skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Srinivasa Ramanujan springs to mind as the most famous example. This is an interesting question to me because while the answer is probably none or predates the modern definition of academia, there's a hidden circular definition embedded in the problem.

Fundamental science is defined by its acceptance through the peer review process, and not by its applications or results. These undiscovered geniuses sending papers to professors are looking for inter-personal validation and acceptance as a peer. They want a benediction to become something (or to redeem or reinvent as something) and they think the blessing of a prof will give that to them. More cynically, a few want to be able to front the conversation like they do in sales, where they can say, "well, we're in talks about it with <high profile client> right now and here's the opportunity to get in before this thing gets really big." Substitute client for institution or professor, and it's the same play. Fronting an institution is also the easier problem to solve than actually applying their own ideas to build the time/perpetual-motion/free-energy/anti-gravity machine, and blaming an ossified bureaucracy for getting in their way seems plausible because it gets in everyones way.

However, some monograph authors are solving an important problem, which is finding analogies and abstractions that scale their minds and (albeit, incomplete) knowledge to others faster than the official rate of publication. Sure, it's probably misleading at relevant levels of detail and the map is not the territory, and it creates a signalling and noise problem for practitioners - but knowledge is not so precious. I'd propose we need more maps for hackers to use for free exploration with the understanding that the governance and prestige systems are their own games. We need more people actually doing math and physics on their own and with better cognitive tools, and perhaps fewer gatekeepers. Now with the internet, what was once a necessary filter is now mostly a bottleneck.

Every elite competency has a funnel and pipeline problem and papers like this (and authors like James Gleick, John Gribbin, Douglas Hofstadter, Roger Penrose, Simon Singh and other popular writers with varying credentials) bring people into the field.

Dismissing this author for a lack of affiliation is probably accurate, but it is a lazy argument that forfeits the opportunity (and an implied responsibility) to improve the public discourse with engagement with ideas that arrive in it. Many respected academics believe and openly advocate stupider things than this paper, and offering it just a fraction of what they have applied to more ridiculous ideas would go a long way to scaling knowledge to new minds, imo.
Additionally, at the time the “small text files” description appeared, your average computer user was much more familiar with “files” than “data”. Everyone was still mostly using desktop apps and managing their own files in folders and floppy disks, the cloud wasn’t a thing and the web wasn’t really an app platform yet. At the time, I think “data” (the article’s suggested change) would have read as more opaque and technical than “file”.
Okay you're saying mathematical perfection is not achievable in the real world. Fine.

It doesn't matter.

What matters is that with a digital signal processing chain you essentially have a knob you can turn to approach mathematical perfection as closely as you wish, at least until you reach the point where the inherent limitations of your analog components begin to matter. And that point is far, far beyond where human hearing can tell the difference.

But with analog signal processing you reach the limitations of analog componentry much quicker, while you are still well within the noticeable range of some humans to tell the difference. This is because the entire chain is analog and thus no part of the chain is immune to information loss or added noise. With a digital chain, only the ADC and DAC stages require high quality analog componentry. Everything in between is pure math.

Neither process is capable of overall mathematical perfection, but digital can approach it much more closely than analog.
The strategic reserve of sunlight and wind isn't susceptible to disruption due to war or economic collapse. It does take some work to collect that energy, i.e. a domestic PV and turbine and battery manufacturing capacity, but these are not consumables like oil, gas, coal or uranium - they're durable goods that should last for years to decades, and which can be recycled.
> Technical reasons to choose FreeBSD over GNU/Linux

On the server/router maybe. For IT pros maybe.

The desktop is a whole different matter.
The last time I took mushrooms with a friend they tried to talk me into joining them in worshiping Satan. Maybe you're onto something.
Storing a zip code in a column of an excel file is by no means an eccentric edge case. If I type 01234 into a cell, it’s not unreasonable to expect excel to save it (and reproduce it in e.g. a mail merge) that way.
We're not Facebook
Funny, nice people don't stand out either. Lucky, connected, affable ones do stand out. They don't even have to be anything else, most of the time.

