skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I strongly believe that we are just meat machines, and you could re-construct your exact consciousness in a machine and, with proper technology, have no idea whether you are real or in a simulation, for example. Way back when I was an undergrad I double majored in CS and philosophy and focused on turing computability and phenomenology, and yeah, I don't see anything about biological circuits, processes, and machinery that gives them capabilities we don't have in conventional electronics. Even if there is some spooky quantum stuff going on in biological systems, we're starting to do that anyway, so either way it's only a matter of time. Why can't a sufficiently complex recurrent neural network have phenomenal states? No one has been able to convincingly answer that question for me so the door has stayed open in my heart all this time that humans are computable, and I find that fact relaxing. Networks have phenomenal states. Either they do, or we don't. Why this isn't obvious to others has always baffled me.

I find it very likely that networks that have a "what it feels like to be the network" have already been created, and that even relatively simple recurrent models have something akin to this, increasing with the complexity and size of the network. What is pain but an error signal?

Put another way, why are we so arrogant that we assume our capabilities transcend that of a universal turing machine? I for one can barely do linear algebra :D

I tend to gravitate towards the occam's razer, boring answer, and with consciousness, the boring answer has always been "no, there is no quantum soul organ, you literally just need more wiring".
this reads like satire
Would be really nice if someone reverse-engineered the maintenance program and allowed a reset of this idiot-light.
Plausible is correct in ignoring the DNT flag, as it does not apply to the data they collect. Have you read the DNT policy that the EFF created, which is linked in that issue? It goes further than what the W3C defined, and it still does not apply to the data Plausible collects. In fact, it explicitly allows the collection of more data than Plausible actually collects.

You're really stretching definitions here, and have yet to make an actual argument about how Plausible invades your privacy. I'll just end my involvement in this discussion here, because it's clear to me that it will not be productive.
All data shows that outlawing abortion does nothing to reduce abortion

The abortion rate in the US was far lower pre-Roe. It went up 5x in the decade after it was nationally legalized.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_Uni...
Expenses by themselves aren’t what “pushed down” means, the term was referring to the discrepancy between income and expenses going negative, so whether someone on the top end is pushed down depends completely on their income, right? (And it might be reasonable to assume they’re on the high end already because their income exceeds their expenses, no?)

The reason the pushing down is asymmetric for rich & poor when it comes to cars is that cars have some minimum expenses that can be pretty high relative to a poor person’s income, and below that minimum they lose access to a car (which in reality pushes them down eve further). Someone on the high end might choose to spend more on a car than their income safely allows, but they actually have a choice of how much to spend on a car, whereas someone on the low end might only have the choice to spend slightly more than they can actually afford, in other words very little choice.
In 2016, Republicans who went to church weekly were far less likely to vote for Trump, than those who rarely or never went.

That means the lower taxes and less regulations were likely desired for their own sake not as a trade off.

Christians crazily believe Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit and was God incarnate within the womb. As crazy as that may be, it logically follows they would adamantly be against ending human lives before they’re born.
A lot of folks here wants you to ask him what he wants.

Be prepared to hear that he doesn’t know what would help. But he will appreciate that you’re giving him agency.

One of the challenges I have with this question as someone who is mainstreamed, profoundly deaf (this means I don’t know sign language) is that deafness takes a number of forms, so there’s no real one size fits all solution.

But far be it for me to point out problems not suggest solutions!

* ask him if it would help to provide a real-time transcription service. This is not an automated system but a specially trained human who will transcribe meetings in real time.

* ask him if he wants someone to write a meeting summary that captures decisions made, action items delegated etc. then make sure that happens.

* ask him if an ASL interpreter would help.

* sign up for sign language courses yourself and use your professional development budget to pay for it. If he doesn’t know ASL ask if he would want to learn also. Pay for his training.

* help him find a professional community of deaf persons to be a part of. Give him options. No group is perfect for everyone.

* the biggest barrier he will face in his life is isolation. So support him so that he doesn’t feel isolated.

* if your company throws company events for everyone to participate in, try to create a something similar, running concurrently, that’s accessible for him. Solicit ideas from him but it could look like a small group chat online or playing games online.

* hearing aids (if he needs them) are REALLY FRICKING EXPENSIVE - benefits typically cover up to $500 and aids can cost $2-7K. Offer to buy his next pair.

This is all off the top of my head. I could probably think of more with some time.

I hope this helps. Thank you for taking the initiative to make him feel part of your team.

