skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't know how much I would pay because I have not researched your product, sorry for being unhelpful. Just to throw a useless number out, if there was a standalone version licensed for individual use I would impulse pay $100 to run it on my workstation and give it a try. Because while I do have scripts to automate a lot of my data analysis it's always nice to have a turnkey solution that automates it even more, and there is the promise that next year I could buy a new version that stays up to date with the integrations or adds more features. I can't imagine that is enough money to fund your development, but... there is no chance anyone in our org will jump through the hoops to adopt and purchase this as part of your enterprise sales when we already have tooling that does what you do, just not as polished. This is code we own and can extend ourselves, which I'm guessing is not something we can do with a SaaS offering.

I am afraid any information at all about data or models can't go to a 3rd party server. Practically speaking stuff has to be able to run on firewalled servers that are only accessible on the company network. Exceptions would have to go through the legal department and at least 6 months of meetings where you would be repeatedly told no, unless it is vital to the product, which a dashboard isn't, even if it could theoretically be allowed.
They Quit. Now You're Picking Up the Slack
"This stifling of competing ideas, say a growing number of scholars, is a big reason why there is no treatment for Alzheimer’s."

Question for those who know: is this a problem in general with the culture of academic science?

I am not a scientist, but I feel like I've seen this story more than once in science-enthusiast media: an established but incorrect idea cannot be challenged because it is a risky career move and hard to get funding for.

I understand that crackpots exist, but I wonder how much of this culture is really a barrier to keep out the unsubstantiated and how much of it is just protecting turf and sunk costs?

I have tons of confidence in the scientific method, but decreasing confidence in the institutions that practice it.
I'm an outsider, but to quote credible external sources, Science AAAS writer Derek Lowe documented that the biotech startup scene was large and relatively easier to get investments in from 1991 to 1994, with stagnation in 2012 [0].

McKinsey separately reported that there has since been another boom in the biotech sector in the 2020s [1].

[0] https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/biotech-class-earl...

[1] https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/life-sciences/our-insigh...
huh? what do you mean by this?
> For young academics, biotech executive Dr. Raymond Tesi said, "it’s difficult to break into a field with so many strong voices supporting a single target. Alzheimer’s has egos and superstars and big personas unlike anything I’ve seen elsewhere."

For a field with no real results to have "superstars" is a sign of corruption.
Oh, so science institutionalizes a practise of humility, you mean..?

Current article notwithstanding, of course…
Bad parents gave drugs to keep child actors on business before. Is not a lot to presume some would give hormone treatment.
You might want to actually read that Wikipedia page; those figures are very very heavily massaged in multiple ways, and not everyone would necessarily agree with how they are massaged. Suffice it to say, there's a large fudge factor here, much larger than the difference you are trying to point out.
Android started off being its own thing, except for the kernel. The Steam Deck is built on desktop Linux tech, so they would have to start over if they wanted to move away from that. That doesn't make their path guaranteed to be the same in the future, but it does make what you describe less likely.
The dark money illuminati might have conspired with the SEC to modify the documents, therefor they are just papers from randoms and can't be trusted. This is the whole you dig yourself into when you start attacking sources rather than taking a step back and realizing you might be arguing on the wrong side of the facts.

The burn rate is the amount of cash the company is spending per month. It does get murky post revenue, but is generally understood to be the rate at which a company is spending - I understand it might be confusing to someone who hasn't been in the trenches of startups and investing so I'll give you a pass on that. Close to $600 million a month going out the door is stupid high compared to what they actually do. The executive leadership agrees with me and is cutting high costs.
I've always preferred text because we tend to read faster than people can talk. I'll use videos for things where I need to see what they're talking about - e.g., car repair.
I think there's another subtle or not-so subtle effect, which is pure peer pressure and trying to anticipate what will be popular. That is, the system is currently structured such that no one wants to put money into something that won't work. The problem with this is that that's almost required if you don't know what's going on: you have to fund a bunch of studies, 90% of which will fail, to find the 10% that don't. But no one -- absolutely no one -- will get credit for a failed but good attempt at trying something reasonable. So instead people just keep doing the obvious.

It's like this with tons of biomedical research: chasing authority figures and popular trends. I don't think the people doing it are evil, or are necessarily consciously aware of what they're doing, it's just everyone is incentivized this way. I'm not even sure they "honestly believe in what they're doing" sometimes, I think it's more a sense of "this is our best guess" where "best guess" is defined as "popular". It's like FOMO with this alternative of proposing shots in the dark being the thing that no one talks about because it won't get grant dollars and if if fails, won't result in any credit.

The whole mentality is backwards to me. It's as if space agencies kept sending probes around the earth because we don't know much about what's further out in the solar system. We don't do that because instead we celebrate the information gained about other planets, not whether or not that information conforms to some particular a priori hypothesis of a particular person.