They don't get there by being nice or funny all the time, but by practice and reading the audience.
What is the reasoning behind your first paragraph?

I agree wholeheartedly with the second paragraph, but it will sadly never happen.
I own a Yoda, a Kodachi and as of a few weeks ago, a Shinobi. I can't recommend Justin & the guys at TEX enough.
I'm using a track point with https://uhk.io/ but find it's a little too "fine" compared to the clunky manual nature of the keyboard. It feels like a piece of jewelry placed atop a heavy duty durable piece of hardware.

I love it, but think that a joystick more similar to what is found on an Xbox controller would fit the feel of the keyboard better.
Aaaand... skin cancer.
My usual experiene is that people use GraphQL wrong. GraphQL's primary use case is to homogenize access to a bunch of heteregenous backend services. If you find yourself just taking your Postgres database and creating a 1:1 mapping between your tables and GraphQL, this probably isn't a good fit as you'r ejust adding another layer for no reason.

> No clear path for Api versioning

GraphQL came about as a way for mobile clients to call backend services. At Facebook, once a version (of th emobile app) was released, it was essentially out there forever. Some people would simply never upgrade until they absolutely had to.

So the point of GraphQL is that you want to get away from thinking about versioning your API and cleanly upgrading because you probably can't. You can do versions but you don't have clean divisions. You'll mark a given field as "since v2.1". And fields that you ahve added can basically never be removed. The best you can do is make them return null or an error.

So if you want to do versions it probably means you have control over the server and the client such that you can deploy them almost simultaneously. If so, GraphQL isn't really designed for your use case. If not, get out of the mindset that client and server versions can move in lockstep.

I will say I think GraphQL made one mistake and that's baking in string values into the API. You can't change a field name without breaking your API. Same with enum values.

Protocol buffers (including gRPC) instead went for numbering. The name is just a convenience for reading the IDL and data definitions and for code generation but it doesn't translate to the wire format at all.

This can have downsides too but they're fairly minimal. For example, if you accidentally renumber your enums by inserting a new value in the middle, the whole thing can break (side note: always explicitly number your enum values in protobuf! That should've been the only way to do it).

Another issue is that fragments seem like a good idea for code reuse but they can get really out of hand. It's so much easier just to add a field to an existing fragment. If that fragment is used in a bunch of places you may find yourself regenerating a ton of code. You will never be able to remove that field from the fragment once added.

Disclaimer: Ex-Facebooker.
If you aren't careful you can cause that without infinite recursion. If the query optimiser an't see to push relevant predicates down to the root level where needed for best performance, or they are not sargable anyway, or the query optimiser simply can't do that (until v14 CTEs were an optimisation barrier in posrges), then you end up scanning whole tables (or at least whole indexes) multiple times, where a few seeks might be all that is really needed. In fact, you don't even need recursion for this to have a bad effect.

CTEs are a great feature for readability, but when using them be careful to test your work on data at least as large as you expect to see in production over the life of the statements you are working on, in all DBMSs you support if your project is multi-platform.
I love netBSD change logs. They always list stuff like bug fixes or new support for old stuff like Amigas or the Dreamcast lol
For the most part: yes. The one I'm not sure of is Mono.

That being said, some tooling assumes linux sometimes, but the popular stuff is generally gtg, especially if you get it via the ports tree.
You'd have to ask Bernstein. I think it's helpful to take a bit of time (I know this is a big ask) to go see how Bernstein has comported himself in other standards groups; the CFRG curve standardization discussion is a good example. The reason I said there's a lot of eye-rolling about this post among cryptographers is that I think this is pretty normal behavior for Bernstein.

I used to find it inspiring; he got himself crosswise against the IETF DNS working group, which actively ostracized him, and I thought the stance he took there was almost heroic (also, I hate DNSSEC, and so does he). But when you see that same person get in weird random fights with other people, over and over again, well: there's a common thread there.

