skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Social media is optional. You don't have to use it. I don't.

But not letting other people send messages over the internet through platforms created for the purpose because you don't like it is a special level of heavy-handed dictating.
I think this is underrated. One girl in middle school who was my daughter's friend wasn't allowed a phone or internet. By the end of 8th grade she had very few friends and really had nothing in common with anyone else to talk about. This was a during a lot of stay at home covid schooling which probably made the effect more severe.
Looks like it didn't work too well depending on which one you were given.

https://www.medsnews.com/health/two-generic-version-of-conce...

I imagine, it's since been fixed or the companies in question are no longer producing it.

I find all these ingenious delivery systems (including Vyvanse, Maydays, etc.) to be pure marketing gimmicks.
> Bethesda has such a reputation for releasing ambitious-but-buggy games

As far as I know, I've only played one game by Bethesda - Doom Eternal. It was also the only game I haven't found a single bug in. I'm more used to Ubisoft games, which are chronically buggy. Doom Eternal was a whole other level for me.
Be careful. I would think that you are still on the hook for the subscription cost until you cancel, even if you use a virtual card.
I went down this rabbithole. Comment systems suck and you will get an amazing amount of spam.

I keep a Contact page with various ways to reach me if you really want to chat about something. It's rare when folks chat me up but it's always a good convo when it happens.
Even with the earlier variants the actual clinical data on the market never achieved 95%. Pure hyperbole and Pfizer has still not shared the actual raw data of the trials.
Far more people die every day because of obesity caused diseases and we haven’t even meaningfully taxed high sugar foods.
So you would feel ethically justified in shoplifting for as long as you aren't caught?
Agree, I don't even order coffee in Portland anymore because everything is "delicate, fruity, floral" light roast aka. tastes like goddam vinegar.
It is not allowed but I have never seen a situation where it doesn't work.
From the article, and announced afterwards, Google will be deleting visits to Abortion clinics (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jul/01/google-de...).
Uh... Because they're a teenager. Sometimes, that are bottomless pits of craving attention for reasons that aren't logical.
You can't solve everything with a discussion. You can tell kids not to do something all day long, doesn't mean they won't do it.
> You're using the fact that you believed a lot of anti-vaccine arguments as support for why you... chose to believe a lot of anti-vaccine arguments.

I dont consider these shots to be "vaccines" (if those are vaccines than aspirin is a vaccine as well, words don't have any meaning anymore), so you can already drop the anti-vaccine etiquette.
In other words, motion JPEG2000, and it's decoded by (no doubt extremely expensive) hardware. There's no way a general-purpose CPU can decode in realtime otherwise.
Disney suffers from having bits and pieces of their back catalog and not scratching my personal nostalgia itch.
I’d love to read this, but …

“Article continues after video.”

So I scroll past the video, which unfortunately decides to attach itself to the top of my phone screen and command 1/3 of my whole browser window. What’s wrong with these people designing these kinds of web sites? They must be crazy thinking it will generate more revenue?
The more charitable read is that there's a lot of free 80% solutions that a lot of people are totally ok with, and some number of 90-100% solutions that a dedicated set of developers provide to people who actually care. I don't NEED almost any of the software I pay for, but I can justify spending $20/365 on an application I use a few times per day to make it better for me to use than the free version.
There's an American cartoonist. Jim Woodring. Fabulous. Mystic.

Almost all of his stuff is wordless. Apparently it was just easier that way.

Then suddenly the Japanese discovered him. Now he's got this giant new audience.

The power of no words.