Add in indirect funds dependence and you have a recipe for perpetuating the obvious.
Ask HN: Best open-source alternative to Slack?
The idea of ceding total control over internal messaging to an external entity (especially for a startup or small company) has always gotten to me, but I’ve recently considered the possibility of using a self-hosted, open-source alternative to Slack. From what I’ve found in research, Rocket.chat seems like a good choice and relatively “easy” to set up. Do you use any self-hosting or open-source options? What’s your experience been like?
That sound wonderful, thank you for the detail!
No, eng and product are separate orgs, but I'll work with them on process, documentation, meetings, etc. I'm a big believer in demonstrating value before asking people to do more work. So when I wanted product to do write more documentation, I did most of it myself to show the impact it had on engineering and how organized the team was. Now product owns it.

It's less about taking on roles and just doing what needs to be done. Everything is a partnership in building the product, so I help where I'm needed most. When our hiring pipeline dried up, I'm the one doing outreach. When our test suite needed enhancements, I'm writing demo code to show best practices. When an upstream service pushed breaking changes, I'm the one pushing for process/communication changes.

Granted, my current org is a little bit of a mess, but every place I've worked at needed me to flex because it gives my team the ability to do what they do best - code. And since I'm fixing processes and not a bottleneck, I have a stronger case for promotion too.
As someone who's stage-managed the migration of significant IT assets out of at least the big 3 providers who "controlled the compute and storage infrastructure" (AWS, GCP, Azure), I'm curious if your faith in 'competition' as a control is naïve or deliberate obfuscation (boy have I seen both). There are things you 'can' do, because yes an alternative, in theory exists, and there are things that are practical to do.
Yes/no – something like a watchdog timer should be part of whatever OS the router is running. Remote power management would be closer to bespoke but ought not to be too exotic.
Yes, thanks for the clarification. My point still stands: I don’t think many people consider themselves evil or even consistently “doing bad”
It may not be the case right now, but I'm pretty sure their platform will eventually run anything that compiles to WASM. This is just the first step.
> I wish more companies would take note of the transparency and sense of urgency on updating their status page.

Looking at you Twilio...
I do absolutely love OpenBSD, and I'm enjoying it on my Thinkpad already. It makes for an awesome desktop/workstation, and I actually feel very productive using it.

I have different plans for that machine. I'm planning to max it out (it's an A1025, so 2x512MB RAM, 802.11g, IDE->CF adapter + 2x64GB CF for storage, battery replacements, etc), and try various OS's of the era: MacOS 9.2.2; OSX 10.4, 10.5 and developer preview for 10.6; maybe even BeOS - to see which one(s) I like the best. Perhaps it will end up with OpenBSD on it as well! I'm also planning to do some development on each of these OSs :)
I take it you didn't read the article? It answers that (ish)
Nice work, you've basically created a visualisation of a Web crawler, cool!

Side note: when posting here it might be better to just put the blog link and the title, everything you've written above is in the blog post anyway
it's important to know what you're trusting. in, say, the thiomersal controversy, the hypothesis was that thiomersal causes autism. many studies were done. there's no link to autism. you either trust the science, or assert a conspiracy between dozens of independent groups to straight-up falsify data, and to what end? so yes, I trust the science on thiomersal. the same way I trust the science on covid vaccines.

you shouldn't "trust the science" when a single paper makes extraordinary claims and that haven't been replicated (e.g. the original vaccines-cause-autism paper itself, which seems to have been outright fraud.)

you also shouldn't trust the science beyond what the study can show. I trust that amyloid shows up in Alzheimer's brains, that neurofibrillary tangles disrupt neuronal function, that APP mutations lead to early-onset Alzheimer's. but beyond that, the science is only suggestive, not conclusive.

no experiment has proven the amyloid hypothesis, only pieces of the patchwork. smart, reasonable people can disagree on how those pieces fit together. all while trusting the same science.
This doesn’t seem like good advice. As a human, the data might not be engineerable by you. The data might seem like it is, but you may end up losing information through your feature engineering. The combinatorial power of NNs is so great that it’s almost always better to give the model as much data as possible and let it figure out which parts of the data are important.
Looking at you, AWS
This reminds me a bit of the role string theory plays in the physics community.
Sounds like a racing condition. A lock (algorithmical or just through communication) should have been used.
A survey honestly helps a lot. Also Hotjar has a tool thar records users using a site. You can see people's frustrations on it.