Is it worth investigating whether NSA is trying weaken PQC? Sure. Nobody should trust NSA. Nobody should trust NIST! There's value in NIST catalyzing all the academic asymmetric cryptography researchers into competing against each other, so the PQC event probably did everybody a service. But no part of that value comes from NIST blessing the result.

It's probably helpful for you to know that I think PQC writ large is just a little bit silly. Quantum computers of unusual size? I don't believe they exist. I think an under-appreciated reason government QC spending happens is because government spending is a goal in and of itself; one of NSA's top 3 missions is to secure more budget for NSA --- it might even be the #1 goal. Meanwhile, PQC is a full-employment program for academic cryptographers working on "Fun" asymmetric schemes that would otherwise be totally ignored in an industry that has more or less standardized on the P-curves and Curve25519.

Be that as it may: whether or not NSA is working to "weaken" CRYSTALS-Kyber is besides the point. NSA didn't invent CRYSTALS. A team of cryptographers, including some huge names in modern public key crypto research, did. Does NSA have secret attacks against popular academic crypto schemes? Probably. You almost hope so, because we pay them a fuckload of a lot of money to develop those attacks. But you can say that about literally every academic cryptosystem.

You probably also don't need me to tell you again how much I think formal cryptographic standards are a force for evil in the industry.
> It's open source, not proprietary at all

"Open source" and "proprietary" are not antonyms. Something can be both open source and proprietary, like XUL. TypeScript is one of them. (So are the NodeJS APIs, for that matter.)
You can run Spring with Java 17 in FreeBSD without problems. Same with Node.js, Postgres and MongoDB for example.
About Mono, I don’t have experience with this environment.
But I’m using the other technologies at my work without problems.
I’ll offer another perspective: human interaction. Good book stores have good staff, helpful other humans that will engage with you and guide you to something you would like.

Computers can fill some, but not all of this role. We are social animals. We are hard wired to feel good when we are in community with other humans, and to (in cases) develop psychosis when deprived of that contact[1].

The price of a book is trivially easy to compare, while the value of social interaction is hard to quantify. Replacing in-person commerce with online shopping because it is less expensive or more convenient may not be as good a deal as it seems.

1: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8131183/#abs000...
Do you think you could sell this to enterprises to help onboard employees?
If you're DIYing an ergonomic keyboard I don't see why you'd go for a trackpoint over a trackpad or trackball. Personally it's one of the least comfortable and precise input devices I've ever used
Can the browser do this for me once it sees that a single button press sent me back to where I started? In AudioOne's case, it's /frontpage -> / -> /frontpage
You can try Buddypress for WordPress, it should be easy to make a small fb clone. https://buddypress.org/
This nails it.
Had the "proviledge" of needing to secure a GQL endpoint and it's a mess. AuthZ? What's that? + Runaway queries that kill the database? check! + Caching? Lol.

Setting aside security and scalabilty for a second: Ifeel like GQL is at its best a complicated database driver, with the data types being defined and implemented twice: once in the DB layes, once in the backed.
On one hand I agree with you. But on the other hand. Physics is not something you just teach yourself to such a high level. It would be completely unprecedented in modern times.
I usually agree with stuff like this, but this one is wrong. It is true that graphql is overused, but frankly stuff like thegraph.com make graphql Freaking amazing! it's totally eliminated our need for anything like a backend to make stuff like https://dashboard.humanprotocol.org/
We're not in court. If someone clearly has an agenda then calling them a lobbyist is just fine
I’m sorry but I’m not willing to implement this feature. Feel free to fork the project and implement it by yourself if you want.

Regards,
$YOUR_NAME.
Because it reinforces his own assumptions and prejudices. It's a way of justifying a thought that is easily disproven.

By portraying someone who doesn't think the way you do as a bad person (in this case, a liar), this person elevates themselves, in their own mind.

