skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's amusing that Chomsky at least says one sensible thing, and that's what causes the far left to reject him.
I don't claim that it's a total repeat. I say I don't like the fact that the opposite is often claimed, i.e. that something is "totally new". Emphasis on "totally". Can you give specifics?

You are right in that technology changes and different things that were not possible become possible or become mainstream accessible. What I don't like is the complete ignorance of what came before because of marketing. Don't get me wrong, I get it in that sense. It only sells well when you make everyone believe it's the best thing since sliced bread and that you just invented it out of thin air. I don't have to like that though.

We start out with sequential reads being faster for example. Think tape drives and how file formats and search algorithms got optimized for sequential reads being faster. Then hard drives come along where you can suddenly do much faster 'random reads' simply because searching is so much faster in comparison and people take advantage of it. But then you build enough functionality on top of that sudden ability to do random reads relatively fast that it does become the bottleneck and you instead organize things on your HDD such that they result in sequential reads instead. Along come SSDs, which are so much faster overall that you don't have to any longer. Until it repeats and your workloads bottleneck on even an SSDs abilities. But the idea of organizing your files in a certain way or taking advantage of the read characteristics of your storage aren't completely novel at all.

Or take databases. We start out with accessing data by key only, because it's faster. You need to know your access pattern beforehand if you want things to be fast. Someone comes along and invents relational databases and it becomes possible to actually do that in a 'fast enough' way as well because of hardware advances. Suddenly someone else comes along way later and re-invents accessing data by key only if you need 'real speed' (aka NoSQL databases).

Or like in another thread where someone claimed 'the cloud' invented node independent re-attachable networked storage. No they didn't. I'm not sure if that's the earliest but it's the earliest I know of, which are EMC^2 Symmetrix and that was way pre-cloud i.e. in the 1990s. SANs are/were a thing for a long time. Mainstream access to such technologies by simply renting an EC2 instance w/ EBS volumes is something the cloud did give us though.
Gas line works for years, then 6 months after removal of western technical experts and ending of cooperation with technicians running west end of pipeline (which article stressed were critical to clearing plugs like these safely) it goes tits up.

Putin is not going to blow up his biggest leverage over Europe during a cold winter, its his only chance at getting them to reduce support for Ukraine.
This is one thing I feel conflicted about. On one hand, it is a lot easier to do those things (VMs, docker, DBs, etc).

On the other hand, now a regular run-of-the-mill developer is also supposed to be knowledgeable about sooo much stuff that is not so directly related to their code. As you say, sometimes it’s nice to be able to hand that off to specialists - a person can’t be good at everything.
This is correct. It's actually rare for pilots to even see the planes they're attacking, if they're attacking a plane at all.
One of the things hiding behind the gigabit recommendation is that there are lots of terrible ISP decisions that might have been made upstream of you, but that symmetric gigabit providers haven’t made by and large. It’s not actually that you need gigabit, but rather that you need an ISP good enough to offer it.

Back in the day, FiOS offering gigabit at your address was a handy shorthand for being on a more modern ONT, not using DSL to deliver it to your apartment over crappy copper, etc.
Perhaps the maneuver could be used against an incoming missile?

I.e., it might be easier to out-maneuver it this way than to shoot it.
After checking some 19th century artists I see it failed hard. All of the responses look the same, there isn't enough data in the training set to differentiate actual styles beyond "vaguely realistic".
> It was not.

I’ll take your word for it (and I upvoted your other comment which stated this).

> Holy non-sequitur Batman!

It was not a non-sequitur. It was an example meant to conclusively illustrate of how radically morals and attitudes (in the time period in question) differ from the current ones, even though we collectively might feel and remember otherwise.
It probably also gets favoured because it tends to fit into the Western mindset of "bottom-up" and "self-bootstrapped" decision making.

