skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Seconded.

8 years ago I had impressions made of my ears and invested in some custom-fit earplugs that evenly attenuate the entire frequency spectrum and don't roll off excessive high-end like foam plugs.

They come in a tiny coin purse that fits anywhere and if I find myself in a public space where I'm at a risk of fatigue or hearing damage (concert, construction site, airplane, etc) I just pop them in.

That said, I'm a musician and audio engineer and thus highly protective of my hearing. But such events are so much more pleasing and sustainable with a quality pair of earplugs. Reducing the decibel level hitting my nervous system really helps to prevent anxiety and tensions that one might normally experience from the exposure to loud noises. It makes every experience so much more comfortable and I would replace them in a heartbeat, should they go missing.

I think most of us (especially those living in cities) take for granted just how loud these everyday environments actually are and the effect that it has on our mental well-being. Earplugs may not be a priority for most, but they are a simple, highly underrated remedy to the ambient soundscapes that many of us are exposed to every day.
Why are you asking this over and over when you're just a couple of Google searches away from both trial videos and his damaging content?
> 44100hz sample rate is enough to reproduce well above the highest frequency even young humans can hear

It's enough to reproduce well above what we can hear by the normal mechanism that we use for most of our hearing (sound vibrates the eardrum, which vibrates some tiny bones in the middle ear, which cause fluid in the cochlea to ripple which disturb sensory hairs which we perceive as sound).

Ultrasonic sounds can be conducted to the cochlea via the surrounding bone bypassing the eardrum and middle ear. Those bone conducted ultrasonics can be perceived. See [1].

This is probably not important in music except in maybe a few rare cases.

I'd still like to see better frequency handling though, so that our music wouldn't sound terrible to the dogs and cats that are forced to listen with their owners. We can't normally hear much past 20 KHz (more like 12 KHz for many of us), but they can.

There are several musical instruments that have significant ultrasonic output. It would be an interesting experiment to see if dogs and cats like those instruments live better than they do recorded (or dislike live less than they dislike recorded). Then compare to the same experiment but with instruments that don't have ultrasonic output.

[1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23384569/
Here's my notes on DynamoDB:
How to spend $100k on what would cost $10k with an sql server for a 100x worse service
I can't imagine 30 days makes much difference than 14 days from the perspective of a fraudster. Assuming they meant to do the fraud anyway, they probably want as fast turn around time as possible.
Agreed. So much of the early negativity around "digital" and "compression" was due to avoidable mistakes made when mastering some particular pieces of media back in the early days.
> The film industry is about to undergo something vaguely resembling what the news and journalism industry underwent

Reading your bio clearly shows why you have this POV. Keep on hustling, someday maybe it’ll be true!
That's almost what I wanted from Lenovo with the X1 Fold, I already have space to carry around a 14" notebook, I gain nothing on a device that's half the size, but twice the screen on the same space, that would be awesome.
> a potentially genuine mistake in their opinion/judgement

The standard for defamation in the case of public figures (for which the parents of the Sandy Hook victims probably qualify because it's that broad) is "actual malice"--the speaker needs to either know that the statement was false (at the time it was made) or entertained serious doubts as to its veracity. For non-public figures, it's generally lowered to "reckless negligence". The other required element for defamation is that it has to be damaging--you need to show that you suffered as a result of the allegedly defamatory statement.

If it's at the point where the statement is causing people to issue death threats against you, it's not a "potentially genuine mistake".
I rarely feel excited to code after taking a new job, but it works for some people. I think it's because new jobs end up with a massive context change, plus having to deal with all the onboarding, so it's about 2 weeks to actually start. Sometimes even months to get used to the new codebase.
> but I can't understand any world where it's just that a person makes a potentially genuine mistake in their opinion/judgement, explicitly corrects that mistake multiple times and then only multiple years after correcting that mistake is sued.