It's pretty much seventh-grade logic.
Gary Yang has published over 200 research articles that have been cited over 18,000 times and has over 50 US and foreign patents granted or in pending.
> I believe the implication that NIST or NSA somehow bribed one of the PQC researchers to weaken a submission is risible.

Could you elaborate on this? I didn't get this from the article at all. There's no researcher(s) being implicated as far as I can tell.

What I read is the accusation of NIST's decision-making process possibly being influenced by the NSA, something that we know has happened before.

Say N teams of stellar researchers submit proposals, and they review their peers. For the sake of argument, let's say that no flaw is found in any proposal; every single one is considered perfect.

NIST then picks algorithm X.

It is critical to understand the decision making process behind the picking of X, crucially so when the decision-making body has a history of collusion.

Because even if all N proposals are considered perfect by all possible researchers, if the NSA did influence NIST in the process, history would suggest that X would be the least trustable of all proposals.

And that's the main argument I got from the article.

Yes, stone-walling a FOIA request may be common, but in the case of NIST, there is ample precedent for malfeasance.
It's always a matter of perspective I think.

Of course, now they will all dance again because they have finished off a "bad guy". Right-wing, talking nonsense, earning money - fits perfectly into the prey pattern.

I watched "The Big Short" again yesterday. There was the saying that people are only ever interested in the next football match or some celebrity's rehab.

You could also extend it to which "bad guy" is thrown to the lions. The main thing is that the mob gets its entertainment.

The real bad guys - the ones who have brought suffering to hundreds of thousands of people - remain untouchable, of course.
The ideal would be to have someone with you during the trip that you are very comfortable with, since whatever emotion you might feel will be amplified. Even in that case tho, that person should know what to do, a little reading about how to trip sit would be the ideal, since for example asking “hey are you okay? You’re acting very weird” would be a bad idea.

In case you don’t have such person, for you first experience I would say that doing alone is better than doing with bad people or in crowded places. I would suggest tripping in a place you are comfortable with, with lots of blankets and pillows. For the first time I would avoid going outside, because even tho nature is astounding on trip, as a first time it could be a bit overwhelming. Prepare music that you like and gives good vibes to you. I personally prefer music without lyrics as those can be distracting. If you have a dog or a cat, know that they might act weird towards you, like if they are kind of scared.
This is the setting.

The most important thing is that a trip is kind of like a roller coaster, once you get on it, you can’t get off until it finishes, meaning that you have to be open minded and ready to see and feel whatever your mind will show you. I personally like to think about people that I love in my life, and I explore the feeling inside of my body.
This is the set.

If you are feeling like you are entering a thought loop, or negative thoughts, changing the setting (so changing music, going to another room) could help.
At some point you will need to go to the bathroom. Be ready, the experience will be very weird, because the bathroom is usually smaller than other room, you are naked, and there are mirrors. For your first time I would suggest to avoid looking at yourself in the mirror, as the experience of seeing yourself aging or morphing could be quite disorienting.

If you need any more info there are subreddit that provide great source for everything you need.
Have a safe trip!
I swear to God, the entitlement exhibited uncannily suggests personality disorder, as though progress screeches to a halt because small planes are better regulated. A small pilot's right to train does not supersede my Constitutional right to be secure in my home, free from maddening single engine noise and air pollution. Pilots training, in fact, do not need to do so over residential areas. Get it together, man. Do whatever you want to do, as much as you want to do it, as long as you're not massively disturbing or inconveniencing anyone.
In my opinion, the biggest filter is just getting accepted into medical school. Once you are in, there is a high probability that you can finish and become some type of physician, although maybe not the specialty you want. I know some people who reapplied four consecutive years before they were accepted. One attending physician in an extremely competitive surgical subspecialty recently told me he took the MCAT three times.

