skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> This is the final chapter

No, its not.

The use of state power to exterminate trans people is the next chapter, and its already well under way. More broadly, much of the next series of chapters is using selective application of “religious liberty” to establish unique and particular entitlement for favored Christian groups across the board, by dismissing the sincerity of other beliefs and/or judging the burdens imposed on them by a different subjective standard in applying the “substantial burden” test than is applied on favored Christian beliefs.

Viewed even more broadly, the focus is on dismantling substantive anti-discrimination protections for non-favored groups extending beyond religion by similar means (as is the case for the above trends, we’ve already seen some elements of this, such as the judicial dismantling of much of the Voting Rights Act; but that is just the beginning, there is much more to come.)

EDIT: Heck, this isn’t even the end of this chapter, if one considers the way this is part of the integrated campaign against sexual and reproductive freedom and the right of privacy established in the line of cases running (through Roe) back to Griswold v. Connecticut, which are all under attack, and span issues beyond abortion to include contraception, same sex marriage, sodomy laws, etc.
...just as I thought...
You must be new
That's cool, that's what my image of a cool landlord is, the one who is just an excellent handyman--a maintenance focus.
Targeting PERK protein in smooth muscle cells may reduce atherosclerotic plaques
You're right. It's far more powerful than posting. Maybe they should be paying to be moderators, since they get extra influence over the conversations.
The real (too long) title is:

"Targeting a specific protein in smooth muscle cells may dramatically reduce atherosclerotic plaque formation"

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/epdf/10.1161/ATVBAHA.121.317...

What I find interesting is that the protein is PERK, one of the proteins implicated in the cellular stress response, and more specifically in the unfolded protein response [1]. The stress response (or the deregulation of) may be implicated in several neurodegenerative diseases.

So blocking PERK in these male mice resulted in an 80% decrease of atherosclerotic plaque buildup.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfolded_protein_response
Yeah exactly. We need to solve this current problem with immediate solutions (if those exist), but we need need need to start thinking 50 years into the future now with the choices we make.
I do that too all the time. A downside though is that you risk ripping the material, especially with knitted shirts. I've done that only a couple of times over the years, so it is not a big loss.
Adam Smith was well aware that the rich man spent a smaller percent of his income on his mansion than the poor man did in his shack. The rich person also has, statistically speaking, a year’s income in liquid cash, a few mil in stocks and bonds, some expensive cars, maybe a boat, some expensive sports hobbies, a travel budget, good food at all times, and a will to divvy up all the wealth among their children.
It's rhetorically interesting to reach and point at this result as if it's some binary gotcha.

For those who believe that abortion is murder, that's it. They don't need to care whether a state's gun laws are compatible with the US constitution.
Nothing in this opinion bars the Congress from crafting a compromise. One might hope it prompts just such deliberation, though within the confines of present politics I find that unlikely.
Sorry, weak threading. Fully agree that the gun nuts don’t want to see “them” armed.
I feel I should ask and I apologize in advance since its technically not on subject. I have an older PinePhone community edition. At the time I received, it was not ready for prime time ( not very usable as a daily driver ). That was ~2 years now?

Have things improved?
Defining polycrisis – from crisis pictures to the crisis matrix
Japan is awesome. I’m a brown guy and went to Japan and I had the mistaken thought that I would feel like an outsider.

I couldn’t be farther from the reality. Japanese people are so kind and welcoming, and their cities and towns are beautiful, safe, and clean. Just a simple hello led to some amazing conversations, and I felt as if I was living at the edge of the future because we talked by passing our phones to each other. Google translate enabled us to have real time conversations and get to know about each other.

I met an old man who gave me my Japanese name and dropped some wisdom. A businessman and I shared our thoughts on life and family over a late night off the map hole in the wall type of seafood ramen place. Ran into some people at a bar who happened to work in the same industry as me and we shared stories over beers. When I missed my bus in a remote town, a family reopened their restaurant and cooked a meal for me.

I was there for only a few weeks, and I wish I could move permanently to Japan. If any Japanese company or entrepreneur wants to hire me as a software engineer manager or as a co-founder, hit me up!
People pay way more than 500% more just to have a logo on their shirt. It has nothing to do with quality.
> Second, the right of abortion was determined from incorporation of other guaranteed rights (here, the right to privacy)

Correct, and it was a very unstable way to enable abortions. It has always been under threat of being over turned because it was a weak argument. Even RBG said that it was weak.
You have to make the argument to the good people of Merriam-Webster then. I'm just the messenger here.
Republicans aren’t very strongly against those things (as they are abortion). So it’s not going to energize them to such an extent.
"Neumorphism" came and went because it was a clumsily unnecessary neologism tacked onto a loosely-defined trend.