Had Jones wanted to make the argument that he made a genuine mistake rather than knowing libel, he could have participated in discovery and trial rather than stonewalling and getting a default judgement.

Had he wanted to argue that he had made an after the fact retraction which reduced the damages suffered by the victims of his libel, he had the opportunity to make that argument, AFAIK, in the compensatory damages phase.

> Intent matters and after watching the trial I have very little understanding how the jury came to that verdict other than they just wanted to punish a bad person any way they could.

There is a reason punitive damages are called punitive: they aren't to compensate for harm, they are to punish, and thereby deter repeats of the action by the same or other parties.
I think it's both. Many states could compete with Delaware by also becoming tax havens. They can't anymore, because there is now more to it that simply being cheap.
In the books the culture is frequently called dystopian by people outside of it. Usually to some extent out of ignorance but not completely and not always.

Within the culture itself in the books, there is an awareness of the dystopian potential of the culture's powers, and tension about what applications are acceptable. The political and cultural shape of the culture itself sort of makes a silhouette around the dystopia it is trying not to be, or could become.

It's a positive transhumanist take for sure, but it directly confronts how necessarily tangled up that is with much worse worlds, and should get credit for it.
It depends heavily on the card company. Most of them are user-hostile scum, with Amex being the most cardholder friendly.

I've still been screwed by AirBnB to the tune of $2k even when I used an Amex card. Caveat emptor (buyer beware), I'll never use AirBnB again, got totally ripped off by a creepy and deceptive house host in Pebble Beach who claimed we damaged his house, even though I'd taken pics of a lot of the oddities. Live and learn.
But isn't translating from English (or some other natural language) is what a programmer does when constructing a regular expression or a cron job? So it is possible, although humans make mistakes, too. Maybe fewer, or different mistakes than "AI", but still, fundamentally it's the same.

Maybe an alternative to natural language processing could be pattern recognition from a number of user supplied examples, and its expression in an unambiguous domain language. That's also what programmers do.
I think this runs only with Allegro Common Lisp, a commercial implementation.
Hypothetically, you can imagine the government setting all tax income on fire and just printing new money to do the stuff it wants (however much they need).

It's valid to argue that dollars are fungible and it's all how you choose to account it, and that's my point.

They don't need you to pay them taxes to get schools and roads, but there does need to be enough productive capacity available in the economy to supply those things, and the government needs to be able to command their production without causing major problems.

Paying say, 40% tax "sort of" reserves 40% of production for government use, but it's complicated.
Great idea, any plans for more complex creations? Git/Redis/Docker are excellent 101s but it'd be cool to see this solid format applied to more technically challenging projects. Though I appreciate it's targeting juniors.
> The standard for defamation in the case of public figures (for which the parents of the Sandy Hook victims probably qualify because it's that broad) is "actual malice"

That's true, but also somewhat irrelevant since Jones suffered default due to wilfully refusing to comply with court process; there was no trial on liability, only damages.
>This position paper makes the case for wireless in-package nanonetworking as the enabler of efficient and versatile wired-wireless interconnect fabrics for massive heterogeneous processors.

Think your processor couldn't have a covert networking interface phoning home? Think again.
I had a Corolla for many years. I changed the oil on it but the oil filter was stuck, so I never changed that. Put probably 50,000 miles on it before the muffler fell off and I got rid of it.

It was a $1200 car. You don't spend a bunch of money on maintenance for a $1200 car.

Throw it in the gutter and go buy another.
And they'll charge twice as much for everything to make up for the cost of fraud.
PFAS, like nearly everything, has a half-life. As a category so large the half-lives can range from days to thousands of years in a vacuum, but even those with thousand year half-lives can be broken down with catalysis in seconds.

It is new tech on the scale of humanity and we will figure it out.
> What botometer does or does not do is completely irrelevant to twitter’s mDAU calculation.

Agreed, but this article was about the tool Musk used and that's what my comment was directed towards.

> No matter how many thousands of individual features botometer has, it cannot (and will never be able to) tell whether Twitter has served ads to that user today.