(Edit: formatting)
The European Commission's official website[1]

[1] https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/refo...
If abortions are bad, then it's good if fewer people get them, whether or not the reduction is spread evenly across different demographics.
And laws against abortion have existed for most of human history as well. Most haven't been outright bans on it, but there have been plenty of rules about who can get them and how all the way back to Hammurabi.
Would you point me to Apple's alternative implementation for access bluetooth / nfc? That's right it doesn't exist. Instead they offer for you to install a native app which once granted bluetooth access can continuously scan and connect to any bluetooth device they want.

- Install Prompts 7 Years behind. Many thousands of requests. - Notifications 7 years behind.
- Fullscreen API 11 years behind.
- Badging 5 years behind.
- Deep Links 7 years behind.
- Screen Orientation Lock 10 years behind.

and what's your excuse going to be the myriad of bugs/stability issues?
that was one of the things that surprised me on an early saturday bike ride, also in regards to street crime in japan, at least in my experience it is so exceedingly rare that most people there are incredibly naive to it.
Sure, but the (conservative) states pushing the new anti-abortion laws are also cutting back social programs, especially ones aimed at single mothers. "Just get a job, freeloader!" One can't claim to be pro-life and then refuse to provide support for those new lives.
I don't usually actually laugh at HN comments, but when I read "audited" in this context, I did. I don't know why, but this kind of tongue-in-cheek use of a more "sophisticated" word to refer to something mundane like robbery is my kind of humor.
You are making personal attacks saying Ive has made many mistakes, instead of just arguing about the main point you have already made up your mind that whatever he does is a mistake and then you refuse to understand why you are wrong.

I dont need luck when facts are on my side. Good luck understanding nuance in the future.
> In Thomas's mind, one has long-standing historical precedence where the other doesn't.

That would be an anomaly in setting judicial precedent. If legal precedent was formally acknowledged for historical reasons, then we would be having a really long conversation on civil rights, _all_ civil rights.

And the issue may not be gay marriage, but straight up sodomy laws, which were introduced as religious inspired laws, most extensively Judeo-Christian. For these to stand, we would need to ignore the separation of church and state.
Because in contrary to the states' rights argument being touted, the legal theory underpinning the decision opens the door to a federal ban. You might not get the chance to vote for the people that ban abortion for you.
And then what will the next president from the other side do...?
We do give them protections, and those protections are roughly proportionate to (our believes regarding) their cognitive abilities. If some dolphin started talking about dolphin rights, those would exist pretty much immediately.
No they don’t. Because they don’t act on it. They believe it just deeply enough not to ask why their actions are wildly inconsistent.
Immediately after receiving the 10 commandments, Moses orders the Israelites to slaughter their friends, family, and neighbors who worshiped the golden calf. And God approved.
Was this article written by an AI bot? Because I'm at a loss to what I just read, and want my 30 seconds back.
It's time for the US to start changing laws if they want the law to, you know, change, instead of relying on courts to re-interpret old laws to comply with the zeitgeist. Does no-one find it bizarre how after almost a century, laws which were previously considered constitutional are found to violate the constitution?

The writers of the 14th Amendment, which was the basis of prohibiting interracial marriage bans, were alive when those marriage bans were in effect. One would think they would have spoken out about how they have just been made unconstitutional.

You do not have a democracy if there is no limit to the creativity with which laws are interpreted. Of course empirically, you don't have a democracy anyway [1], but for the sake of argument...

[1] Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. - https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
If Republicans take back congress and the presidency in the next election cycles, a national abortion ban becomes a serious possibility. This is not just a "red states" issue.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/11/us/anti-abortion-movement...
I took Wednesdays off for about 5 months once to burn PTO (the accrual policy was changing, and I would have been over the cap at the end of the year). That wasn't systemic, most of my colleagues either took more vacations before the change or planned to take some bigger blocks.

It was nice to have a day off in the middle of the week, although I had some occasional meetings, I needed to take, which was bleh. It was also super easy to schedule interviews when I was recruited by a former coworker. Unfortunately, I didn't end up fully using my FMLA newborn leave, because it needed to be used in week long chunks and I had planned to burn PTO first, and use the FMLA weeks later, but I switched jobs instead (and went back to a 5 day week)
> why does the entire thing need to be without a company?

Because OP said:

> an international group that doesn't trust US based corporations with their personal data

That is not realistically possible in today's world, and is an issue way broader than crypto.
"...if we simply distributed existing resources equitably to everyone"

There's nothing simple about distribution. It's at least as hard as producing stuff in the first place.

Solving distribution in a way that is both fair and economically sustainable has also proved to be extremely hard--much harder than just producing enough.

