skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
True, but if they're "server enough" for AWS, I think that says something.
The 24 hour thing is a problem though.
I suspect the economic system as a whole wants it to be true.

The system wants parents working and yielding maximum economic output at all costs, kids be damned. It was very visible with the COVID-19 pandemic. At least in my country, a minor research paper with small sample size finding that kids in some age groups spread the virus less than adults (while kids in other age groups spread it more) was prominently featured in the media saying simply that "scientists had found that kids don't spread the virus", while other contemporary studies saying that of course they do (as common sense suggests) were never mentioned. Of course, this was used as an argument to open schools and nurseries as soon as possible so parents could go to work (in theory it was because of education... yeah, sure).

The following I suppose is more country-specific, but in recent years, in my country, nursery schools have been officially renamed to "children's schools", with years having numbers (1st from 0-1 year, etc.) so it's indistinguishable from the latter school where they actually, you know, teach them things, and even uttering the word equivalent to "nursery school" is increasingly frowned upon by people who says "it's not nursing, it's education". And of course, language shapes reality so the underlying convenient idea is catching on, I have already heard parents who have the time to take care at their kids at home taking there instead because "they will learn more", "it's for their education" and such things, when anyone who has had a 1-year-old knows that what they most need is the undivided attention that they won't have in a room with 6-7 more kids and a single adult.

The public discourse becomes more and more focused on making us think that parenting has to take a back seat to today's work culture (lest we start to think that maybe we should change work culture to accommodate parenting) so I'm not surprised in the least that convenient scientific results start coming up on how parenting doesn't matter. (Not accusing the scientists behind the study of anything, by the way. Different scientists can legitimally reach different conclusions, but then the media chooses what to feature and how to frame it, like in the COVID example above).
That problem is actually solved though. There are plenty of online stores where you can create an account and buy something via invoice after it got delivered to you. This works just fine.
'Username and Password' is 'most' of 'sovereign identity'.

'Proof of Personhood' is mostly only going to matter in a legal context, in which there will be some kind of state that recognizes that personhood. Even governments kind of screw that up though.

For the later we probably just need a slightly more advanced 'Ministry of Information and Identity'. Like the passport office, but digital. And away you go.

This whole 'decentralize everything' is a big of a canard. Useful though experiment, but not much more.

Also: "Soulbound token" make me cough up my coffee a little bit.
I think you are selecting a small subset of tech for your argument.

For example:
- Apple is the one driving stronger privacy, and Apple is tech.

- Microsoft would actually get on my good side if they stopped with their telemetry and ads fuckery on Windows. If they lost all of their ad revenue today, they would still be producing cloud products, Windows, Office, Xboxes, etc.

- The reason why Netflix has lost momentum is because several other competitors built their own streaming platforms. All tech stacks, driven by cloud platforms.

- Amazon will still have their cloud platform, and their store, and their shop platform. Tougher regulation won’t remove Amazon’s edge on cloud technologies, warehouses, and logistics.

- Traditional tech companies, such as Oracle, IBM, HP, and similars won’t be affected at all by tightening of privacy.

- Heck, even Salesforce has its edge on corporate customers and B2B, and wouldn’t feel that much of a hit.

Tech is much, much more than Meta and Google. Google can still push ads based on search queries and webpage content anyway, without violating privacy.

So your argument is essentially about Meta. And that’s true, Meta is under risk. And that’s a good thing. They have created a lot of damage and need to correct their products.
Maybe for generating more useful input vectors for property-based testing?
I wrote about this in another comment here [0]

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31704791
For a family of 4 maybe. You can live just fine on 160k individually
Self reliance is definitely not part of the modern developed world. Countries are more interconnected than ever, and almost any person, unless they live in the wilderness in Alaska and do everything themselves, relies on other people to live. The pillar of the modern developed world is specialization and trade, not self-reliance.
For me the issue seems to occur with any audio source, but only happens when there is a decent amount of RAM usage, or CPU usage.
The thing is - in startups, there always is an external deadline (assuming you're not cash flow positive or profitable) - it is tied directly to your runway and when you'd run out of cash. That is the ultimate deadline for pretty much all startups.

The very early stages of a startup (and even later stages) usually require this much effort because you honestly don't have enough money to last you the "right" amount of time you need - and therefore you need to put in more time.

As you said - this isn't sustainable long-term - but, especially in the early stages, you may not have a "long-term" in that venture if you're not able to put these hours in.

Not to say it's impossible to find a great work-life balance for an early stage startup - but it's highly unlikely.
I never did read this book, one of the bigger holes in my technology reading. I should use this as an excuse to finally pick it up and dive in, once the new edition arrives.
I didn’t say do you accidentally engage in corporal punishment, I said if you believe in corporal punishment, implying a difference between a flaw and a belief not shared by all that may still damage a child. Sure you can change your beliefs but it’s not like a flaw that your self reflective about.