Most people should avoid friends and family. Or rather "normies" who aren't your target market. You'll get dishonest replies by people who want to support you, people who are blindly envious, people who want to sound clever or helpful. You'll often get feedback like "this costs too much" or "this is too ugly", when your actual target market is happy for it.
Please beware there are many fake cryptocurrrency investment platforms out there, I got scammed twice before I met a genius hacker who helped retrieve my bitcoin. The whole plan was so smooth I could not doubt it. Bitcoin is actually a great investment option but one thing I discovered over time is that it is not possible to mine bitcoin so don’t be deceived. I invested 2BTC on a particular website called FoxBtc.io, I monitored the profit yielding but got locked out of the account before I could withdraw. I went online and met this recovery expert CryptoSwiftRecovery@gmail. com who helped me retrieve my bitcoins back in few hours. He saved my life , he can save yours.
If I understand "political" to pertain to any activity that occurs in a polis, then you're right. If I were to spend time studying number theory, that, too, is political because it is an activity carried out within a polis, and it is impossible to separate the act from the entire web of interdependencies within the polis.

I think your linkage of the political with the controversial is telling and makes me think this is not the idea of "political" you have in mind. In which case, I hope I'm making the non-controversial statement that an artist's intent is distinct from the interpretation of the artist's work. Sometimes an artist's intent is political, sometimes it is not. Sometimes a political interpretation sheds light on a work, and sometimes it doesn't.

A long time ago, I recall one of my classmates telling me about a lecture he attended in which an analysis of Ancient Voices of Children was given with George Crumb in the audience. Afterwards, Crumb said he found the analysis fascinating and that he was unaware of the set of relationships discussed in the analysis until they had been pointed out, but none of those things were salient to him while he was composing the work.

So I think the artist's intent is privileged, while any mode of analysis or interpretation has the burden of proving its value in each particular case.
Don't worry, I really enjoy being called dumb and ignorant. Its truly the best way to make me stop and listen to the other side so I can find out what my mistake was.
>you cannot see adverse risk in certain activities without a study - observational, RCT, or otherwise - confirming it.

This is pretty far from my claim. I didn't say that I don't believe things without clinical evidence. I said that there is a conspicuous lack of clinical evidence for something which otherwise has so many claims surrounding it. Even a simple questionnaire would be publishable, if it showed an effect. Do you close your toilet lid? Have you had an illness in which you experienced vomiting or diarrhea in the last 6 months? How many people do you live with?

I think perhaps you assume that "you are with the experts" on this one. That most researchers consider the evidence presented in this article to be good evidence that there is a health benefit to closing the toilet lid of your toilet. I can assure you that most researchers do not consider this to be good evidence, exactly because it has no clinical endpoint. It might as well say "in mice".

Perhaps you believe that there is some common sense reason to think that toilet plume is a bad thing, but common sense largely fails to come to correct conclusions about germs. Which is the case that I have been making in this thread.
The logo does indeed look like a reference to the movie, but A Clockwork Orange is originally a book. Highly recommended btw.
The US has a classification for NEVs that this would fall under if speed limited to 25mph.

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

If you want something small but more capable then an imported Japanese kei truck is worth considering.
> If I paint a picture of a sailing ship cresting a wave, is my art political?

Yes. Modern sailing ships are a symbol of wealth inequality, and historical ones have plenty of other controversial associations, depending on time period.

> How about a bowl of fruit?

Also yes. Access to fresh fruit is a political subject. Just look at maps of food deserts.

> Or a blacksmith forging horseshoes?

Stick around here for long enough and you'll find plenty of people arguing over the idealization of rural life, the roles of domesticated animals, etc.
They fall over in the trunk. In the backseat I can buckle them in or put them in the crevasse between the seats and the floor.
I think we need a restructuring of the process by which funds are allocated, not necessarily more money (although I'm not opposed to that).

My sense is that politicians don't really understand much of the problems affecting research. They hear researchers complain about NIH funding obvious studies, and don't realize that what the researchers mean is "obvious to an expert in any remotely related area", not "obvious to a person with no understanding of the subject matter." Then they pull in experts, and end up with hyper-credentialed persons who have benefited from the very process that needs reform.

It's sort of a vicious circle.
When this discussion about the water deprived southwest comes up, I have seen the suggestion crop up repeatedly to halt agriculture in California, Utah, and Arizona that require a lot of water, and the followup is usually to suggest shifting those agricultural practices and crops north and east. I don't think growing almonds in Mississippi or Alabama will help much. It's just be exporting the problems elsewhere.
Maybe with eye-tracking we can help with those concerns. Altering the visual representation of text, for example, if the eye-tracker notices you're having issues focusing on it.
Spring planning, backlog grooming, etc. are not the examples I would use if I wanted to support the opinion that leetcode is not a real programming. (I definitely agree that some knowledge of algorithms and data structures can be very beneficial.)

My examples would be activities like building complex systems, maintaining and extending them, making them modular and flexible enough, doing performance analysis, identifying risks, and addressing technical depts, considering and implementing different architecture patterns, creating efficient CI/CD pipelines, automating routine.
https://usrtk.org/sweeteners/aspartame_health_risks/

This article links Aspartame to some wild problems. One of them is Alzheimer's.

