skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
+1. To add, the modern EMV chip enabled transactions are not at all like magnetic stripe transactions. The chip in the card is not a passive storage but is also a computation device that signs a transaction, generates one time keys etc.,

Of course it is still possible to skim the card number off of magnetic strip and sell it in the darknet. However, the static card number is becoming less and less of a relevant thing now a days as more sites/processors are migrating to dynamic auth such as Apple Pay etc.,

A good overview + detail : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv1DjtBwADg
I drive this stretch of I-15 regularly. I can vouch for the fact that the road would have been practically deserted at this time of night. Fog is extremely rare because the air here is so dry.

I have to wonder if the motorcyclist had a non-functioning tail light. Then it would be hard for a human driver to see, much less computer vision.
I would like to see someone advance an idea that all rail should be fully subsidised and free to use. Because rail creates massive economic gains by increased mobility, but modern rail companies struggle to maintain a modern infra while trying to make money and competing with coach and planes. If they just focused on running trains things could be much better.
Correct answer. We don't even know what makes you conscious, or gives you memories or will. The brain is basically a magic blob to us at this point. Maybe in 100 years?
This is why my PIN is 9998.
Getting only one cycle per year out of your storage solution is hard to justify economically. Regular pumped hydro gets 200-365 cycles per year, and there's already a substantial difference between day and night electricity prices.
Try and think of the many ways in which the USSR was different from the Russian empire and you will understand the scale of Lenin's and Stalin's radical changes.
Matt also has a followup podcast about each episode where questions are answered. It's on youtube as well, https://www.youtube.com/c/StillTBDPodcast.
I agree that one is usually concerned with more recent information (hence the effectiveness of the LRU caching heuristic). However, looking back at past endeavours has been a source of new ideas and joy (reminisce achievements) for me. I don't do it frequently though. Maybe once a year or once every two years. Revisiting your past serves as revision as well (you get to see concepts you once used in your work/life).
You should probably read the article, before writing a highly-downvoted comment answering a completely different article.
The connection is places like this: https://www.google.com/maps/place/48%C2%B009'08.6%22N+11%C2%...

What you see is a problem amplifier. Any problem related to any train, track or signal is amplified there and becomes a much bigger problem, for too many trains and people. Some of the tracks you see are high-speed tracks reserved for high-speed trains, but the problems spread to those too.

Is it possible to build such intersections better, so they don't amplify problems to such a degree? Absolutely.

Blaming "management" is a fine thing to do to do when you've no clue what's wrong or how it could be fixed, but you want to blame someone. Nice and generic.
So, either way, the benchmark is not an apples-to-apples comparison between frameworks?
Maybe the HN title should be changed. People in other comments are very excited: "I had no idea!", "wow, CIA dossier!".

Possible title: "Unevaluated information about Kim Il Sung's identity from an old publication in some Korean monthly periodical."
There are tons of children who could learn to program, could even teach themselves, but who are unaware that the option exists.

Oh they're aware, alright. It's hard to get them interested in coding when they can play Minecraft or zone out in front of YouTube. Whatever they do on the device other than coding is going to be far more entertaining than coding and a lot easier.

Source: I have kids.
Taking into account that the sun's radius is much larger than Earth's - it actually is collimated.
They also do insist on having their own grid - separate from the rest of the country.
Going really fast makes much less sense in Germany compared to France.

Frances population is far more centered in mayor hubs while in Germany the population is dispersed much more homogeneous.

In some places the ICE stops every 20km, there are too many curves, or it shares its rails with slower trains.

There is no need for high speed rails here because you can not accelerate anyway.
What about kotleba, caputova, babis...?
> at the standup

"Standups" are micromanagement. Which other high level profession does this. Doctors are not interrogated daily by some charlatan with a certificate for a 2 day course. PhD programs in CS/Maths tend not to do "standups". Asynchronous communication could replace most meetings at your regular CRUD sweatshop anyway.
They've got egress cooling water limits of 26-30C (78-86). It's an entirely manufactured problem.

There's trivial solutions to this, but they all probably run into other regulatory stupidity.

They could easily solve this just by offering giant 38-40C (100-104F) pools open to the public near their plants.

Or, just have a parking lot sized winding halfpipe before draining into the river, or otherwise easily make up for the missing cooling tower capacity.

In Iceland thermal plants will release boiling temperature water into rivers that didn't have it before, nobody thinks twice about it, as people are used to the natural equivalent.

You'll want to make sure to give the fish a way out, but otherwise the only notable side effects are some algea buildup.
Why do you think that Fusion would necessarily be a lot more expensive than fission? I don’t see any reason to believe this long term
All pins in my country are 5 digits. Which can be annoying for four-d visitors (depends on the bank, and I've not heard of problems for a while).
> I always think it's weird how instead of just improving public transit, we've all become fixated on self driving vehicles.