Adding more shading and depth cues to user interfaces is a broader trend that has continued since the popular repudiation of those tools in the early-mid 2010s, but the attempt to package this up and shoehorn it into a neat label alongside "skeuomorphic" and "flat design" was never a particularly useful exercise. I wrote back in 2013 about how these prescriptive labels obscure the tools they represent: https://interuserface.net/2013/05/flat-is-not-the-opposite-o...
Seems pretty normal for Japan.
Are you sure about that?

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/06/14/texas-special-electi...
An alternative viewpoint is that this business model is good for consumers, or a least differently neutral.

If printer companies try to make their money on the printer sale, then it's very difficult for folks who only need to print a little now and again, and they might not be able to afford a very good printer. By moving to a consumption-based revenue model, now they can let everyone have a super-cheap printer (they are MUCH cheaper than decades ago, despite inflation), and then the people who use the printer more (get more value from it) pay more, and those who don't pay less.

This seems reasonable, even though I also don't like hardware that bricks itself if I don't use as directed.
Mmm...yes it was an expensive car brand, but it is a common car in Africa because it's just so reliable, very rugged and also easy to repair. And it's not that expensive.
You are objectively wrong.
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/05/06/americas-abo...
You really think that Bruce Schneier, renowned digital security expert, needs to be paid to write a denouncement of cryptocurrency—the enabler of a host of recent ransomware and similar attacks?
Yes all those things!

Slightly out of date re doge! Dogecoin 0.21 roadmap has segwit and CSV. Check issue #1798 on Dogecoin GitHub.

I look forward to using doge for atomic, subatomic swaps, Lightning payments, etc…
Constructor co-founder here – thanks for the shout-out, Peretus! Seeing customer feedback like this is a great way to start my day.

For anyone who doesn't know us, we have an unhealthy obsession with simplicity and set out to build something as conceptually simple as Trello but with much better usability, and specifically for software teams.
I'm not an American, so don't have a dog in this fight.

Obama does a great job of using the Republican messaging of "The consequences of this decision would be a blow not just to women, but to all of us who believe that in a free society, there are limits to how much the government can encroach on our personal lives."
And in their justification, the assenting justices are now coming for gay marriage. It’s funny that justice Thomas is not also gunning for interracial marriage, given that they were both legalized using the same interpretation of the law. SCOTUS is a joke, and it’s decisions should hold no bearing going forward.
Non-tyrannical governments (ie most governments) also make very harmful things illegal for very good reasons, and a system which can facilitate these harmful things is in itself a harmful thing.

I don't know how you can argue that facilitating illegal transactions is on balance a good thing, unless you also argue that the world would be better off if all currently-illegal transactions were instead legal.
The argument (and I’m not saying it is or isn’t backed by sufficient evidence because I don’t know) is that the lost 20% is because we are physiologically not capable of retaining mental focus for 8 hours a day for 5 days in a row. There is some evidence for an equivalent claim for physical labour, which is part of the reason we do 40 hour weeks rather than 70, though again I don’t know how good the evidence really is.

To put it another way, think of this as the mental equivalent to why we can’t run marathons at the pace we can do a 100m sprint.
> the principles that the country was founded on.

It might be better for the country if those principles were applied to other questions, like "How should a militia be regulated?" and "Which plants can adults consume?". Unfortunately the loudest proponents of states' rights don't seem to think the principles should go quite that far.
Why would those women go to a different country instead of a different state?
Well designed tests aren't something you can get through with a textbook or a web browser.

I would say the majority of tests are not well designed, and rely on rote memorization and recall. It's disheartening to see schools implement surveillance to compensate.
My previous local council (Havering) have done this for years. It's pretty standard. It's just an extension of "flexible hours".
Sridhar Ramaswamy on Google, Search, and Neeva
Most projects don’t have any issue using bank accounts because they work well. As others have stated some projects do.
I think we can have some nuance here. As individuals I believe we have the leeway to do the right thing for the wrong reasons. But once we get to the level of government and acting in accordance with laws, I believe that acting for the right reasons (i.e. following the laws) is the only option that can lead to long term outcomes.

For the government to selectively follow laws, saying that in this case they don't apply since they don't give us the right result, makes a mockery of the very idea of having laws.
The numbers went up because people started coming out of the closet and admitting that, yeah, they were doing something that was previously illegal but was now legal.

It doesn't mean that fewer of them were doing it before it became legal. They were doing it and hiding it.

It's the same as when gay people finally started coming out of the closet, once the laws and stigmas against being gay were reduced. Now they could finally admit what they were doing all along, with less fear of being stigmatized, arrested, imprisoned, or killed.
I predict the next device to go all bonkers with subscriptions and pay-per-use etc is cars.