Also, I've noticed, words can be too precise. Pictures and pantomime can let you talk with greater accuracy.
That isn't a solution, because people who want to have a memorable/unique username are not interested in sharing it with others, and they will move to a platform where they don't have to. Probably part of Twitter's appeal early on was the ability to get there early and grab up an account like @cookies or @milk.
This all assumes a price that doesn't creep up. I only know of one of my subscriptions that hasn't increased pricing in the last several years.
(Mostly a rhetorical question) I'll probably never be able to do that if it's based on karma but my question is, if I stop saying things that get my comments flagged but proceed to get into negative ranking (ex: -50 or maybe -100 if I get on an unlucky roll) will I be banned by the system automatically? I assumed so which was the other reason that annoyed me
Go ahead and request the data and see if you can actually get it. The FDA is so corrupt that who would actually trust them after the opoids crisis?
Lithium batteries are easier to charge, have a more suitable voltage, are lighter for the same energy and have no memory effect. They also have a great even voltage drop during discharge which makes for accurate charge indicators (Sony used to advertise them as "infolithium" back in the day)

Lithium batteries are pretty great except for the fire risk. And Lithium mining is bad for the environment (lots of chemical waste during extraction) so using them for single use stuff is horrible.
>That said, have any good coffee recommendations?

Anything cheap and fresh is good. I used to go to whole foods and look at the roast date and get the ones on sale.
I think what the parent meant was, can someone looking at it decode what is going on. Not asking whether it is possible in general.
A few major things have changed in the intervening time that have worsened the problem.

First, the suburbs have expanded, greatly. This means they're farther out in the periphery on average, there are far more highways, roads, and parking structures needed to support them (with far more lanes and traffic), and it's consequently more difficult and dangerous to go places on your own, especially without a car, in any place that is in or connected to suburban developments. For reference, when I was going to elementary school in the late 2000s, my school was half a mile away on the other side of a five lane highway that had no sidewalk on the other side. It wasn't until later that a pedestrian/bike accessible trail was put in to allow access to getting downtown and even then it would still take 30-40 minutes walking or 10-15 minutes cycling and it sucked the whole time. And this was a less exurban development than many of the ones that have sprung up in the last decade.

Secondly, perhaps in part as a reasonable reaction to the first and in part as an unreasonable reaction to fearmongering, parents are unwilling to let their kids venture out on their own without supervision, and even police each other, by calling the actual police on parents who let their kids travel alone.

Thirdly, tech has just gotten better, in ways that make it higher quality and in ways that make it addictive. Browsing the internet and playing vidya is a better value proposition these days in many suburbs than going outside to navigate asphalt and private lawns as far as the eye can see.
This seems like a straw man to me.

If we discovered a free and unlimited source of entertainment then we wouldn't need to charge for that either...
The marginal cost of a copy has never mattered in the history of copyright. We're not talking about an item from a factory here; we're talking about works of mental labor that frequently take many thousands of person-hours and often tens to hundreds of millions of dollars to produce the first copy.
> Now it is and I fully expect them to use their newfound power to oppress women seeking lifesaving medical care.

I fail to see how an abortion is lifesaving medical care, can you explain what you mean by that?

If you're referring to ectopic pregnancies, it looks like the majority of abortions are not due to an ectopic pregnancy. The only source I could find that actually reported the number of abortions due to ectopic pregnancies only covered 1981-1991[0]. It looks like the number of ectopic pregnancies was consistently around 80-100k whereas there were around 800k-1million abortions per year.

In addition to this, I don't know of any laws that have been passed in any state banning abortions that save the life of the mother. I would love to read up on some laws that prohibit this, not an article from NYT, or Washington Post, or some other political news agency. If you know of any, please let me know because I would like to be well informed and change my mind if that's the case.

> I can think of no group more dangerous than religious fanatics bent on protecting "innocents" in the name of God.

And I can think of nothing more dangerous than a political group oppressing and killing people unable to defend themselves in the name of "reproductive rights".

I would seriously like to see actual laws that are passed or trying to be passed to ban abortions that save the life of the mother. If you can show me evidence of that I would be willing to reconsider the consequences of overturning roe v wade. But right now, it looks like the only thing happening is states have the power again instead of the federal government.

Edit: I reread your comment and it looks like you're referring to rape. Rape and incest laws also haven't been discussed yet. I don't see any Republicans targeting victims of rape and incest, and I'm sure if you talk to most of then they are OK with exceptions in these cases. Unfortunately, once again, the vast majority of abortions are not due to rape and incest.

