skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
How would you go about reading the flash (aside from doing so directly via QSPI)? The BOOTSEL mode is write-only from what I understand (and have observed).
Even if we had a competent, non-bitterly partisan Congress, no.

Because then you're left with who is better convincing uninformed people; the experts, or paid lobbyists.
Asking about trusting a solo entrepreneur or solo developer is not the right question. These points are irrelevant.

What you need to show prospective clients is that your business is viable if you're not around: there's continuity and support.
If you are talking about the manifesto and guiding principles, it's great and you can build wonderful workflows using it.

If you are are talking about the agile industrial complex, it should all burn in a garbage fire.
Sorry let me be more polite.

Your attempt to compare the Republican and Democratic parties creates a false equivalency. This is demonstrated by the January 6th insurrection fomented by a Republican president and covered up by the Republican establishment, which has no analog in the Democratic space.

Democrats do bad things. The bad things they do aren't as bad as what Republicans do. It's like having both pancreatic cancer and a zit, one's worse than the other.
That’s a silly statement. The process is what makes a country democratic.

Creating laws out of thin air and not through the proper processes is the opposite of democratic.
How much energy it needs to fly vs energy needed by propelled plane?
That is because that's what they do. The supreme court is a political organ making very conservative political decisions. Much of the time the sort of headlines you seem to prefer would be navel gazing that's not important to most people and would be misleading distract from the real world result that it's gutting much of the EPAs powers? Why because conservatives don't like the EPA. I applaud the headline for getting at the truth of the matter
He’s extremely competent at lying to make the company look good
MIT Innovators Under 35 2022
Hot damn, that sounds awesome. Easy PRs would be a huge step to getting me off GitHub.
I think we're in agreement here then, the valuations follow the fact that these companies can operationally grow much quicker than others.
Read the dissent and see if you don't find it equally convincing. Supreme Court justices are very smart and very good at their jobs and it's not surprising that pretty much everything they write sounds reasonable and well-argued.

Key quote from the dissent:

> Section 111 of the Clean Air Act directs EPA to regulate stationary sources of any substance that “causes, or contributes significantly to, air pollution”
and that “may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.”

So, does CO2 qualify, or is it a "major new problem"? Sounds like a policy issue to me.

By the way, it definitely isn't a major new problem, the Nixon administration viewed CO2 and climate change as settled science in the 60s before he signed the Clean Air Act: https://www.nixonlibrary.gov/sites/default/files/virtuallibr...
> Doesn't discord block non-native [aka third-party] client users

Despite the other reply to your comment strongly stating "No." without elaborating any further, Discord still doesn't allow third-party clients [0].

0. https://twitter.com/discord/status/1229357198918197248
In Canada, when you turn 50 they automatically send you an info card and invitation to receive a home kit.

I got one and then a year later I decided to use it. I'm glad I did because I had a stage 3 polyp. They removed it. Now a long Covid lockdown later they checked everything again, and I'm in the clear.

Basically I dodged a bullet and would have been better off if I'd tested immediately instead of putting it off, because colon cancer is just that common, and not really noticeable until it becomes more advanced. I would have been in big trouble if I'd waited any longer and then ran into the lockdowns.

I've heard some places have lowered that initial age to 45.

The home test is not invasive, so use it! And as the article points out, if you have any of those symptoms, get it checked. A colonoscopy is invasive, but not nearly as much as cancer is.
I could see some games scratching that 5 digit mark. I recently saw Earthbound for $4000 open box, and I wouldn't be surprised if that number goes up for unopened copies.
> If we don't like it when the police creatively interpret laws to target minorities, can we allow the EPA the authority to creatively interpret laws to target fossil fuel companies?

We can under the legal theory "What I want goes; what I don't want, no."
from Wikipedia '... The Federalist Society provides its 70,000 members with "intellectual sparring and professional grooming.'

without taking sides on this attorney gang, it seems to be like a bunch of professional boxers and others here are mad because they cannot fight. I do not want to fight lawyers, but calling them a conspiracy, when they specifically engage and practice debate professionally, is sort of pathetic honestly.
Ask HN: Do you use Anki on the terminal? If you do, can you share the workflow?
I am looking for a terminal application to control anki.
Have you seen the Dobbs decision?

It's about what policies the judges personally prefer
> OpenBSD also sometimes ... sees new releases

They do two releases per year on a schedule.
^ this. The comment's arrogance and narrow-mindedness is preposterous, and would be a strong signal to me to stay away.

I find Git's CLI and workflow model complex because I had the "misfortune" of using other DVCS products (Mercurial, Bitkeeper, Bazaar NG, Darcs, etc) before it. All did a far superior job of presenting roughly the same conceptual model in their command-line tools. Git's is a step backwards.