There would be a day when you have to spend $$$ to use air conditioning even though the entire hardware for that is in there.
No they don't, at least not in the United States. The Government has no rights. It has privileges given to it by the people. Only individuals and corporations have rights. Corruption may have been subverting that principle since time immemorial, but that does not change the fact.

The federal government, if it was motivated enough, has the capability to bust your door down and hold you in a cell indefinitely with no trial if it wanted to. That doesn't mean they have a right to do so. It only means the people have allowed them to do it.

> all sorts of things we don't want as a society (money laundering, drug trade, human trafficking).

Oh, you mean the eternal bogeyman that can be used to justify any conceivable invasion of your privacy by government? Right.

What do you say to The Government requiring that your home and all new homes contain cameras and microphones to detect bad actors doing all sorts of things we don't want as a society, like money laundering, drug trade, and human trafficking?

Somehow I doubt you'd be on board with that, which is the entire point. You would draw a line in the sand because The Government does not have a right to do that, and those unsavory things that could possibly happen in your home are not a good enough excuse for them to subvert your rights.
Because its a huge balancing act, if 25% of population (no matter political beliefs) views the government as illegitimate it leads to chaos.

Our current technological civilization is EXTREMELY fragile.
5 attackers in 2014 took down a CA power grid and caused millions in damages.
They were never caught.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/05/272015606...
> No one has such a deep attachment to the rule of law for its sake as to tolerate 500,000 explicitly-legal child murders.

That's where you are wrong. What action exactly are you looking for that would make you respect their beliefs? Apparently its outside the law.
> Weird because the courts striking down laws as unconstitutional is literally their job description.

"Unconstitutional" is never as straightforwardly defined as one would like. For example, protesting against the draft was ruled by the Holmes court as unprotected speech. Today, you can burn a flag with impunity.

> Equal protection under the law would be my first pick for constitutional protection of abortion.

While I'm supportive of the, for lack of a better term, "spirit" of Roe vs Wade, it was never premised on equal protection under the law. After all, men don't have an acknowledged right to avoid parenthood. The opinion itself only justifies abortion on a limited right to privacy and explicitly rejects the "my body, my choice" justification that it is mythologized to have:

"The Court's decisions recognizing a right of privacy also acknowledge that some state regulation in areas protected by that right is appropriate. As noted above, a State may properly assert important interests in safeguarding health, in maintaining medical standards, and in protecting potential life. At some point in pregnancy, these respective interests become sufficiently compelling to sustain regulation of the factors that govern the abortion decision. The privacy right involved, therefore, cannot be said to be absolute. In fact, it is not clear to us that the claim asserted by some amici that one has an unlimited right to do with one's body as one pleases bears a close relationship to the right of privacy previously articulated in the Court's decisions. The Court has refused to recognize an unlimited right of this kind in the past. Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 25 S.Ct. 358, 49 L.Ed. 643 (1905) (vaccination); Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200, 47 S.Ct. 584, 71 L.Ed. 1000 (1927) (sterilization)."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/410/113

> There are very few life threatening things that the law compels men to do.

Selective service and compelled paternity.

> Yet the law can compel a women to carry a fetus to term against her will?

The law can compel a man to support a child even if he man is not the biological father. It can compel one be vaccinated against his/her will. It can also compel sterilization if it determines that one is mentally defective.
Angels aren't real, and neither is heaven, my friend.
> I think was this was meant to mean was: Any citizen has the right to join their local/state militia, and keep their service rifle and uniform with them at home.

Seems sensible. But the court is saying that if you look at what laws were passed / in force at the time, and what courts said about them around that time, you'll see that to contemporaries of ratification the second amendment meant a right to carry arms, not just to be in a militia, or whatever. That too seems sensible. Now what?
Edison learned this lesson early on.

https://www.newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/thomas-edison-in...
I'm not talking about current IP laws, exactly. The parent's claim was that physical property laws are "natural" and IP laws are not. I'm saying the concept of property is not natural and some ideas and information share key properties with physical objects, but the larger thrust is that all property rights are constructed and enforced by the state, it's all a shared consensus and where we draw the lines isn't because of some inherent difference between ideas and objects.
I'll be the begrudging devils advocate for a decision that is sure to have devastating consequences for poor women in red states.

It is good for unelected bodies like the Supreme Court to allow such dividing issues be figured out democratically. The US house has bled power to the other 3 institutions and of them, the judiciary is the least democratic. Ofc, my support for this change assumes that this Supreme Court will show restraint towards political activism (in either direction) in general. Call it naive, but I'll wait and see.

States rights has always been a double edged sword. You can't have your cake and eat it too. The same state rights that allow gun control and homosexuality to be locally legalized before national concensus; also now lead to abortion legislation being a state issue.