In the early 2000s i worked for a pharma company. A woman named Beryl told me they knew aspartame caused Alzheimer's if it went over a certain temperature.
I never knew one needed so many laundry symbols. Are clothes that complex in France O_O ? Honestly I never knew there was such a thing...
They could also just upload the password and the key material, so in the end this is about them being able to do it in a way that isn't obvious to everyone looking at the network tab, which is the real issue being pointed out.
They are, but typically wages are paid after working, rather than beforehand. So paying wages monthly rather than, for example, twice a month, amounts to an interest-free loan of two weeks' worth of wages by the employee to their employer, which to me seems unjust. (Thus the Biblical injunction to pay your workers before their sweat has dried.) This interest-free loan is particularly galling when we're experiencing 6% inflation per month, so your wages are worth 3% less when you get them.
You could say much the same about depression. As it is, we know there are lots of different conditions all labeled depression, distinguishable mainly by which medication they respond to, if any. (This, despite that symptoms vary widely; e.g. many suicidal, others just lacking affect and motivation.) At least treatments exist, somehow grandfathered in. The wastebasket diagnosis means that no new medication can be found to have any useful effect, because it only treats a small fraction of patients in a trial, and worsens others.

And, somebody always pops up self-righteously insisting Gold Standard Randomized Controlled Trials prove that none of the medications that millions of people need daily to be able function at all have any effect.
Their MEGAsync client is open source at least.
>You said distinctly that if I said it wasn't an impact, that I just wouldn't admit that it was. That is calling me a liar.

This is not distinct or clear to me; I certainly can't say you are lying when I can't parse this.

>I do not consider things that are "correlated" with a previous salary.

Ok, I believe you believe this if you say so. It doesn't sound like a lie. I can't understand how you can believe it.

>Again, you continue to assume my actions

The things I am confident about have nothing to do with your actions.

There's a lot of talk about things like "institutional racism" and it seems to me deeply weird that it is such an emotional topic, when it should be a bloodless technical one, given the premises. Namely that because of correlations, outcomes that are not intentional are endemic.

The overall sense I have of your comments is that the idea of unintended consequences is offensive. But how do you correct anything without thinking about them?
I wholeheartedly agree with this post. I have used/tried every admin panel creator gem under the sun. Or other 'quickstart' products out there such as Jumpstart. Other than that there has been several efforts to make admin panels for rapid app creation that come with some CSS flavor. And always end up hitting the same ceiling, that one feature that cannot be created due to DLS limitations or whatever, and then its all back to square one just that now you have to hack the shit out of the app to make things work.

Never going down the road of using tools like OP's one, I rather spend more time writing boilerplate, which in the end is what's saving here.

It does look like a nicely crafted project and I wish OP luck with it.
> Society is not obligated to force people to let you [...] into their businesses

Courts have routinely disagreed with you here.
You have not refuted my point. Going from manual calculators & punch cards to something with 5MB of storage literally changed the world.
The birds had help.
Joke’s on you. There’s literally no information to be gained by the way my books are disorganized.
For sure, but that means the original claim

> People in their 20s having their own digs is, I think, a decidedly American phenomenon. In most of the poorer parts of the world (including, for example, Central and Eastern Europe), 30+ years ago younger crowd managed to have sex just fine, using dorm rooms, snatching time while parents were away, etc. My 2c.

is true then. It's only talking about the situation in the poorer parts of the world and not elsewhere, and gives CEE in 1980s as an example.
It used to be difficult when we started dating but now not so much. She keeps getting better over time. She just can't control her emotions when things get heated. I'm basically the opposite; it's easy for me to detach from my emotions and take a step back.
Or bacteria.
Thesis, antithesis, synthesis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#Hegelian_dialectic
So 50% more in one direction, 33% less in the other. This is the eternal question of percentages misunderstandings between peoples. But this doesn't feel "quite a lot poorer" to me, just less rich that the number one.
> Just one reason you mostly couldn't do heavily serialized TV. You could pull it off for a heavily promoted miniseries or limited run series. But, by and large, shows where missing an episode meant you were lost, just wouldn't fly in general.

Soap Operas had been managing to do this for decades before B5 showed up (although yeah, B5 did it a lot better)
Hays Australian IT Salary Guide 22/23 [pdf]
It's alarming to me that you'd find that alarming.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=3rerBnAKPn0
>Those ideas exist for the purpose of domination

I wonder how you decided that. Most religions and many philosophers expound the virtues of good and why it matters. It goes by different names: loving kindness, metta, the Golden Rule, and a host of others.

If the concept exists for dominance alone, why do these religions and philosophers discuss it so much?