There were around 140k abortions due to rape in 2019.[1] If every single rape resulted in a pregnancy, and every single victim aborted that pregnancy, that would only account for 22% of abortions (around 640k abortions in 2019[2]). It's highly unlikely that this is the case, which means the vast majority of abortions are not due to rape and incest. It doesn't matter anyways, because even if Republicans pass laws allowing victims of rape and incest, and ectopic pregnancies to abort, I have a feeling you still won't be happy.

[0]: https://academic.oup.com/aje/article-pdf/149/11/1025/187423/...

[1]: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-....

[2]: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/ss/ss7009a1.htm
Yeah. The conversation would go something like this: (spewing noise) “What did I just put in my mouth!? Hey. Lets feed this swill to the plants and go grab coffee at Methodical.”
And even apart from that, I'll agree with him that there's a "comfort food" feeling in "bad" coffee. When I travel I bring my own hand-grinder and pour-over equipment, usually with a bag of beans from my favorite coffee roaster. But having been in the military, I'm also perfectly happy drinking instant coffee with some sort of creamer: It's hot, it's caffeinated, it tastes better than water from the canteen. (OK, so maybe there's more nostalgia in the enjoyment than I realized.)
> I think it’s under-appreciated how much the rise of the Nazis was a direct result of Germany’s loss in World War One.

Huh? Even school textbooks talk about how the humiliating terms of the Treaty of Versailles lead to the rise of Hitler. Or as my high school history teacher joked: WW2 started in 1919.
The money is just as substantial, you just don't feel it as much.
How’s the smell? I’ve considered doing this, but have a house full with a wife and 2 kids. I don’t hate the smell, but it’s not exactly enjoyable for all.
Wales

3 million people, 9-10 million sheep
This might be a way to get a post-mvp idea that was built using No-Code/Low-Code to a code base but for a new unproven idea I would say buyer-beware, unlikely to get you what you want.
You are on it. Right now.
Americans may not be familiar with Rowan Atkinson's non-Mister-Bean career; I recommend the song "I Believe".
You may not be aware of the full extent of the problem. It's not just the "time wasting" of the old days, just ~15 years ago. Try these documentaries:

- "The Social Dilemma" on Netflix

- "The United States of Secrets" on PBS.

- John Oliver on Data Brokers, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqn3gR1WTcA

There are others I can't remember off the top of my head. You may feel differently when you find out about companies profiting off the current (as in right now) whereabouts of your child.
>And anywhere is marginally better than nowhere.

Nope, this is completely wrong. People want to help but they have limited bandwidth. When you give them someway they can feel like they are helping without meaningfully doing anything, you’ve reduced their attention/effort that will go into real solutions.

Doing minuscule shit is absolutely harmful to the cause. This is one of those areas where a compromise is as bad as doing nothing with the additional downside of patting yourself on the back thinking you made progress.
How can a discussion about visual comedy not include pioneers
Buster Keaton and Harold Lloyd?

[0] https://youtu.be/frYIj2FGmMA

[1] https://youtu.be/QD9VypQh7qM
Acknowledging up front that I don't have kids, if I did, it would be extremely important to me to teach them that there is no such thing as privacy on the internet.

If you want them to grow up to be adults who live in the world, drive that lesson home: Every single thing they ever do on the internet is being tracked and monitored and can be shared with anyone, at any time, especially the people they'd least like to see it.

"Online privacy" is an oxymoron. Sure, there are ways to be much more secure about it than others. Teach them to use them. Raise them to be "that kid" who understands why their messages should always be encrypted and self-destructing.

The world will not respect your children's privacy on the internet. They need to know that, and the earlier, the better. Don't Santa Claus them on this. Don't set them up for failure.
Ever heard of the Freedom of Information Act? The Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency has sued the FDA so that they would release documents related to the review of the vaccines.

https://phmpt.org/

> You're posting an excessive amount of fear mongering in this thread.