> Often people are MOST self-reflective about their perceived flaws

And yet often they continue to engage in them. I don’t know that we’re disagreeing all that much except perhaps on the definition of “control”. I don’t think most people have the self discipline to control their own behavior so much as influence it, but maybe that’s just one of my flaws.
>Don't tell me about how the right is persecuted, because nobody is banned just for being on the right. People are banned for specific things or actions that are making waves at the moment.

Thank you! People aren't banned because they align with a particular ideology, its due to actions they take on behalf of their ideology and those actions are usually quite extremist
I once interviewed a guy- a CTO at a biotech- and he wouldn't answer the question "I have a million DNA sequences and want to count the number of occurrences of each sequence" (could be hash table, could be any number of other solutions; he just balked and exited the interview).

Maybe he's just been around the block a sufficient number of times to have gotten tired of the standard SV "here's a hoop, jump through it, now do it again, and again and again" ritual that it likes to call "interviewing" for some reason.

Seriously - your questions are fine for junior or mid-level roles, but beyond that, you should have more important thinks to talk about. And both of you should be able to tell if the other is a bullshitter and/or a lightweight within about 30 minutes at most (and often far quicker than that) of a normal, focused technical conversation -- without having to specifically grill the other person, or otherwise put on the pretension that you're one whose bona fides are established beyond question, and they're the one who needs to jump through a sequence of hoops to prove that they are worthy of your time and attention.

Just cut the crap, get down to brass tacks, and talk what needs to be done as if they're a peer. That's all you have to do.
A computer is a pretty bad analogy for a brain. But even so, 1 synapse is much much greater in complexity than 10 or 100 transistors. Each synapse is a complex system unto itself, which interacts with all kinds of cellular mechanisms which make up the highly dynamical system which dictates information processing within the neuron.

So if we wanted to make a simulation with reasonable fidelity to the mechanisms of cellular information processing we know about, I would wager to guess it's more on the order of 1GPU == 1Synapse at a minimum.

That's not to say that all of this complexity is required to reproduce consciousness in a meaningful way, but actual information processing in the brain is gob-smackingly complex.
Animals are pretty clearly sentient, it is the sapience and consciousness that are harder to pin down.
Might be worth updating within the context of Apple Silicon (now /opt-prefixed), as well as MacPorts support thereof. Still a Homebrew user here, by choice.
Golden age of travel is over because countries are opening up and closing down for the foreseeable future. It effects passport holders unequally based on country of origin. Even if your argument is that countries are rarely closing their borders now there is always the risk of becoming trapped.

Also, keeping up with the vaccine schedule (i.e supported vaccines, ability to add them to your existing vaccine card or cert) is difficult. How to get an EU Digital Covid Certificate as an American or other nationality?
Because there is far more evidence, both formal, and lived experience for everybody, multiple times per day, that people's environment (including who they surround themselves with) affect their personality, than there is evidence that it does not.

The "newborn saying thank you" comment was a joke, as they generally don't say much when newborn, but illustrative of the point: newborns do not have any expressed personality to speak of, because genetics alone cannot create one. Your newborn has zero personality, but with the right upbringing, and perhaps the right genes, it will have a great one. With just the genes... probably not.

tl;dr the claim I am arguing against is TFA's "environment doesn't matter", but I don't claim that genetics don't.
This is awesome! Had no clue this existed.
Every tech company you listed has some kind of ad-based revenue. They're all data vacuums, and a lot of their current and especially future value is tied to how much user data they have access to and how they can monetize it further.

You ever hear the phrase data is the new oil?
That argument is not that clear if you state it in the converse. Being able to operate with nobody trusting you is potentially a problem. Being required to be trusted by at least somebody is arguably a good thing.
Beautiful Trigonometry [video] (2020)
Assumption: determinism

Counterexample: quantum mechanics
The Linux kernel can spawn processes on its own
Yes, I was going to say something similar.

You don't need an extended family. But some form of community that doesn't hate kids helps a lot. We're lucky to have great neighbors and we all help eachother with things. It's a bonus that they don't call the police whenever we aren't behaving like helicopter parents.

Beyond that, stop listening to (non expert) childless people about how you should raise your kids. They mostly don't know what they're talking about. Even if they are your friends.
I think there's something to this and have been thinking about this for a while too. Just today tried to see if diff.me was available, sadly it's not.