Git didn't invent distributed version control, it didn't perfect it, it wasn't particularly superior to the others [it does have some benefits in terms of performance tho, yes], it was merely at the right place (the Linux kernel when Linus got sick of Bitkeeper's business model) at the right time (when people finally got sick of CVS and SVN garbage.)

And the rise of GitHub was certainly part of the rise of Git's prominence.

Slightly different circumstances and it could have been any of the other open source distributed revision control systems instead.
I agree about decentralization as anti-feature, but this is a poor analogy.

It's equivalent to saying, people do not want all their money to disappear because they chose to carry all their life savings in a briefcase on the subway and then they lost the briefcase. If you did that, no bank is going to reimburse you. The way to avoid this problem, is to keep your fiat savings in the bank (which means, as some number in some database they keep), instead of in physical bills on your person. It has nothing to do with fiat or TradFi being inherently better than crypto.

Likewise, the way to avoid this problem for crypto, is to not carry your private keys with you all the time (or at least, to only carry them on devices you can afford to lose, such as a hardware wallet that an attacker needs time to penetrate, giving you time to go home and restore/move your funds). Obviously self-custody is still hard and still a high barrier to entry, but from a financial risk perspective, you should only "carry" as much crypto on you as you would be willing to carry as cash in your wallet (which of course you can always lose, and losing it doesn't validate or invalidate the banking industry).
Every surpreme court article makes me hate this community a bit more.

There is far too much obsessing over "their logic is consistent" and far too much intentional ignorance of the fact that they chose which logic to bring to bear on which issues, and that there are many other possible ways to apply consistent logic.

Their logic can be consistent and they can still be partisans, looking to implement a specific agenda.

I don't believe people on this site are too stupid to realize that, I believe they prefer not to, because they support the outcomes these rulings enact.

And given that, we are in a lot of trouble.
Personally I wouldn't use LinkedIn because it's a vapid site that isn't really fun to use: you have to be on guard to avoid unprofessional behavior too much or it comes back to bite you.

And that's just the point I'd like to emphasize.

If somebody truly conducted themselves poorly and unprofessionally on a site used primarily for job seeking and professional connections, perhaps it's best that potential employers know who they're dealing with? Letting the chips fall where they may and letting employers see who they're getting seems like a far better outcome than trying to gin up another faux outrage campaign that somebody isn't doing enough to censor something somebody else doesn't like.
Ah, good point! That definitely does sound tricky. Might be cool to see some syntax where you encode your estimates, and it sends an async warning of some kind when the estimates are wildly off?

resource "aws_lambda" "foo" {
estimated_invocations = {p5: "1 per hour", p95: "100 per minute"}
# or
estimated_invocations = {avg: "5 per minute"}
}

Then you might get a range estimate of some kind, and maybe even an automated pull request with the real numbers if you're way off?
>> The Major Questions doctrine is an invention of the Roberts court that no court before has even considered

"The major questions doctrine originated in two Supreme Court decisions: MCI Telecommunications Corporation v. American Telephone & Telegraph in 1994 and FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation in 2000."

-- https://www.theregreview.org/2021/11/15/revesz-brunstein-reg...

Roberts was appointed to the Supreme Court in 2005.
Yep, exactly what UBER is doing and what Tesla has found themselves doing with high spending on their Texas and Berlin Gigafactories. It's a short term pain for domination... expand fast and be the market leader in every country before someone else beats you to it. Then, soak in the profits.
And if the people choose to vote to limit individual liberty of others then this decision is still good for individual liberty?
> I haven't seen riots about marijuana...

So? "You can only say it's a right if you riot about it" is a weird position to take.

> And although I can't say this about any particular individual, I think that statistically, the left position regarding covid-19 vaccinations seems to be contrary to the "bodily autonomy" philosophy.

I don't know what you think the leftist position is on this, but no state nor the Federal government has even hinted at the idea of a universal vaccination requirement for COVID-19.

Virtually all states require quite a few vaccinations - measles, mumps, rubella, etc. - in public schools. Once again, Roe doesn't rely on "bodily autonomy", and any such right is very clearly not absolute (as Roe itself makes clear about privacy). My autonomy to swing a knife around ends when it hits your face.

Thought experiment: Do we have a right to poop? Can Congress forbid me from pooping? How would SCOTUS rule on a law banning bowel movements?
In fairness, I was one of those people until I landed at a satellite office of my SV company in New York and started hanging out with real finance players.
It would exacerbate income inequality. It would favor higher-wage workers.

Income and income taxes are irrelevant to the wealthy. Changes in wealth inequality are mostly changes in asset prices.
> Abortion isn’t 0 or 1, legal or not legal.
As others have already pointed out below, and I already mentioned, over half of states are ready to enact total bans. The repeal of Roe doesn't make abortion illegal, but it does make a _ban_ on abortion legal, which is exactly what is happening.