The sad part of democracy is that it aims to represent the views of the voting majority. If the voting majority truly cares about access to abortion then we will hopefully see enough democratic traction to give them the mandate needed. Now, the rural republican votes counting for more in the senate is a huge issue and threat to democracy that the US needs to figure out if it ever wants to represent the views of the people. But, the Supreme Court should not be responsible for managing dysfunction in other branches of govt.

My personal opinion is that polarization has pushed both sides to be completely antagonistic towards each other. 'Own the libs, fuck the deplorables', no compromise. The jaded side of me says: vote in more moderates that are willing to strike compromises. Crazed jesus Republicans and hyperprogressive activists are terrible people to put into national office. They gain power by antagonizing and being unhelpful roadblocks for change, all while asking for the most stubbornly impossible outcomes.

In the long run, history will have a dim view of this era of global polarization with all political sides to blame.
Wait until you move to your new country and discover that you need a local bank account to get a local phone number, but you need a local phone number to open a bank account.
>You broadcast it at the swarm that can present the highest valid block that satisfies the difficulty equation.

And you have to trust that the swarm will not drop your transaction or devalue your tokens through various means that they have available to them.

>The trust we have is the trust in math and physics

That makes no sense. The "math and physics" you describe are specific equations that were chosen by the swarm operators to ensure their own profits via block rewards. The swarm can change that math at any time by changing the protocol, and they have already done so several times. You don't get to decide what the math is or whether it's favorable to you, the swarm does, and you're trusting them to keep doing it that way. They are quite literally acting as the sole authority to the system; most bitcoin users are not ever going to run a full node.

>The swarm isn’t going away. It’s grown a lot in the last 14y.

I should remind you, past performance is not an indicator of future results.

>You don’t get it because you DONT WANT to understand this.

I understand it very well. What you have been told are marketing lies. If you actually inspect the system you'll see that they're not true.
This just means you do 4, 10h days instead of 5 , 8h days. It's the same hours overall.
I'm in the same boat. I am not going to defend an invalid justification for a position just because I agree with that position, and furthermore when people spread misinformation in support of my position, I will work to refute it.

If anything, it's more important to me that I refute misinformation in support of things I believe as opposed to argue against positions I disagree with.
Abortion is clearly not murder. Treating it as such has horrible implications.

Let’s start with the belief that life starts at conception. With this belief, a fetus is equivalent in protection to a newborn. Following this, voluntarily ending it is murder.

Then what about miscarriage? If a newborn were to die under unknown circumstances, there should be an investigation. Should then all pregnant people be investigated for potential negligence or abuse for this already traumatizing situation? 1/3 to 1/2 of all fertilized eggs never implant. Should these be scrutinized? I cannot see how one can say a fetus and newborn deserve equivalent protections and then fail to give them.

Further, what about support for abortion exceptions for incest or rape? If the pregnancy in this scenario went to term and the child was born, one wouldn’t then support that murdering the newborn was OK.

If you don’t believe these things, then you don’t believe newborns and fetuses deserve equal protection. You only happen to believe specific fetuses deserve one specific protection.
Now that is an interesting angle, I don't think we can so easily toss out quantum effects in the first half then follow up with such a provocative second half, though. AFAIK there are still some unsettled questions about how this would all work in practice.
Hi HN!

First author of the paper here, thought some of you may enjoy reading about this! Even now, training robots on human demonstration data is the best way to get them to do new and exciting things in the real world. However, this generally requires a lot of data curation in the standard way: the robots can only follow along if you give them data that is solving a single task in a single way.

To improve the status quo, we introduce Behavior Transformer in this paper, which can learn from unlabeled demonstration data solving multiple different tasks in different ways using a GPT-like generator model. We had to make some modifications to fit the continuous actions, unlike the standard GPT model which fits discrete words.

As it turns out, unconditional rollouts from this model shows a lot more "natural" behavior (i.e. different tasks solved in different rollouts in different ways)_than standard behavioral cloning. More importantly, behavior transformers show much better mode coverage compared to previous models, and show some level of compositionality. Check out our videos! [1]

Finally, another oft-ignored part I am quite proud of is our code release -- we worked quite hard to make sure our code [2] is easy to read, reproduce, and remix! And also, did I tell you that these models train super fast? The Franka Kitchen environment in the top video [3] takes just 10 minutes on an Nvidia 3080 to the point you are seeing in the video. Compare that with standard RL training, and you might agree with me that a small number of demonstrations can truly go a long way!

Happy to answer questions, as well! Have a great Friday, wherever you are :)

[1] https://mahis.life/bet

[2] https://github.com/notmahi/bet

[3] https://mahis.life/bet/more/kitchen/