I was thinking something like a git repo with a flat file in it. You list your beliefs / opinions / things you think are facts in a structured way (maybe a tree like structure) going all the way back to some "root". Then you can easily diff this file with someone else and see where you agree and differ. Changing someone's mind could just be a pull request :)
Interesting rundown. More than 1 guy wrote this: there's a lot of functionality, also a couple of specialities represented. If I think about having to write this, I get a feeling of incredible fatigue. It would never work well, problems installing would happen on half the machines.
Elon Musk’s Futurist Bookshelf Needs Alvin Toffler
A problem with biofuel is scaling it up, see: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7498153. According to that article the U.S. would need to devote "an area bigger than Texas and California and Pennsylvania combined" to crops specifically for its own jet biofuel needs. That's just for flying, not for food or fuel for ground transportation or anything else.

Your gasoline link talks about 2050. Gas is averaging $5/gallon in the U.S. Where's this $3-4/gallon gas? And that $5/gallon price is aggressively cheap, Biden couldn't even get a tiny carbon tax through a government his own party controlled. I made up $20 and $50 but what do you think a fair price is if we price in environmental externalities? What would that price be between now and 2050?

By "natural gas nonsense" I assume you mean supply issues related to the war in Ukraine. That disruption is exactly the sort of problem we can expect more of going forward, or do you think it's some kind of one-off aberration? Also from https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/22/fertilizer-prices-are-at-rec...: "The impact, Barclays suggested, will be 'extremely asymmetrical' with most emerging market economies disproportionately affected by food and fertilizer supply risks."
Every few months, my credit card blocks one of my purchases because its statistical algorithm decides it looks sketchy and wants me to respond to a verification email. How is this any more trusting?

Both systems recognize the existence of fraudulent actors, and handle the problem in different ways. Blockchains use cryptographically-signed transactions, so merchants get no information they can use against you. Credit cards hand your credentials over to every merchant and try to fix their fundamental insecurity by flagging unusual transactions, insuring against losses, and issuing new credentials when bad actors get them (which brings lots of associated hassle, that I've gone through a couple times in the last few years). Bank transfers handle the problem by simply delaying full access to the money, at least for larger amounts, until banks on both ends have checked everything.

The same applies to more complex systems. Blockchains try to build systems with extreme transparency and security (and sometimes fail at that). Traditional finance builds systems reliant on centralized actors, and adds lots of regulation, oversight, and incentives such as criminal penalties to keep those actors in check (and sometimes fails at that).

We certainly should strive for a more idealistic future. But legacy banking/finance is not doing that. Blockchain platforms at least provide the possibility of building something new that's better; on top of an open trustless platform, you can build your own system assuming whatever level of trust and altruism you like.

Two examples on Ethereum: optimistic rollups are more scalable second layers, in which withdrawals work more like bank transfers: withdrawals aren't cryptographically verified, but have a delay during which anyone can submit proof of fraud. A more idealistic example is Gitcoin, in which people donate to public goods and the money is allocated with a quadratic funding system.
Forget the car. The mechanical knowledge is the valuable thing.
What, exactly, in quantum mechanics is nondeterministic and how does that translate to nondeterministicness in the macroscopic/biochemical world?
“Naturally occurring fluctuations” != “messed up climate”

There’s a reason prior to irrigation (and Hunter gathering) only a few regions in the world supported long-term human habitation.
Sure. But isn't what you are describing exactly the point of the sovereign/decentralized identity trilemma?

Anyway, the point is not even that Twitter needs to be able to identify its users. Twitter just needs to get rid of its bot problem. To solve that problem, they could simply charge their users $5 and promise to refund if after some vetting period (by their fraud detection and other users). The downside of this approach, of course, is that it would deter not just bots but also a large number of legitimate users who wouldn't be interested in paying to sign-up.
I think the point is that it’s just a change of venue for making consensus; the roles don’t change.

A small number of people with lots of resources choose whether a large number of people with few resources fight each other to the death.

GGP implied that war was something a blockchain could “fix”, but GP argues that it, at best, it maintains the status quo.

In my opinion, it’s a little worse than the status quo because at least before those with few resources got some small say in the matter via their elected representatives.
Aren’t they bound by the arbitration agreement. You can’t have it both ways.
How can we tell if this is true, or some kind of Elon Musk submarine PR hot?

Politico is not a military/strategy publication, it's "inside baseball" for politics, all the points scoring and petty squabbling that politicians do. Seems like an unusual place for this material to appear.
If there’s one thing I’m certain of is that given the ability to use it’s own engine Firefox will still lose to Chrome. Willing to bet $100.
Thanks for sharing this. I'm also caffeine sensitive and unwittingly built up a tolerance as a teenager.

I realized the degree of my caffiene sensitivity when I had to give it up. Just quitting my one cup of coffee a day was rough. (The headaches!)

Now that I should be able to consume caffiene again, I can scarcely look at black tea without my heart racing. I really miss good coffee and it's effects, so I'm thinking about doing just this myself.

It's hard to start however, now that I know that I'm basically cultivating an addiction.
That's the turring test.