Despite the moral problems inherent to market-based pricing (the poor go to the back of the line), all the alternatives we've tried so far have led to far worse results.
Boredom. It's always boredom. Every time.
It's pretty clear that the country is in for near-total Republican control of the federal government for a long time now, maybe indefinitely.
> We need to stop pretending it has anything to do with Jesus and everything to do with power over others.

I can promise you that this has quite a bit to do with religion. My parents both voted republican because "Billy Graham's son endorsed Trump" and before Trump they voted republican for this issue among others. I fully understand that elected republicans are just paying lip service to religion/abortion but they have their constituents completely fooled (or happy with their cognitive dissonance).
> Socialists need to stop having pavlovian responses to the word 'capitalism' and 'markets', and economic liberals need to stop treating markets as a sacred cow and instead think of them as one tool in a toolbox.

Suppose I were to suggest that we think of Feudalism as a tool in the box, or Slavery/Forced labor. Some economies used to be run like that. And nobody said you have to use that "tool". The thing is - it's not really a tool, which "we" can collectively apply towards reaching accepted social ends. And neither is Capitalism.
> Regarding abortion, what aspect of the constitution would cover it?

The US Constitution does not contain the word abortion, and so decisions by the Court on abortion either way are only indirectly guided by applying other parts of the Constitution.
then we should judge the other comments as well or just the one that is disagreeing with the common sense?
"My body my choice" a favorite phrase of conservative anti-vaxxers and anti-maskers.

How hypocritical that this belief doesn't apply to someone else's right to choose.
And so the floppy lives on.
Ask HN: How do you prepare for technical interviews in Europe for SWEs?
Most of the online resources talk about using Leetcode, time and space complexity, etc.,

However having to go through now through interviews with multiple European companies (UK, Germany, Spain) they don't seem to work that way:
- multiple hours with a team of engineers going through some problems
- "chat about your technical knowledge"
- "review your background".

What is the best way and resources I could use to prepare for these kind of interviews?
Thanks!
Oh yes, drunk businessmen sleeping around JR stations because they did not make it for the train to come home for the night are treated as holy cows in India. Full respect, including Police.
I would have no problem with this line of argument if it was honest and genuine, but it's not - it's a pretence.

If prolife movement actually cared about protecting life, they would not support policies that leave children to die of terrible diseases if their family can't afford healthcare.
Catholics and Evangelicals ... have always been against abortion

FTFY
I “promise” it’s the opposite so I guess everything cancels out.
If it fits the quality you need, I think a plotter is actually the best option; the FOSS ones seem to just take arbitrary pens for ink and there's a fair few projects implementing open source plotters that seem to get decent results.
I just felt a eudisturbance in the Force, as if all the angels in heaven erupted in joy...
> We can regulate emissions and farmers can be penalized for violating them, so that can’t be on John Deere.

The letter of the current emissions laws and court case law is it is on John Deere. So start by talking to your federal representative about this.

Are you willing to pay for someone to go around and do random exhaust sampling of tractors? Most farmers aren't doing anything, but there is no way to know which farmer is the 1% that is without testing. If it is still "factory" then it meets emissions (VW style scandals aside, but then catch one you get them all), how are you going to enforce it if anyone can make violating changes?

> To say that they can use the same scan tools is a false solution because John Deere could simply choose to stop selling it to them.

Probably not. The protocol is the ISO11786, and we will keep using it because there are other customers of engines who demand it. The engine in our tractor is also sold for use in boats (boats are not large enough a market to pay the development cost of a modern engine, but the profit margin makes them worth selling to), it is also used in generators, and a number of other applications, and those customers demand standards so they can fix things when it is in their unit.

Also, one of our big selling points is everyone knows you can get parts for old John deere tractors (but not our competitors), and so the trade in value is higher.

Though technically you are correct, we can stop selling scan tools, the reality is there is too much value to do that.

> while in your experience repair issues are “non existent to most customers”, we cannot let that be a reason that we don’t pursue right to repair.

Sure, but be very careful about the what the law says. Most right to repair laws are not helpful to someone who uses a tractor as intended, but are useful to those abusing it in ways you may not want them to. violating emissions better be clearly on the farmer. What about the person who buys a used tractor - we use the same engine on a 200 and 300 horsepower tractor (I'm not sure without looking the exact range, but that is close enough for discussion), it wouldn't be hard to modify the smaller tractor to have more power, but that will impact how long the tractor lasts and thus the value to the next owner. There is no way to know if someone made that change and then undid it.
A lockless thread queue (not entirely sure what that would be, sorry; a queue in front of a pool?) seems like the kind of low-level library that could be written with liberal use of unsafe. No need to flagellate yourself on the altar of compile-time safety.
> I know I am sentient, so it stands to reason other humans are sentient.

