skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Here is the model:

Individual agents have a mild preference for publishing only models I agree with. They will never publish anything that I 2/3 disagree with (I rank all published papers in order of preference and the bottom 1/3 fail this test) and will immediately retract anything they have published that I disagree with to that extent and replace it with something I do agree with a random amount that places it in the top 66%. We start with them having published things that I randomly agree or disagree with.

No other factor than my agreement will have any impact on their decision to publish or retract.

Surprisingly, with only this mild preference people will automatically self censor and not publish any models I disagree with.

In reality, it's a series of laws that stops them, but we've just proved it's natural so really do those laws even matter?
HN top bar colours by popularity: https://news.ycombinator.com/topcolors
Costco only takes Visa.
It was a joke about disaster movies. One of them even had tunnels in its plot. There's a disaster movie set in Australia that goofs on the tendency for all asteroids to hit off the coast of New York by having the news come hours before the disaster reached them.
This area of finance is utterly, completely backwards and seems like one of the most (evil)successful bits of proper-burden reversal in existence. The entire concept of "identity theft" as it exists now is 100% pure industry propaganda. Nobody is cloning bodies and transplanting brains or something. It's not that anyone is "stealing my identity" it's the financial institutions don't bother to verify it and then somehow have managed to make a system where this is my problem. If I haven't chosen to have a business relationship with a given financial institution or credit bureau, and they choose to give somebody else financial services, it shouldn't matter if that person used my name or widely circulated information about me, anything less then full biometrics/video for signup and establishing mutual certificates and cryptographically signed interactions thereafter should be presumptively invalid. If Person M lies to a Bank A about their info claiming to be Person A and tries to escape their commitments sure they've committed fraud, but if the Bank A then tries to go after Person A then the bank are literally accessories to fraud and should face criminal prosecution or at the least massive financial penalties (with both expenses and punitive fines paid to Person A). If the banks want to have private credit bureaus to help them with scaling, abstracting and reducing bias in the risk aspect sure; there are reasonable arguments for that. But said credit bureaus should have no role in identity verification, and if they are lying about people (claiming financial things about them which are not true) that again should be on them, with serious statutory penalties.

All the burdens are completely backwards, in turn massively perverting the incentives. And it's eternally infuriating. Some rando applying for a credit line on the opposite side of the country should be Not My Problem, 100% of the time, whether they have my name or address or a random symmetric 9 digit number some government assigned me. All the tools exist for financial institutions to manage their risk/convenience tradeoff, but they're the ones who have the power, information and should have the incentive to do so. They are externalizing onto the general public instead.
Thanks, I clicked about 50 to 100 times and waiting for a final result...
Less supply, higher supply volatility = higher prices, this is market 101.
Context is conversations where people assume that POSIX is the spec for Unix, and some other OS is POSIX, so just re-compile already... or hey, we won't have to rewrite a lot of tooling for some other OS because we used POSIX OS... or it will just magically run because POSIX.

Incidentally, a ton of GNU utilities aren't POSIX unless you set the POSIXLY_CORRECT environment variable...
This project is almost a decade old! I wonder why it resurfaced? Coincidentally or perhaps not the book in the post "How to do nothing with nobody all by yourself" also is a top HN post right now. Maybe related?
Horizon 2020 has funded a ton of projects, you might want to do some reading before you get deeper into your unsubstantiated opinions.

Here is a list of ~17000 projects funded by Horizon 2020 (H2020 + H2020-EU.5 programme, with at least 1,000,000 EUR funding by EU): https://cordis.europa.eu/search?q=contenttype%3D%27project%2...

Of course, lot of those projects will go nowhere (and therefore seen as "waste" by some), that's bound to happen with any large scale program like this. But unless you make bets on a lot of projects, you won't get results like this submission.
Or be time-rich, so maybe poor-and have a library card.

Edit: from the replies, the library of my youth is not as common as I imagined, or no longer exists
If only. There is a very vocal minority that is advocating for tolerance and freedom of expression, but only if it aligns to their world view that "is at the right side of history"
What’s the need for scare quotes around “intellectual?” The founding fathers were anti gun-control “intellectuals”: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed46.asp (“Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes.”).

But it might be time to acknowledge that the “Americans” the founders were talking about are a dead people that no longer exist. After all, more households in the 1950s had guns than today, but mass shootings were unheard of. Society is very different today and maybe that makes the Constitution obsolete. As James Madison wrote, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Maybe we’re no longer such people and can no longer be trusted with the responsibilities the Constitution requires of us. In that case gun control makes total sense.
Quiet, fast elevated trains and commuter rail would be amazing, but at this point in the US I'd settle for existing at all or in the few cities that have rail systems, equipment that's not >50 years old and can actually stay on the tracks, be on time, and have reasonable levels of service.