That seems likely, but I don't think that really means much given that Twitter's interest lays in serving as many ads as they can get away with.
Pickfu.com might be what you’re looking for…
> he had the opportunity to make that argument, AFAIK, in the compensatory damages phase.

Or in the years between when he started his smear campaign, and the consequences thereof finally catching up to him.

Between this and the Tim Eynman verdict[1] (Who pretty much followed the same legal playbook, up to filing for bankruptcy[2]), it's not been a great week for grifters.

[1] https://www.atg.wa.gov/news/news-releases/judge-orders-eyman...

[2] And then trying to take back that filing. When he realized that you can't use it to hide your stolen money from the courts. [3]

[3] https://www.atg.wa.gov/news/news-releases/bankruptcy-judge-a...
"I'm a supporter of Jones being able to spread whatever insane theories"

I think you are a supporter of freedom of speech in general - that's something I thoroughly approve of too.

I also think you are able to understand the difference between seeing a horrendous crime and seeing that crime and attempting to profit from it.

That seems to be what this bloke did: He tried to change and engorge the narrative regarding these horrific murders. This wasn't simply the usual run of the mill "American conspiracy theory".

He tried to convince the world that the crime didn't actually happen and even worse tried to convince the world that the dead were actors and other nonsense. He was caught out rather neatly when his defence team sent rather too much SMS data to the prosecution.

I am a fervent supporter of freedom of speech and other fundamental rights but there have to be boundaries - of reasonable decency and other quite tricky to pin down terms.
This kind of justice with special treatment only encourages people to believe in conspiracy theories

I'm not sure that'll be effective, even though something had to be done
Self cultivation via meditation and related methods is where it's at. Smoother and deeper than mere machines. It's the old and good "transhumanism".

It really is impressive stuff.
Kenji is the godhead for me. In fact, I'm making falafel his way again, today or tomorrow. The politics? I wish you hadn't told me that.

As for burgers, I've settled on using the broiler. I'm not convinced that a fry pan offers any advantages. And he's right about using salt. Adding more after it's cooked is NOT a substitute.
Internet Resilience to Solar Coronal Mass Ejection [pdf]
> if there were a darkweb prediction market for smart contract cryptocurrencies

Assuming you mean "using" instead of "for", isn't this Augur? (That said, I haven't used Augur personally; maybe it sucks.) Building prediction markets is one of the more common and older projects for crypto.
> but FRCP rule 37(b)(2)(A)(vi) very clearly indicates that a default judgment "against the disobedient party" is a permissible outcome of "[failing] to obey an order to provide or permit discovery

Nitpick: this is a state case and the Federal Rules don't apply, but I think most US jurisdictions have very broadly similar default rules.
Generally, to appeal a judgment, you need to post a bond. Otherwise, the other side can move to enforce the judgment. This seems to be the case in Texas, though it seems the amount of the bond is capped at 50% of his net worth.
So Zero It's Negative? (Zero-Copy #3)
That is a ridiculously tortured argument. The censor not extending his reach to outside venues doesn't make him any less a censor.
Those weren’t public policies, they were marketing campaigns to divert away from reasonable public policy solutions.
Presumably plenty of people are fine with it and arewatching tons of ads and buying those absurd awards. I've been using old.Reddit and RiF app only forever, if that API goes so shall I.
> The "the first amendment only applies to the government" is an argument

"Congress shall make no law..." We've extrapolated a bunch from there, but the founding words are pretty clear.
>You forgot to mention that the bank has $100,000 cash

That much seemed obvious; of course they have the money you paid them.

>and a debt instrument (asset) that is worth more than $400,000 on its balance sheet

Yes, the buyer is now in their debt; this is of course why they do it. They give money now for money later.

None of that changes the fact that the money still came out of the ether.

>Also, the question was ‘How does the government print money?’ and not ‘How does a bank lend money?’