> I would guess in 10-20 years the US would arrive at the same conclusion, with small differences between red and blue states.

This data visualisation [0] highlights the problem with this approach.

This isn't an issue where you can sit back and contemplate it as some abstract exercise of democracy. So many women will die, or be persecuted during that 10-20 year span you mention and it is completely needless. No one should be adopting a "it'll all work out in the end" mindset.

[0] https://twitter.com/monachalabi/status/999562371461992448?la...
Of course it is. Note this line from TFA:

Something the customer is (fingerprint, iris, face)

Right there, trying to normalize the idea that the government needs our fingerprints, iris etc. And that ship has sailed, lots of laws getting passed that will require this from citizens.
No that would be correct. Congress delegated the power of they don't want to do that anymore they should take it away
I haven't done any measurements, but the non-W variety seems to last a pretty long time on a battery, even while powering a DAC and speaker at max gain.
I didn’t know this, thank you! This just goes to show how much context is part of something being art!
> What case law, if any, did you rely on in Microsoft & GitHub's public claim, stated by GitHub's (then) CEO, that: “(1) training ML systems on public data is fair use, (2) the output belongs to the operator, just like with a compiler”? In the interest of transparency and respect to the FOSS community, please also provide the community with your full legal analysis on why you believe that these statements are true.

> If it is, as you claim, permissible to train the model (and allow users to generate code based on that model) on any code whatsoever and not be bound by any licensing terms, why did you choose to only train Copilot's model on FOSS? For example, why are your Microsoft Windows and Office codebases not in your training set?

I'm not sure I buy this argument. In the first point, the authors state that Copilot was trained on public data. In the very next point, they slightly tweak it by saying training was done on "any" code which loses the distinction between public and private code. Obviously Windows and Office are not public code.

I also interpreted "public data" to mean they trained on codebases that explicitly specified, say, MIT licenses or other permissible licenses. That seems like fair use to me. Those licenses don't explicitly restrict training AI models on their codebases do they? It's ironic if these licenses started banning AI training now though. That would effectively mean Copilot would be sole trained AI model.

I'm happy to be proven wrong though. In general I have a distrust of Copilot. I fear it would make individuals worse programmers in the end at the cost of productivity
It sounds like they mostly acquired it, see:

https://blog.coinbase.com/living-up-to-our-values-and-the-ne...
Well, it is fine to be a small enterprise, but unless you have a huge moat, you run the risk of a different growth-at-all-costs competitor (not necessarily a giant) coming in and vacuuming up all your customers.

Salesforce vs. Siebel being a great example of exactly that.
OP also said "in their 30s" not "at 30". So I'd use 35-45 rather than 30-40, which shifts it a bit.
My favorite answer is: if you included Microsoft source code the quality of suggestions drops below viable product.
I fear what a lot of what outspoken "progressive" types (and yes, before anyone asks, also the MAGA crowd) want is a CCP-style political system as long as they're the ones in control. Concepts like separation of powers and rule of law are merely obstacles to smash through on their road to utopia.
Did we go to the same school? Halfway through the semester he gave up on even that pretense and started throwing them out in front of us and giving everyone a C-
India?

India's greenhouse gas emissions are 50% of those of the US. Per capita they are at 12% of the US.

BTW, per capita is the correct comparison because the atmosphere does not care about arbitrary boundaries. To illustrate imaging a world with just 2 countries, one emitting X per year and one emitting 2X per year. The population of first county is P and the population of the second country is 2P. In this example we'll assume little trade between the two countries.

That world needs to get down to a total of 2X per year. If we do thing per country that means each country gets to emit X per year. So the first country is fine where they are and the second country needs to cut emissions in half.

To the people of the first country they just continue their normal lifestyle, which generates X/P emissions per capita. The second country has to go from X/P per capita to 1/2 X/P. They will need to make big changes that will likely greatly reduce their standard of living.

But then separatist parties, upset with such a big blow to the standard of living, come to power in the second country, and it splits into 9 separate countries, each with population 2P/9.

In this new 10 country world, each country's share of the global 2X emission budget is 2/10 X. To meet this the first country has to cut per capita emissions to 20% of what they were before, requiring drastic changes in their economy and lifestyles.

The 9 new countries on the other hand only have to each cut per capita emissions to 90% of what they were before. Their standards of living don't have to change much.

...and now there are strong incentives in the first country to split!

This only ends when you reach a configuration where every country has the same per capita allowance.