I believe that people with this kind of mindset do not understand nor can understand the value of time.

Example, for me going to work using public transit takes ~35 minutes, that is 8 minutes of train then the rest on a bus. (Not including the waiting time for the train/bus to arrive for departure)

Using a car, it takes me roughly 12 minutes.

So.. I save 2*20 minutes per day by not using public transit.
How much is that per week? Month?

Some may argue I should move closer to work, but that would mean a way higher mortgage and a crampy apartment vs. my house out in greener areas.
I think the choice is fairly simple...

Or that I should switch jobs, but there are no companies around my living area which pays the same, and I really enjoy job and definitely my living standard.

So unless the city put a direct line with no stops between my suburb and the area I work in, a car makes my life less stressful and more efficient.
in Poland something like 90% of IT offers have transparent salary ranges - if someone hides that, he's already suspicious. There's also a community-wide agreement that those offers should be avoided.
Offering free train rides should only be used as incentive to use trains more.

When the rail infrastructure is alreay overwhelmed as it is in Germany it really doesn't make sense without first massively investing in the infrastructure - which will take decades.
Because it's inconvenient. I went down the sourcehut road. Realized people don't need that stuff to develop, and it's way more annoying to work with when you just want to get something done and you don't _care_ about the "truly decentralized" parts.

To be clear, I adore sourcehut and it felt like a good way to develop. Certainly felt more like a hacker doing it. But I had the exact concerns as the author. I needed contributors, or the potential for that.
One alternative that I sometimes do is to continue the work on a new branch (just as if I was doing stacked PRs), but not send any new PR until the first PR is merged (or at least approved).

Mostly because stacked PRs are usually not ready for review until the base PR is reviewed, and are probably going to get rebased and require some refactors. I've had cases where the base PR had so many changes that I just started over on a new branch.

I know that GitHub now has draft PRs, but I still think that (unless you really want someone to take a look at the draft while the base PR is not merged), it might be better to not make people waste time looking at code that might suffer heavy changes.
Coal power plants have the same cooling problem as nuclear power plants. And looking at some rivers in Europe at the moment the problem with power plants using water for cooling isn't just heating up rivers too much, the water levels are dangerously low to the point of some rivers almost disappearing, there are some famous examples of that in Italy this year.
Because many people are afraid of what is not familiar, that's it.

It's not hostility, but a rather a case of shying away from reading the docs and changing the way they work.

From my experience not everyone is conductive to try and adapt to new ways, and many people do not use git CLI or SSH. They just use GitHub's gh CLI command.
Interesting... I am an avid reader (and an obsessive bibliophile!) but I have the opposite reaction to yours regarding file formats. Pdf is perfection, then I like djvu and then well-formatted plain text files. Epubs are a thing of horror, that invariably botches all the formulas and destroys the flow of the pages.

It has gotten to the point where if something is in epub format, I don't even bother to download it.
True (and there is a nice video from Tom Scott[1] where he uses one of those things), but almost no high-speed trains[2] use those parts, AFAIK.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TLcaJdsRr0
[2] with the exception of a few "weird" Intercitys that take very strange routes to reach tourist destinations like Berchtesgaden
No major cities outside Frankfurt and Koln were connected by the highest speed rail (300 km/h) ?
Tangentially related - what's a good option for a cross-platform (portable to all platforms with a filesystem) read-only virtual file-system today like e.g. quake's pk3 file format ? e.g. let's say I want to access a few ten of thousand small files fast, much faster than what e.g. NTFS allows since I know that I'll likely have to read more-or-less all the files and I can mmap the whole thing, what are my options? My prime concern is having an api such as

handle = vfs_fopen("/my/file1.txt")
pointer_to_the_file_bytes = vfs_map(handle, <start offset>)

which would be as fast as possible. compression, encryption aren't needed.
Tom7 actually used it in a video recently: "Harder Drive:
Hard drives we didn't want or need" http://tom7.org/harder/

There are some more serious examples in the manual here: https://libguestfs.org/nbdkit.1.html#EXAMPLES

We use it for exposing/converting proprietary block devices (VMware, Windows things) to open source through the open NBD protocol. There are many open clients, including the kernel nbd.ko, libnbd, and qemu.
Sorry but almost no one driving personal vehicles is driving the speed limit on this stretch of I-15. Most motorcyclists I've seen here are driving well above it and weaving in and out of traffic. It's certainly odd in this case that the motorcyclist was hit from behind.
I thought it was always 20 years away, but it seems both have been common.
You seem to be conflating reminiscence with reflection.
> It might be easier to learn, but it's harder than ever to actually do something useful with those "toy" environments.