Funny that quite a few actual doctors subscribe to my fear mongering as they signed this request. Ever wondered if your point is valid?
There's literally nothing wrong with the title. The author doesn't have to qualify their excitement because it might not be for the same reasons as others.
There's a difference between a snob and a connoisseur. The amount of roast is just one more variable of dozens. I personally prefer medium roast beans when doing a pour over, but you can't go wrong with dark roast in an espresso, aeropress or moka pot. It's rather difficult to compare coffee that's brewed in such drastically different ways. Like the author of the article, I also don't mind bad coffee.
So a lot of comments here suggest copying it to another application and process it there.

Two points from my side why I would not do that:

First, you can do this directly in Excel either with a regex expression in a macro [0] or PowerQuery [1].

Secondly, I don’t know about the authors example but generally if you have to do something like this the column is likely to be one out of many, i.e., part of a table. I can’t point my finger to it but I imagine there might be a lot of steps in that process that could go wrong (formatting issues, altering table scheme, etc.)

[0] https://software-solutions-online.com/vba-regex-guide/

[1] https://www.myonlinetraininghub.com/extract-letters-numbers-...
This is definitely a problem of social media IMHO. When you can be @ginger@some.domain by just finding a Fediverse server where nobody's decided to be @ginger yet, or getting someone in your circles with the resources to stand up a server, there's a lot less competition than when there can only be one @ginger on all of Instagram across the entire world.

Someone could still decide that being @ginger@prestigious.domain is Worth Something and start harassing you for having it but it's a lot less likely.
... apparently there are serious doubs on the validity of that research, so hopefully this is false alarm: https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/w1ahrq/comment/i...

(Just discovered that link through another HN submission for the same topic which was flagged)
Important to note that longer-term studies happened before full FDA approval:

> More than half of the clinical trial participants were followed for safety outcomes for at least four months after the second dose. Overall, approximately 12,000 recipients have been followed for at least 6 months.

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-appr...

But also "Phase 4" clinical trials are where the study of long-term effects occur. Moderna, Pfizer, and J&J are all doing those today. Here's a Jan 2022 paper that has some information on current-ish specifics: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8665991/
If you try to control your kids internet/device usage too much they will learn to work around it (at least once they hit the young teens). Try to have open conversations with them and teach them about the dangers of strangers, predatory microtransactions, the permanence of whatever they post on the internet etc.

If you just try to monitor and restrict what they do they will grow to resent you, and they'll hide everything from you (and they'll likely be much better at this than you expect).

Do note this advice is for teenagers though. I suspect you'd be quite successful limiting a 5-10 year olds unsupervised access to the internet, and probably justified in doing so imo.
> Didn't the FDA release like 60k pages of those documents a couple months ago?

Because they were sued with the Freedom of Information Act in place. Not because they wanted to. Talk about transparency!
When I was a kid (8 or 9 yrs old?) back in the early 2000s, my mom was pretty tech savvy compared to her peers. She actually installed corporate monitoring monitoring software on my machine and told me about it. She said the internet is dangerous and she needs to see what I'm doing to protect me / make sure I'm not up to no good. Once I'm older she'd remove it. It all made sense to me and I didn't mind. I think it also helped deter me from doing anything too stupid.
Someone needs to go Liam Neeson on these people.
Is YouTube really so bad nowadays? I feel like I'm in a weird position as I'm young enough to have grown up with YouTube, having used it regularly since age 11 or 12, and I got a ton out of it, but "The Algorithm" wasn't a thing in the same way back then. I still use YouTube today and still get a lot out of it, but I mainly watch videos from channels I'm subscribed to or through direct recommendation by other people.

Am I living in a weird bubble while the rest of the world experiences a parallel, much worse YouTube?
Books on my shelf that got /more/ generally useful with a bunch of years passing since I bought them.

Simply Scheme, Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, How to Design Programs.