The chinese room is sort of intended as a refutation of the ideas contained in the turring test. I postulates a system that would pass a turring like test but argues that there isn't any component of that system that has 'understanding' to which the general response is that it is the combined system which 'understands'.
As a user I have no desire to even try any browser other than Safari in my iPhone. As a developer I have a strong desire to not have to deal with multiple browsers on iOS. Forgive my ignorance but I’ve got no idea what tangible benefit a new browser engine would give. Perhaps I’m just lazy and part of the problem.
This might become the new soundtrack to my working days.
If I were legally responsible for a company's behavior, I would not want to, for instance, use pirated copies of SolidWorks or Office.

It's an minor risk I would imagine, compared to the benefits of reading the articles. But paying for the articles you cite or reference in presentations seems like a good decision for the same reason as you don't want some "pirated version" notification popping up while you give a presentation at a conference. The risk is a lot lower, but it's the same logic.

Considering the cost of that handful of articles versus the budget for a company's coffee supplies it seems like probably the right decision. I don't think I'd go for an actual journal subscription though, that seems like ridiculous overkill unless you're the size of Google.
There are a ton of HPV strains. The vaccines protect against the most dangerous ones that give you cancer, but not all of them.
So you think ACEs aren't heritable? Wanna bet?

Actually, I was curious about this and found https://www.nature.com/articles/s41398-021-01538-w - which indeed has Plomin as a coauthor. It's a twin study, and it does argue that ACE has an independent effect from genetics. In fairness to Plomin, I don't think his argument was ever that you couldn't screw up your children if enough bad things happened to them.
Hard to take seriously when the cons list doesn’t even have “versions no longer indicate breaking changes”.
In no way defending real estate agents, but people have been predicting that the Internet would obsolete their business model since the Clinton administration. It's yet to happen, and arguably they have more of a hold on real estate transactions than they did previously. The web never disrupted their business model, sadly
Also The Perfect Storm in which the author discusses rogue waves and contemplates that one took down the Andrea Gail.
I wonder what or who could be behind this?
What's to gain exactly?
Hurting competition? Console manufacturers have had stricter requirements and more onerous developer restrictions than any mobile platform since the 80s.
The pixelated style is really wonderful. I’m glad they went with a whimsical theme.
Yes, so much content aimed at driving consumerism, creating trends and fads for the latest fashion and gadgets, peer pressure to follow them.

I find it adorable when young children are presented with some expensive present, they cry out in delight.. and start playing with the wrapping paper, ignoring the gift.
Back to basics.

Dramatically more sustainable/resilient computing for everyone (at both hardware/software/architecture levels).

web3 will be irrelevant.
AI definitely relevant, but you’ll need the means of using it.

Main drivers: climate emergencies, energy price surges, natural resources control shortages.
sorted out by paying off the scammer, brilliant
Enough people followed the dead tree versions of the Bible and Koran for enough time. bert-jesus, bert-Mohammed, and bert-stallman will probably be even more persuasive.
Can you elaborate on the last part? And what leads to the conclusion that absence of value judgement is the cause of so much illness?
I have my doubts about whether just scaling a model of V1 would be sufficient to reproduce consciousness. Structure and function are extremely closely linked in the nervous system, and neural circuitry is highly specialized in terms of structure to support a given function. E.g., motor cortex is going to be vastly different from auditory cortex and so on. Assuming that because we have 1st level feature detection in V1 fairly well understood and reproduced, we have solved neuroscience in general strikes me as a massive and unjustified leap of faith.

If there were a brain region that might be emulated to reproduce "general information processing", the best candidate would probably be neocortex. As far as I am aware, that does seem to be a very wide region of the brain which has fairly consistent structure, and largely serves to integrate all other systems.
Do you have any sources to share? I know too many counterexamples to just believe that without question.
PyMC4 Released with Jax Backend
The Zen Playboy: The Life and Times of Stewart Brand
“some kind of ad-based revenue” carrying a lot of water in that sentence. Apple, for example, have an ads business, but it’s a drop in the ocean compared to iPhone, or hell even iCloud.
Nothing quite like AwesomeWM yet, but here's two I'm aware of that have some interesting features:

https://github.com/WayfireWM/wayfire/wiki

https://github.com/riverwm/river

(I'm also on Sway, FWIW)
I suppose that was an original message for Bitcoin, but the current state with various institutions serving in trust-based roles for so many users, Bitcoin doesn't seem to have met that goal.

The users who out of practical concern are considering between trusting Citibank and Bitfinex, will benefit from chosing the one that's regulated.
Assumption: consciousness depends on quantum effects in the brain

Counterexample: quantum effects are rare in non-atomic scale, no data whatsoever that indicates they are involved in high level brain functions, rather a lot of data pointing towards the opposite, given rapid progress in modeling said functions.
What kind of a place can you buy in, say, Mountain View while making 160k?