It's hard to define 'useful,' but I'd argue that you can make useful things in Scratch. My first language was Scratch, which I learned 14 or so years ago. Although I only stuck with it for a couple years before moving onto Python (then Scheme, then C, then OCaml),
Scratch was very formative in my development as a programmer, and there are a ton of 'useful' things you can do within Scratch itself.

I grew out of Scratch after writing a 3d rendering engine for a platformer, and a neural network that played a racing game (NEAT). Both of things are fun, and I'd argue to some extent, useful, if not only to others who are learning. It was at this point that I was recommended a book on Python and, well, the rest is history.

I realize that, for some tasks, like systems programming, Scratch would be absolutely counterproductive. (though I recently recall seeing a post about writing a Linux kernel module using the language.) Nevertheless, that doesn't mean that you can't do useful things using the language. Having later developed games in C from scratch (ha!), just trying to replicate a fairly basic Scratch program with sounds and sprites and movement requires a good working knowledge of how to type, C and its compiler, SDL and related libraries, memory management, maybe how to embed Lua for scripting, etc.

None of these things are hard, per se, and I do agree that you have to jump through a number of layers of "security" to do modern development work on most platforms, but one has to admit that the environment that Scratch provides is powerful enough to create useful things, that require a non-trivial amount of work to replicate elsewhere.
Free runs into the issue of capacity management. Prices, even token prices, serve to limit some consumption. Without it, free transit mostly serves to divert people from walking and cycling, not cars and planes.

Guangzhou planned to offer free transit to ease congestion during the 2010 Asian Games. It was cancelled after a few days; metro ridership doubled, causing queues of up to twenty minutes to enter stations, and eight stations turned exit only to relieve emergency levels of overcrowding. Most rail transportation could not handle the crush of additional riders from free rides.

https://humantransit.org/2010/11/guangzhou-abandons-free-far...
Could you not have separate platforms in the same station, with the lines being essentially unbroken?
It is in the history of the programming language Smalltalk, that it was meant to usher in a new era of computing.

This era would be built on several basic principles. The first one is that you would have no real separation between source code in some text editor, and the running program—a prophecy that has yet to come to pass. All the rest of us rely on shooting a misbehaving program in the head and birthing a similar child with slightly altered DNA to replace it... Smalltalk expects you to have a conversation with the program as it runs: the whole programming language is instrumented with reflection, and every module is hot reloadable. There is literally a method, Object.become, “OK computer, take all of the references anyone has pointing to that other object and point them to me, I will be taking over for it.” Bold.

A second conceit is that the new way to be a programmer, the new metaphor, is not one of traditional authoritarianism—think in particular of remote procedure calls. But the new metaphor will be biological: a module will peek around its environment, maintain a “homeostasis” of inner state consistency, the system as a whole will be tolerant of intra-module logical inconsistency, while the individual cells will just die if they cannot maintain consistent state, cells live, cells die, cells organize into larger tissues and organelles and organs in order to find their greater purpose.

A third great principle is fractal architecture, the idea that the parts should contain the essence of the whole. So in functional programming you might build a computer program out of parts that are not computer programs. But Smalltalk wants to say, no: every computer program in this language will be constructed out of units that are fully fledged computers in their own right, running one or many computer programs. And so there is no need for all of these computers to be on the exact same host machine, of course they can be because a computer can pretend to be multiple computers by task scheduling, but it is not necessary.

Related to that, there is a vast skepticism towards locking and atomicity. Implement virtual time, or leverage the full power of the actor model... Those are preferable.
Well, in that case the parent must ask themselves: am I doing geometry on an infinite cylinder or not?
> Instead a singular train operator being able to run a train that seamlessly runs all the way through without changes

Isn't that the case already? Or are the high-speed trains that go from Paris to Belgium / Netherlands / Italy / Spain just regular speed outside of France? I'm quite sure, at least the ones going North (UK/BE/NL) use the same tracks as the trains doing Paris-Lille (city in the North of France, close to Belgium).

> Also, while at it, make the train operators compete on EUR/KM of operation so that the costs become competitive with intra-EU flights.

I don't know if that's such a good thing. There are routes that are much more profitable than others. It's my understanding that, at least in theory, the profitable ones "subsidize" the others, such that people can actually use them.

I don't think that having new companies showing up on the Paris-Lyon line, for example, will be a net positive for the country as a whole (that's by far the most profitable line in France).