Other filters include the licensing exams (USMLE Step 1, 2, 3) and the residency match. The number of residency spots for certain specialties are not growing nearly as fast as new medical schools. If you want to do a primary care specialty, this isn't a concern. However if you want a surgical specialty, radiology, dermatology, etc, you need to truly be an exceptional applicant.

During those initial two years, I took all the prerequisite classes, volunteered, shadowed, wrote application essays, took the MCAT, and flew around the country for interviews. You should strongly consider working as a medical scribe during this time. One interviewer at my preferred school told me, "if you aren't accepted, you need to go work as a scribe and reapply". I wasn't accepted there.

Your CS research and working experience will help. I personally do not think you need more research just to get accepted. But certainly if you want a competitive specialty, while in medical school, you will need to be listed on multiple publications in that field.

Good luck!
Users don't understand costs, especially for certain countries. The biggest bounty I got was like $300 for a solid week of work. Most were a few bucks. It was a waste of everyone's time and money, except BountySource.
It's also true in new bookstores that by browsing the stacks, you find books you didn't know existed and are interesting. Amazon does a very poor job of that - even the top 100 in a category are not as interesting as the selection in my local small bookstore in the same category. That's because the local bookstore is curated. Amazon is sorted by "popularity".

The Harvard Coop was about the last good technical bookstore in my area, but it's been dumbed down, and now just mostly carries the pop science stuff, like other bookstores.

I haven't been in the MIT Coop since they moved for the second time. They used to be right in the middle of the campus.
I'm a huge fan of FreeBSD, though I have to admit - when I was looking at the Vulnerability Statistics chart I wondered to myself "are there fewer identified FreeBSD vulnerabilities because there are way fewer FreeBSD users (than Linux)".
> It's still solid fuel rod crap.

There are a number of First-of-a-Kind SMR and Micro Reactors planned for the U.S., UK, and Canada. The advantage of the three leading lightwater SMRs (NuScale VOYGR, GE Hitachi BWRX-3000, and Rolls Royce SMR) are fast time to market due to the existing supply chain and continuous innovation on well understood technology. The problem is not so much the solid fuel, but the Zirconium clad fuel bundles that produce explosive hydrogen gas during Loss-of-Coolant-Accidents (LOCA). Accident Tolerant Fuels are being deployed now and may be another important innovation that reduces the likelihood of meltdowns but these systems also address the main sources of LOCAs: 1. isolation condenser system (ICS) replace pressure release valves that caused the Three Mile Island accident, and 2. passive coolant circulation systems that don't require external/backup power like the ones that failed during the Fukushima accident.

The problem with this class of lightwater SMR is that they are essentially base load power and the projected Nth-of-a-Kind costs will be competitive with fossil fuels (coal and natural gas) at best but are not cost competitive nor a good complement to intermittent renewables (wind and solar). They are a good slot-in replacement for existing coal fired plants.

There are also a number of Advanced SMRs and Micro Reactors (mobile and campus-size) that have announced First-of-a-Kind builds like the X-Energy Xe-100, TerraPower/GE Hitachi Natrium, ARC-100, Moltex SSR-W, USNC MMR, Xe-Mobile, and Westinghouse eVinci. These designs compete on a much larger landscape of theoretical trade-offs that may leapfrog the lightwater SMRs. I prefer this diverse mix of technologies and applications over a single anointed technology like Liquid fluoride thorium reactors (LFTRs). YMMV.
Hmmm, maybe. I like the Thai Chi exercise and the Calm apps on Oculus but I can't say they are life changing. One VR experience that maybe is more life changing is the ability for me to instantly get my head out of whatever I am doing when I put my Oculus on for a 5 minute game of ping-pong. Clears the head and running around for 5 minutes hitting the ball is good after sitting at my desk for a while.
I think it's the length of the headers that contributes to the sound (I'm sure in combination with other components). I know the boxer engine in Subaru WRX/Impreza STI models has unequal length headers which allowed exhaust fumes to exit in a staggered pattern producing the iconic Subaru rumble.