The topic is germane to the topic of monetary creation.

Ultimately, the creation of debt is the creation of money and the destruction of debt is the destruction of money.
1. Formal, centralized crypto standards, be they NIST or IETF, are a force for evil.

2. All else equal, fewer dependencies on randomness are better. But all else is not equal, and you can easily lose security by adding determinism to designs willy-nilly in an effort to minimize randomness dependencies.

Nothing is, any time in the conceivable future, change to make a broken RNG not game-over. So the important thing remains ensuring that there's a sound design for your RNG.

None of our problems have anything to do with how "much" you encrypt something, or with "cranking up the number of bits". That should be good news for you; generally, you can run ChaPoly or AES-CTR and trust that a direct attack on the cipher isn't going to be an issue for you. Most of our problems are in the joinery, not the beams themselves.
I wish you the best and I'm sure you have a great marriage, but something to note for others is that there is a hidden potential cost many don't think about when deciding if the mom will be stay at home: you may be responsible for a sizeable alimony in the event of divorce as a result of the court deciding the wife sacrificed her career on your behalf for the family.

It could be the difference between having enough to pay child support and your own expenses, and ending up with a felony charge and losing your property+passport+freedom+licenses because paying both alimony and child support (now higher because of higher income differential) can be insurmountable for some after going through a divorce. If you're a high income earner it's basically the kiss of death at any chance of ever changing your career (or taking a break), even if you psychologically burnt out on it.
I know someone who works in gov (Australia, not US) who told me all about a FOI request that he was stonewalling. From memory, the request was open ended and would have revealed more than it possibly intended it to, and would have revealed some proprietary trade secrets from a third party contractor. That said, it was probably a case that would attract some public interest.

The biggest factors preventing governments from stonewalling every FOI case are generally time and money. Fighting FOI cases is time consuming and expensive and it's simply easier to hand over the information.
Oh 100% SAML over WS-*. At least SAML can be made to work across vendors. I've never seen anything WS work outside of MSFT products.
Canonically, Gaiman wanted him drawn like Peter Murphy of Bauhaus, but other influences have crept in.

https://www.google.com/search?q=peter+murphy+morpheus&tbm=is...

https://64.media.tumblr.com/ae34d97834546bfcf60bc929b8a100ab...
A master carpenter always blames his tools.
My armchair assessment is he loves money and he found a herd of morons that is willing to throw millions at him if he behaves like a maniac and says outlandish things. He basically performs like any religious huckster, knowingly feeding people lies for dollar bills. Here he is on JRE walking back his Sandy-Hook-being-fake-claims and he presents as a perfectly reasonable, informed dude: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QzpXMbM-kos
A Dangerous Place to Be Pregnant Is Getting Even Scarier
> Had he wanted to argue that he had made an after the fact retraction which reduced the damages suffered by the victims of his libel, he had the opportunity to make that argument, AFAIK, in the compensatory damages phase.

He did, and he made the argument, and played the video in which he claimed he retracted them to the jury.
There is probably some folk theorem about this.

The emergent structure of a society is always more complex than the analytical tools available in that society are capable of modeling. As the tools become more sophisticated, the same technologies and institutions that enabled their development results in a correlated increase in complexity in the social structures. Forever keeping true contemporary introspection out of reach.

The best sci-fi counterexample is probably Seldon's Psychohistory from The Foundation Trilogy.

A thought experiment related to this: how dominant would the average macro hedge fund from 2022 be if they were transported back to 1985, with no knowledge of specific future events but with all of their scientific knowledge, models (and maybe computing power?) etc.
'Pandering' to who?! local residents who are sick of the city getting wrecked? Like so many people these days Shellenberger thinks the two dominant political organizations who control everything are morally and ideologically bankrupt.
It's only fantasists who believe the slow motion SF disaster is a good thing, and they also appear to think they have some sway with the DNC.
I think this is a sloppy take. If you read the full back-and-forth on the FOI request between D.J. Bernstein and NIST, it becomes readily apparent that there is _something_ rotten in the state of NIST.