But even that extremely low bar isn't achievable. Meanwhile, local, state, and federal government can find $200 billion dollars a year to spend on roads so we can all be stuck in traffic on good quality pavement...
I want to say that's a relatively recent change.
Must be the most tone deaf article I read in a while. Lots of people were starving in Russia in the ‘90s, for sure malnourished or dead people emit less carbon.
I am sorry for jumping in that late, but this is exactly what we built Murmel to do (https://murmel.social/) - it would aggregate the most shared links and stories in your Twitter timeline (or a Twitter list), and then send you a daily email digest. We also support RSS everywhere, so you can get those as soon as they become trending.

Murmel is not free, but we offer a full 30-day trial. Come check it out.
In Canada they only accepted Mastercard for some time.
Well, I don't do embedded anymore. I enjoyed it, but it can be nerve-wracking.

I write end-user application code, for Apple devices, in Swift. I really enjoy that.

I also do some backend stuff (in PHP). It's not my forte, and I like to avoid it, if possible, but I'm highly skeptical of a lot of backend stuff, these days, and like to know who I'm letting in the back door.

I'd like to do some Bluetooth stuff. I've written a bunch of BLE stuff (even given a class in it[0]), but I haven't found a venue that gives me an excuse (the Meshtastic stuff looks like it might be a good bet, though).

[0] https://github.com/ChrisMarshallNY/ITCB-master
> The main reason this utterly failed, is because there is literally no reason for people to use this, considering that most Phones came with Android pre-installed and nobody was mad enough to install FirefoxOS instead which came with no software support and had no unique selling point.

Firefox OS was never really supposed to be installed by random people on their random phones (which, in fact, is one of the reasons I wasn't very interested in it back in the day). This "main reason it utterly failed" is a very misguided opinion presented as a fact, so I guess the rest of the article isn't much better.
> while in reality it says only "men are more in the extremes, both higher AND lower extremes than women."

The paper explicitly does not say that, have a look at the conclusion of the paper in question.
> Because they are higher trust societies with less low level corruption

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

(Also, if you are comparing places, don’t forget to also consult https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index)
Wow thanks for that, you just shone a light in a dark corner of my mind.

I am not a native speaker, although I have a decent level in english (enough that some native english speakers thought I was on multiple occasions, which boggles my mind).

So, somehow I always had an uncanny feeling with "in anger": much to my surprise I intuitively wanted to use it the "proper" way regularly but somehow always refrained from it because rationally I thought it really carried the literal "angry" weight, even though it just didn't feel true.

Idioms really can turn out odd.
Great quote. This highlights why it's so important to separate religion from the state. Whatever we humans have achieved, we achieved it through our efforts, both private and collective. Attributing purpose to randomness takes away from our capacity to learn and improve.
That's also how I've seen it done. But that's not so different from the nullable optional approach. It's still effectively two flavors of null.

What I'm wondering is how people who have an issue with different representations of absence would approach (or avoid?) situations requiring them.
Ok, I was trying to compare that to french salaries, where companies pay into retirement, health and jobless schemes.

The numbers look slightly better than what they're in France factoring in CoL, but that's probably more telling about our housing situation than about tech salaries.
<https://archive.ph/2022.07.08-135829/https://www.ft.com/cont...>
Step 2: instead of apending your time and money helping others or solving problems, spend it alone in a room reading old books to make yourself feel smart. Intellectualism is great, but can easily become a selfish activity.
The full text search feature is surprisingly useful. Just searched my ~800 books for keywords like "tree traversal" or "assoc" to find books that I wouldn't have suspected to deal with these topics (`assoc` being a Lisp keyword searching for entries in association lists [1]).

And I already had ways to search within contents of my books via "HoudahSpot" (an excelent MacOS tool that uses Spotlight search to sift through all my files and present the results in a tabular view), or via command line using `mdfind` [2]

[1] https://jtra.cz/stuff/lisp/sclr/assoc.html

[2] For example searching all PDF files for a certain keyword:

mdfind "kMDItemKind='*PDF*' && kMDItemTextContent='*tree-traversal*'" | grep -Ev "Mail|Library" | sort | less
i do not believe being alone is meant to be the source of profundity, but of serenity · it is much cheaper (energy/time) to obtain profundity from others, but serenity can only be obtained after acknowledging that whatever i call I is always already locked in some kind of inside and only by being alone i can regulate this inside in such a manner as to be(wel)come (the) serene => alone not to improve, but to survive
You're right that it's not perfect, and that there's a fair bit of content that gets ranked "controversial" which has few merits.