Trade complicates it, because now emissions in one country might be going toward doing things for the other country and so should be counted toward the other country's emission budget. That can be dealt with by something like a cap and trade system so countries can trade some of their emissions budget to cover emissions done for them in other countries.
Congress can’t just say “do whatever you want to fix X problem”. They have to be explicit with what powers they delegate to the executive branch and what they are permitted to do. Otherwise the law is plain unconstitutional since breaks the fundamental separation of powers. The purpose of SCOTUS is not to decide cases based on the desired outcome. It’s to decide based on what the law actually says, not what it should say.
I wonder if we got that to go viral in the US if it would have any impact on SUV popularity.
Pretty much this.

Even RBG said that Roe v Wade was on shaky ground as a legal precedent.

And what people don’t realize is that if Roe v Wade wasn’t overturn the next ruling discussed was allowing further restrictions by states, further eroding the precedent.

The alternative was just kicking the can down the road until the next challenge.

This just ripped the bandaid off.
When you're selling a stolen rare "artifact", you have to pay the "don't ask the five people who are known to have one of these" fee
A Japanese edtech startup trains kids to be tomorrow’s AI managers
Probably the most common vector for crypto theft is phishing people to sign malevolent transactions. So I have a hard time believing that there’s a technical solution to this problem at all — much less with current blockchain technologies.
> The gist of that doctrine is that an agency can't stretch some pre-existing grant of Congressional authority to create sweeping regulations addressing a major new problem.

But it's not a major new problem. The Congress that established the EPA granted the "stretching" along with it, otherwise it would take an act of Congress to determine the color of the Post-its.

The new rulings are farcical zealotry. Apparently, the only people capable of making decisions died 100 years ago and anything we've learned after the Civil War doesn't matter.
None of this sounds good for individual liberty. It just becomes an issue of are you lucky enough to live in a state that doesn't hate you
> if the Congress wants EPA to regulate emissions the way they tried to do, all it needs to do is to pass a law explicitly instructing it to do so. Of course, it won’t, because there is no political will in Congress to pass this.

This doesn't accurately represent the present situation on this or really any topic. It makes is sound like members of Congress simply don't care. Unless the filibuster is removed or reformed, a party wishing to legislate on any controversial issue needs a super majority in the Senate to pass the legislation just in that chamber of Congress. They also need control of the House and the presidency. There is plenty of political will in the Democratic caucus to pass this legislation, but due to gerrymandering in the House and the inherently unrepresentative nature of the Senate they cannot get enough votes to pass legislation, however much they may wish to, on the rare occasions the stars align and they have control over both the executive and legislative branches. The Republicans need control over only one of these three choke points to stop legislation. And now that they have a generation of control over the Supreme Court, and the Court has demonstrated that they regard legal argument as post facto justification for political decisions, the Democrats are well and truly screwed. There may be some Republicans who secretly would like to do something about any one of the major catastrophes facing the nation and the world, and some may claim this in public, but because their co-partisans are making total political war on non-conservatives at the moment they can't actually do anything or they face the mob.

Basically, "political will" isn't the issue. It's our crappily designed "democracy" mixed with total political war, strident propaganda, and millennialists who are happy to let the world go to hell because they think they're going to heaven.
The boring answer is probably something along the lines of “copilot was trained by employees of OpenAI who aren’t technically MS employees”. When I worked at MS you had to jump through all sorts of hoops to get access to code from other orgs. I can’t imagine what BS you’d need to do to give access to a vendor.
While it should have been obvious to anyone who had been to Ohio in the couple years before the election that Trump was the favorite, 538 did give Clinton a lower chance than other outlets. Also, 13% things happen all the time. Now if the model had said 0.13%, ok, maybe you side-eye it
rpi has never been about open source.
Love it.
First they mock you, then they fear you, then they accept you.
Ground effect planes and to a lesser extent gliders are cheating and we can’t forget that.

But taking an ion propulsion system that previously only worked in vacuum and making it work at sea level is not nothing. I haven’t seen anything here to convince me it’s pure parlor trick. It’s part parlor trick for sure, but the sort that opens wallets.
Yes, the "minority" party that's currently 2 points ahead on the generic Congressional ballot (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/generic-ballot/), won 1.5 million more votes than Democrats in the 2016 House elections, and is on pace to win several million more votes than Democrats in the 2022 House elections. That's an interesting definition of "minority" you have there?
An ion drive isn't really physically similar to a normal electric motor using an electromagnet.
Yep. They can prevent growing your own wheat (in large quantity) because it impacts interstate wheat markets. You can literally bend this to apply to anything on that logic.
There is a bit of a your fist/my face issue. I don’t want my neighbor operating a meth lab in his shed or building an atomic pile.
What’s the most efficient large-scale physical battery? (Pumping water upwards, lifting heavy rock, fleet of electric vehicles, etc)
maybe this? https://www.gerritcodereview.com/