Or maybe force the new ones to serve all the other lines? I don't know what the best solution would be.
Was that actually a candidate (like the monster raving loony party), or did you have to add your own box?
As a demo, I can forgive ugly and being a bit cryptic. It's the ramifications that get me. Okay, in the main document, you have a transclusion link to the King James Bible (Genesis 1:1-3). But one of the main points of Xanadu is the bidirectional links, so when you switch to reading the King James Bible, you should also see bidirectional links not only to the document you were just reading ("Xanadoc"), but every other link to the King James Bible in Xanalogical space, and past a few dozen such links, things will get incredibly messy (and a "missed opportunity"---one of the sides documents actually quotes one of the other side documents, yet there's no link).
Personally, I'd rather generate documentation at compile time.
Both the authors of this study and meta-analysts generally have followup responses and other diagnostics and models that work under degraded assumptions, so I don't think it makes a ton of sense to respond to "this is the absolute most introductory example of why this kind of intuition works" with "it doesn't work in <XYZ> case". There are a variety of ways to think through what data looks like under publication bias or not irrespective of what the "correct" effect would be.

I'd also add that this is a paper responding to an existing meta-analysis, so the claim that it's impossible to get a quantity of interest for a meta-analysis because the constituent studies are being inappropriately aggregated is itself an argument in favour of this paper's rejection of the original paper's finding.

I personally just rejected an m-a at a social science journal on thursday because I thought it suffered from unaddressed garbage-in garbage-out along the lines you mention (non-experimental data, no attempt to pin down causal identification, inadequate qualitative discussion of risks of publication bias, unclear QOI), so I am sympathetic to the criticisms, but just know that there are next steps. :)
Because:

- UX is important to the average software developer

- UX within popular email clients targeting the task of code review is non-existent

- UX within IDEs for code review is better but: (a) send-email integrations are less polished/mature than they could be (largely due to the dominance of PR/MR flows) and (b) IDE code-review UX is still, despite everything, lagging Web UI code review UX

TL;DR: open distributed specs are what we need ideally, but you can't escape the fact that they'll always need much more work to overcome feature inconsistency and niche uses

---

I'm really rooting for sourcehut in this battle as I think if it got some adoption we could start seeing improvements to the above problems (they're all surmountable), but I think the biggest thing that's going to help that adoption is sourcehut adding a (good) web UI for their flow, per https://todo.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/lists.sr.ht/111
I agree, I see many impedances (sorry) in command line usage. I think the percentage of people who can use one declines every year, there's simply no competing with the advertising budgets of flashier systems.
Again these are anecdotes. I've certainly done that too but I've also paid $200+ for a short hop on Ryainair when it was the cheapest option, picked an extra legroom seat and checked a bag too. The point is that expensive fares and ancillary fees subsidize cheap loss-leader fares. It's a complex system and you have to consider it as a whole instead of looking just at the subsidized loss-leaders when making a cross-mode comparison.

I would consider a fair comparison point to be for a given flight:

1. Sum total spent on airfare by all passengers on a flight - PLUS.

2. Sum total spent on ancillary services by all passengers on a flight.

3. Divided by the number of passengers on a flight.

And average it out across all flights between the city pair over a year to eliminate the effects of seasonality and timing.

Without having access to Ryanair's revenue management data this is the best we can do.
Or build something that you want yourself, it's likely that someone else would like it too.
The idea that the IRA were jolly people who were just going to leave alone anyone who identified as British and wished to remain in the United Kingdom is laughable.

I've seen "Brits out" and I know what it means. I've known innocent businessmen have their livelihoods ruined and their lives taken, all by the hands of various republican factions, just for being "collaborators".

I'll never forget Enniskillen, Omagh, Bloody Friday, the attempt at Tullyhommon, or the various other atrocities and the party in Stormount that lauds them.

Look up Barry McElduff and his shameless mocking of the Kingsmill atrocity. This happened as recently as 2018 and he is already back in Sinn Fein. Not something anyone does in the spirit of reconciliation.

I'm glad someone at least had the nerve to defend us from clear intimidation and death wishes.
You don't need separate stations, just enough separate tracks. Berlin Hbf for example has its ICE trains mainly arrive in the basement level, with regional and local trains on physically higher levels (worth seeing for anyone visiting). But most large cities' main stations have 10+ parallel tracks, usually with a large junction a km or so each side to let trains funnel into the correct platform (see e.g. Hannover: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/52.3813/9.7435). Plenty of room for local, regional and ICE trains to be all together.
Can someone reply with a script, to subscribe to all YouTube URLs found on this page.
In 1988, Autodesk (makers of AutoCAD) was so impressed by the Xanadu project that they gave them financial backing, hoping to bring a product to market the following year. After four years without any progress, Autodesk gave up:

> […] Come 1992, the “resources of Autodesk” were still funding “talent of the Xanadu team” which had not, as of that date, produced anything remotely like a production prototype—in fact, nothing as impressive as the 88.1x prototype which existed before Autodesk invested in Xanadu. On August 21, 1992 Autodesk decided to pull the plug and give its interest in Xanadu back to the Xanadudes.

(Quoted from footnote linked from this page: https://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/e5/chapter2_64.html)