But some that's valid-but-unpopular also shows up. The specific characteristics can vary a lot by subreddit.

You can also use this sort on a personal page (https://old.reddit.com/u/<username>) to see which of their comments / submissions stirs up dispute.

Collaborative filtering / user-based moderation absolutely has its issues and limitations. You can eke some more information from it through the "controversial" sort, however.

Crowd-pleasing ranking systems like voting tend to surface crowd-pleasing content.

(There are reasons I spend little time on Reddit these days.)
A competent researcher wouldn't make that assumption. Random idiots might do so, though.
It's funded by the EU and it doesn't even cover all EU languages. This is just a small scale pilot project, it's unreasonable to expect them to cover 3000 languages.
You'd also have to be very precise in laying down the reversed side, to ensure synchronization
Deutsche Bahn (German Rails) is doing this right now with tracks in use
Binance served crypto traders in Iran despite U.S. sanctions
The one-millionth-and-one article to fan petit bourgeois striver angst over maybe possibly not getting-in on the grift of mainstream academia--like economics. Churchill's famous quote:

If you put two economists in a room, you get two opinions, unless one of them is Lord Keynes, in which case you get three opinions.

If it's a choice between "inequality", or reducing it by minting more parasites, I think I prefer inequality.
Your class names, variable names, and method names have plenty of centuries' worth of context in them anyway whether you like it or not, not to mention the comments and documentation.

I think you'd benefit from looking at writing differently. What you describe--"I can never properly explain my tangled thoughts"--is the essence of composition. The goal of the process of writing is to untangle those thoughts and express them!

When I say "process," I don't just mean that you begin typing immediately. Composition is about planning as well. Even if you spend just a few minutes making a list of keywords & important concepts then arrange them on cards in the order you think you should present them in, I bet it would help writing your initial draft of a document.

If that doesn't appeal to you, so be it, but look into a composition course, because I genuinely think you could turn something you hate into something that helps. You might never fall in love with writing, but that doesn't mean it can't be a tool that solves problems for you.
It didn't with me. In fact, with computer science it encouraged it. I had a hard time learning programming, but one TA was amazing. He helped me get through it, slowly I got the required skill set needed to have a more comfortable experience to understand CS material.

All anecdata of course. With that said, are there any studies done on this? I have a hunch the answer is not really. If there are some, then my hunch is: not all that much.
I just had a cervical fusion after 26 years in IT. Not a fun time. I really suggest you do not look downward at your screens. My surgeon used the term “computer neck” so it must be a common thing.
> I want it to give me access to the ebooks I buy online.

> This isn't calibres' fault

The software doesn’t do everything.

…but you really only want it do something else, that’s not possible.

So it’s bad.

This is a very difficult position to defend:

There is software, free, maintained as a labour of love, that others like. …but it doesn’t do the one thing you want.

So it’s categorically bad and a mess.

That’s the sort of entitlement that makes open source developers quit. :(
Yes, sometime within the last 5 years they broke their long partnership with AMEX. It seems to be Citibank now.
I visited a library last year looking for a book. Of the many lost souls saw there, none were reading. Libraries have changed.
I don't know who you are, but you brighten my day whenever I stumble upon your posts :D
> People are now arguing to moderate/censor spaces that existed to get away from the moderation/censorship on the regular Web.

On the contrary, I go to the fediverse to escape the lack of moderation on other platforms. Or rather, the way they're moderated. See the last point.

> The job of a moderator is not to "rescue" people from what they hear, say, or read.

I think the Fediverse needs better discovery mechanisms for instances and how they generally run things, but I am entirely okay with deferring judgement to another party or run my own server (done both, currently on chaos.social). If neither works for you, the official instances are a good middle ground.

> That's a false dichotomy. All moderation is human moderation.

You misunderstood. When I talk about "corporate moderation", I am referring to moderation choices being driven by corporate interests. Which is usually: as fast as possible, kafkaesque appeal process, whatever is agreeable to most of society is agreeable with us (including rainbow capitalism, but not too queer or angry or kinky please) and, most important for me, entirely devoid of context. I get banned for a week for telling a newspaper to "cease existing", but those telling me to "join the 41%", a veiled way of telling me to kill myself based on a misread statistic about the prevalence of suicide among trans people, get away.
Just a heads up, if you're using any dark mode extension you'll want to disable it for this site. (op, probably worth getting your site added to the global dark mode list)
Last time I checked Russia also had access to the Sea without Crimea.