That doesn't stand to reason at all, it's just popularly assumed.

I can hear my thoughts, but I can't hear yours. I can see through my eyes, but I can't see through yours, and so on. There are many differences between "I" and "everyone else".

Just because something is true about you doesn't mean it stands to reason that it's true about everyone else.

> Additionally, other humans act in a way I would expect from someone sentient.

This is totally circular reasoning. Humans only act the way you expect sentient people to act because your training data for "sentient people" is "humans". The only person you know is sentient is yourself. Personally I find that most people quite frequently act very differently to how I would act. Should I conclude that they're not sentient?

Further, the fact that machines don't act like humans is no evidence at all that they're not sentient, it's only evidence that they're not human. They are very different to humans, so of course they don't act the same. They don't have bodies like us, or biological needs like us. That says nothing about whether or not they're sentient.
Separate abortion from Roe v. Wade. The big challenge has been that Roe v. Wade was horribly decided. Even RBG thought so. Roe v wade gave the Supreme Court the right to make law without reference to any text in the constitution. Casey tried to change the justification but it still was a disaster. Sadly it is far from the only time the Supreme Court has made things up out of whole cloth that has had massive societal implications - see separate but equal, Dredd Scott, etc, bush v gore. Citizens United.

Getting rid of roe v wade kicks the issues to legislatures.

I may be the only hopeful one - but removing this from unelected, lifetime judges who seem to forget that a democracy is no place for kings and queens may ultimately result in abortion returning to the path it was on before roe v wade - a non-controversial issue decided by elected officials.
Alcohol abuse by other means.
No, laying out a power grid is very much not a private sector thing. In most stable countries, the grid is either operated outright by the government or the government leases the grid out to the private sector. The same thing is true with the internet cabling.

>Trustless. No authority.

This is very, very wrong. It's another one of those marketing lines repeated by blockchain companies that is blatantly wrong if you look into it even just a little. At minimum, you need to trust the "swarm" that you just mentioned. It's effectively acting as the authority and you're trusting it to make the right decisions. And if the swarm goes away, you can't make your transactions anymore; the value of your tokens will drop to zero.

>The trade off is worth it.

To this date, no one has been able to explain to me clearly what this trade off is. "It's trustless" is not a trade off, that's not communicating what the actual benefit is. And it's also just wrong.
I've been a web developer for about 3 years and in my anecdotal experience of the modern browsers I have had the most trouble with Safari.

Multiple times I've hit issues with things that I would have expected to be 100% complete, like SVGs not being able to properly transition animations in certain cases.
The Accidental Internet Scholar
I would be curious if this decision hurts the Republicans going forward.

Religious Americans essentially held their noses to vote for Republicans just to get this issue rammed in.

Now that they have gotten what they wanted, are they still going to vote for Republicans with the same transactional decision process? Or are they now going to say the Republicans can no longer offer them anything additional and now the problems with Republicans being immoral and unchristian become too large?

Once Christians have an abortion ban do they become focused on helping the poor and other issues which were pushed by Jesus and whose teachings more closely align with progressive agendas? Or are they hypocrites and will vote for the Republicans to give the Pharisees & Rich of the world more power?
It's a shame the abortion debate is overtaken by radicals on both sides when the majority of Americans would prefer laws similar to most European nations: legal abortion within the first trimester.
> My company is on a four-day week. We work Monday to Thursday and just close on Fridays. We're transitioning to a three-day week (dropping Mondays) in January

Wow, sounds good. Are there reductions in pay associated with the change?
Archived: https://archive.ph/tLsD2
Guetzli is really hamstrung by its resource usage. When it first hit the news I tried it out, and compressing a full quality JPEG from my phone could take 20-30 minutes on an i7.
How to Create Auth Routes with React Router V5
And pretty much only them.

Perhaps some day we'll learn how little the programming language matters for anything beyond coding.
...said no one ever.

This is just a dishonest argument.
Yes frankly this website is not capable of entertaining certain contrarian ideas. Which of course are only contrarian in the narrow societal bubbles they occupy.

I blame the downvote mechanism for rewarding echo chambers and punishing outlier opinions.

/Shrug.
When I was a kid, I saw some older kids did this to an unwilling younger kid - little guy flew off and cracked his skull open.