They're a hundred times easier to get going with the exercises using racket than the incredible faff it used to be when purchased, especially with SICP.

Maybe if the book is good enough the wider community supports it?

Then there's K&R C, K&Pike, Richard Stevens, of which any edition from the last 20 years is still pretty useful. Although there must be something better than K&R for C by now - the example programming style can be improved upon while still appreciating its considerable strengths. In that general direction Van Der Linden's "Expert C" and "The C Puzzle Book" remain fantastic books to grok C and low level programming.

The Wrox "Professional Assembly Language" is both out of date (32 bit x86) and still about your best bet, update it and play with the x86-64 abi docs, a download of the intel optimisation manual, "Hackers Delight" and http://aggregate.org/MAGIC/
This also has the advantage that it doesn't boat the TXT response for the domain. Putting it at some thing like _prose.sub.domain allows just getting the relevant record.
If you want to know what a privacy dystopia looks like, check the Yandex search engine (from Russia), where you can do reverse image search with face detection.

Google anonymizes reverse image search with people in them. You get generic results like "person in t-shirt".
Almost everything about SpaceX's Martian colonization announcements is very, very far from what could be practically realized with anything we can build today.

For example, Musk repeatedly mentions a six-month trip. No, it is 9 months, at best.

He talks about transporting 100 colonists for those 9 months, 6500 hours, in a ship with the room that an airliner uses taking that many with their baggage across the Atlantic Ocean, up to 9 hours.

Might they not need food, water and, maybe, air for 9 months? The airliner pumps air through on the way. It collects its sewage, to deliver there. Maybe a pressure suit for when they get there? Change of underwear?

By NASA standards, Starship has room for at most 17 crew for such a trip. That is if you know they all get along, or don't care how many kill one another on the way. More practically, 8 is probably the limit.

Probably you need to send ships in pairs, so they can be swung on a cable between ships' noses for centrifugal gravity. That way their bones don't dissolve on the way. Will 1/3g be enough? Nobody knows. But it had better be.

It is a good plan to send uncrewed cargo ships ahead of time with what they will need there. You probably need at least five of those per colonist ship. With on-orbit fueling, that amounts to ~80 Superheavy launches, 10 for each colonist.

Will Starship be rated for launching crew? Maybe you need a couple of Falcon/Dragon launches, besides, for each Starship-load of 8 colonists.

So for a million colonists, you need ten million Superheavy launches. At 10 launches/day, every day, that is 3000 years. Maybe breeding colonists in situ would be faster? Because over 3000 years, some will die. (Hopefully not all at once.) How many do you need to launch just to keep numbers from falling? Maybe later ones can move into dead colonists' pressure cans, so need less cargo?

But a million colonists is very far from enough to be self-sufficient. No microchip manufacturing, no biochemicals, no Cybertruck. So you still need all the cargo launches, 10 every day, century in and century out. Hopefully the colony produces enough (movies?) to pay for that, because you can't bring them back.

So, no, there will be no SpaceX Mars colony. But promoting it keeps Tesla stock price inflated.
Their cold brew based drinks are also good (as a espresso machine owning snob)
> for public health

SO getting a shot that does not prevent infection nor transmission, for public health? Sounds legit.
Have you been to Mr. Green Beans in Portland? I’ve gotten beans there before, but just in early stages of roasting my own beans with a repurposed air popper. It’s definitely a hassle to use, have been looking into a standalone roaster.
I've used Bitwarden at Lastpass and Keypass in the past and found all of them much worse at their sync and ability to integrate with websites or OS to paste my passwords, not to mention how many of them required either a subscription to them or to Dropbox or the like to keep your passwords synced across devices.
Basically Discord then? You have a human-readable handle that is not guaranteed to be unique, and disambiguated by the last 4 digits (?) of your actual UID (which is a number)?
> It's not complicated- by reducing the odds of contracting covid, the odds of transmission are reduced.

Looks like you never heard of asymptomatic carriers.