You clearly have some framework of what "is accepted" in terms of territory and what isn't. Somehow Kaliningrad is valid, but Crimea isn't.

I am not going to change your mind, but let me say this for the others who are reading here:

None of this matters.

Some time in the 20th century, most of the world agreed to stop trying to expand their territory and accept the borders as they were at the time. This led to prosperity, safety and peace.

Russia is breaking this contract, creating suffering and hardship.
If the war starts with Taiwan, everybody will bomb the fabs. The Taiwanese probably have units detailed to do that to prevent their intact capture, just as Switzerland have mined every bridge and tunnel in the country.

China will not capture the fabs.
I find it odd that a professor would not see the value of human interaction that happens when people are in the same room. That's barely touched upon in his article.

Sure, there's a lot of value to working from home. But there is also a lot of value from being in the same room as your co-workers. Engaging in face to face conversations, bonding, joking, etc. I've gained some of my best friends thru work and I just don't think that would have happened over Zoom.

For some individual contributors, 100% remote work is perfect. For some, it's solitary and unfulfilling.
How so? I really do not see how you read it to arrive at such conclusion? And which "ideology" is which?
I used notion for a long time. I was never satisfied with it, but everyone around me used it, and so did I.

2 months ago I found a good alternative called ERA. It is targeting developers and their needs (as far as they market it that way).

It's currently free to use as it is in beta, but for me it offers everything I need.

https://era.sh
Why use a browser at all when the same funded project has a separate native app that exists for this: [0]

[0] https://translatelocally.com
I’m sure the ants have some kind of error correction, and even if it is a one-off robot, you can apply a personal error correction, but it will be specific to that robot. There is no “general” amount of error because every motor/encoder/circuit will provide different levels of error.
I think there’s more of a generational shift happening here. People from iGen/Millennials are now old enough to be middle managers and understand the true value of remote work as everyone got a taste of it.

Even with the examples of Microsoft or Apple campuses, think about the miserable traffic on the 405. Employees who live even 30 minutes away are expected to be stuck in traffic for at least an hour one way. All for what? To take one or two meetings that day in person and the rest with people around the world?

People like deterministic days. They like being able to not have to waste their weekends on cleaning from the week beforehand because they’re too busy at work.

I don’t think hybrid work is doomed, just that those who choose to go into the office may be outnumbered by the next generation who prefers to not.
I think it's worth pointing out what the opposite means - to say that "this field might have a value, or it might be null - but only one tuple/row can set this field to be null" implies that you have given the null option some kind of real-world value.

That is to say, you are using null to encode some kind of meaning, when really this is not what null is supposed to be used for.

That's not to say I think we should be morally disapproving of people who do that - I use things for their unintended purpose all the time, and it bugs me when people get on a high horse. Use what makes sense to you - and I love this change for exactly that reason.

But the general theoretical approach is that if you want to care about the value in a field, you need to give it a value. Null is for the valueless, and if that isn't an allowed state, you should simply set the field as not-nullable. Theory is fine in theory. For a practical database that exists in the real world, this option is a good addition.
Step 3: When you do see people, and they talk about their problems. Offer them books, and say "You must read this, it will change everything"
boo fucking hoo. why is that a big deal? why isn't china on the banned list if there is oh so trade war with them?

is binance an american company? if not then why should it care about american sanctions?

wasn't a few days ago that coinpayments.net exited USA from payments because of ongoing political events or some other reason? so they literally put USA in the same list of sanctioned countries that USA made in the first place. lol
> The essence of monads is to use abstract types to enclose a mutable state, providing only a set of carefully-crafted combinators for using it in such a way that you can't duplicate the state but have to use it in a linear, non-branching fashion

When I was reading about these stuff, I was not lucky enough to find such a clear high level description of what is the purpose of a monad. I got it eventually, but I wish I encountered this concise description earlier.
But that would still get you nulls in the result set, which is what we're trying to avoid?
Looking at that page, it's also marketed as a fully turn-key solution with really everything (design, track construction, vehicles, signalling) provided by Bögl, so they presumably also hope to get some sort of lock-in effect where buyers of their system continue being dependent on them for any ongoing maintenance or future expansions, too.

For how this can go wrong, look at the story of the Translohr (some sort of guided bus touted as a cheaper alternative to a conventional steel wheel tram), where the cities who bought that system subsequently had difficulties in persuading Alstom (who had bought up the tram part of the Translohr technology and eventually decided to sort of discontinue that system) to continue providing maintenance support or possibly even additional vehicles for the exisiting Translohr installations.
Ir raw materials perhaps, but they can no longer build cars.
That makes two of us. Pity because it does seem pretty interesting.