Now of course that doesn't necessarily mean that NIST's work is completely compromised by the NSA (even though it has been in the past), but there are other problems that are similarly serious. For example, if NIST is unable to explain how certain key decisions were made along the way to standardisation, and those decisions appear to go against what would be considered by prominent experts in the field as "good practice", then NIST has a serious process problem. This is important work. It affects everyone in the world. And certain key parts of NIST's decision making process seem to be explained with not much more than a shrug. That's a problem.
> Which looks a lot like he was afraid that discovery would reveal something much worse than what was at issue in those cases.

And the great irony is that, because of his lawyer's mistake, he has lost the ability to keep from discovery an awful lot of things, so that revelation is likely to happen anyways.
Don't forget S was developed at Bell Labs, the mother of R.
I thought there was a Steam.cfg setting for disabling client updates?
It comes to this phrase about a function "acting in a different way for each type".

In C++ there are literally three separate implementations of std::string's contains method for three type signatures. This is pretty clearly what is being discussed as "acting in a different way".

In Rust there's just one, here's the entire function body of contains: pat.is_contained_in(self)

OK, well that's just buck passing right? Clearly this is_contained_in() method on Pattern is really just the contains() implementation, we're passing the work to this function that as you point out needs to be implemented by each of the matching types for Pattern.

Except, wait, Pattern actually defines is_contained_in(haystack), thus: self.into_searcher(haystack).next_match().is_some()

Sure enough Pattern implementations although they're not forbidden from implementing is_contained_in themselves, do not in fact do that, they just implement into_searcher. Our hypothetical Jpeg type can provide a suitable into_searcher implementation which results in a Searcher for the Jpeg somehow, without knowing what contains() or split_once() or trim_start_matches() do, and now they will work on Jpegs.

So the "acting in a different way for each type" for contains() ends up only being because of details about the inner behaviour of that type, which is exactly parametric polymorphism so far as I can see.
Most programmers don't need to prove crypto algorithms. There are many situations where you can just use TLS 1.3 and let it choose the ciphers. If you really need to build a custom protocol or file format, you can still use libsodium's secretbox, crypto_box, and crypto_kx functions which use the right algorithms.
I never knew the bar was so low as to include taking vitamins. Once we are all transhumanist no one is a transhumanist.
Hacker News gonna Hacker News.

I could explain it but I don't have the energy to respond to a gotcha today. This has nothing to do with the conversation in the grandparent or the whole thread really.
You can beat me to a pulp, doesn't make me suddenly remember a specific N byte string any faster.

Passwords are to be remembered, private keys are to be stored. I suppose I'll tell you where it's stored, but often even that doesn't help. (E.g. It's on a USB key I didn't label and lost, or this is totally the admin pin to my smartcard, ok you got me these 3 are the real pins, uh oh it's physically wiped itself? Sad face for you)
I don’t really know why it’s so hard to pinpoint what Alex Jones is or does what he does.

He’s a professional troll, as in says things he doesn’t necessarily believe in himself but fit whatever public brand he is trying to sell because it brings him attention which in turn makes him money.

Sometimes it seems like we have all these words to describe people exactly like him aka troll, LARPer, astroturfer, and yet for whatever reason when we actually see someone doing any of these things we somehow think he’s actually crazy and believes all these conspiratorial things when the most likely explanation is that it’s all just a bit.
Depends on what your job was.

I got fired at the end of 2019 and was thinking about retiring. Covid made it an easy decision to take another job, I was going to be sitting at home in front of a computer for a year or two anyway.

For near retirees who had to go to work in person, it made much more sense to retire rather than to risk death in order to put a few more years worth of money in the 401k.
I was answering for the general case more than the specifics of the lawsuits that Jones faces; you've already covered the defaulting aspect well.
Not really, you can run this under SBCL too.