 9, 1862, the Union warship Monitor met its Confederate counterpart, Virginia. After a four-hour exchange of fire, the two fought to a draw. It was the first battle of ironclads. In one day, every wooden ship of the line of every naval power became immediately obsolete.

Ouch, false. The ironclad ships that the US built were what became known as "[river] monitors"--they were at best barely seaworthy, since they had no freeboard worth speaking of, so any sea that was mildly stalled would cause the ships to founder. In no way were they ships-of-the-line, or capable of threatening ships-of-the-line, and the first ironclad ship-of-the-line would have been HMS Warrior, built before the US ironclads.

> On December 7, 1941, the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. If the battle of the ironclads settled once and for all the wood-versus-iron debate, Japanese carrier-based aircraft settled the battleship-versus-carrier debate by sinking the cream of America’s battleship fleet in a single morning.

Even worse than the previous paragraph. Aircraft carriers did not render battleships obsolete at Pearl Harbor, which involved a fleet of old battleships at a state of low readiness. If the Japanese thought battleships obsolete, why did they bring them to the Battle of Midway 6 months later?

One of the things that I think is poorly comprehended by much of the lay public is that military technology really is "part of a complete package". There isn't a single technology that beats everything else; instead, it tends to end up closer to a rock-paper-scissors scenario where it turns out you need all of the weapon systems to avoid being defeated by one of them. For example, in WW1-ish naval warfare, a large capital ship like a battleship is vulnerable to torpedoes, which means it needs a fleet screen of light units to avoid the torpedo threat, but those units are vulnerable to the powerful capabilities of battleships, which requires capital ships of their own to threaten.

What makes technology obsolete isn't "this can be countered by something else," it's "this capability can be provided by something better."
It's not just those grades; I see the same in high school. To a lesser extent, but a lot of the classes that are non-advanced are, here's a 5 question quiz and 15 minutes of content every week, turn it in whenever.