An alternative, for example: we could take the same amount of money being spent on creative works, absorb it through taxes instead, and redistribute it through a state-managed endowment system. The amount of money we spend for one Mick Jagger would probably fund quite a few musicians with a 70k/year stipend and an obligation to perform shows/generate recordings/etc.

But to pull that off, you'd need some sort of formal arbitrator to decide who is "enough" of an artist/scientist/etc. to qualify for an endowment. I know there's a very strong attitude of 'you can't regulate what art is', seemingly used to justify charging seven figure prices for products that look suspiciously like they were fished out of the local preschool's recycling bin.
Some one will use free art to make money and none of it will go to the artist without any sort of protections.
What Chris Rock said there is the textbook excuse of a person with an avoidant attachment style: Pushing the other person away and not allowing them to get closer by telling yourself that they can only need you, but never ever love you. If you hear that voice inside of you, it‘s „the devil talking“.

I say this as someone who has gone through all of this, and a lot more. Instead of seeing these feelings as proof that the world is out to punish you, it‘s much more useful to see that pain as a signal. A signal that tells you that you‘re likely carrying some deep bullshit around from your past and early childhood. And that dating and relationships are here for you not as consumables to fill a need, or as a measure for your own self-worth, but as a challenge, a „task“ in your life that gives you the chance to grow beyond your childhood patterns, and to take an active role in redefining not only your relationships to „woman“, but to mankind as a whole.

If you‘re on HN, you‘re very likely an intelligent, resourceful, curious person. You have most likely solved problems in your life that have been much, much tougher. It would be a pity if you ran away from this one.
> Depends. Is a kernel panic better than something acting wrongly? I prefer my kernel not to panic, at the expense of some error somewhere that may or may not crash my system.

That's a false dichotomy, you don't get to choose between definitely crashing or maybe crashing. That would be nice but it's not on the menu. Crashing is just the best case scenario, so if you can make your system stop instead of being incorrect, that's great.

> but we all disable them in production (assertions)

We don't all do that.

I concede that it depends on the use case. You might not care if you got a single user non-networked gaming console for example. A bug could even become a welcomed part of the experience there. I hope these cases are more rare than not though.
Sleep apps backfire by causing anxiety and insomnia, says expert (2019)
I wonder what will happen to the SS Richard Montgomery, with 1400 tons of unexploded ordinance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Richard_Montgomery
It's impressive you can do this in 200-odd lines of Python. How much CPU juice does that SelfieSegmentation drink?
> Using WiFi will probably add ~30-50ms of latency to your setup, which is bad, but also consider that both the PS5 and Xbox Series X have over 100ms of input lag alone.

This is absolute nonsense. Average end-to-end input-to-rendered-frame latency is half that at 60fps and more like a third of that in 120hz mode in Gears 5 on the Series X https://www.neogaf.com/threads/xbox-series-x-input-latency-r...

Lots of similar results abound. Here’s Multiverse on the PS5 averaging 31ms end-to-end latency at 60fps: https://twitter.com/noodalls/status/1552942081014132738

“100ms of input lag alone” (before the engine even has the input? c’mon mate) is a preposterous idea.
Yes - I followed former fighter pilot on YT - you have bad guys in range if your sensors/missiles, fire missile or two and that is mostly end of the fight.

Even if you don't hit the guy you just pull back and go for your station because without rockets you will be gone if the other guy somehow survives 2 and you don't have any.

Dogfights like in the movies don't happen.
Why dating apps don’t work
Hover over one of the sign-language symbols and see video of a person signing to provide information.
I'd probably just embed a small js engine.
In case it causes trouble you can switch to another implementation.

The hint about loose coupling is good, you want to be able to evolve your app without breaking the plugins/macros.

Decide who is in control. Does the plugin run in the background or may only provide functions the app calls.

make sure you can limit the runtime of the execution of plugins, in case you want to ensure that plugins can't hang/crash your app.

Also think about security, depending on the use case it might become an entry point for malware.
Yup, I played the entire "Last of Us" campaign on Sony's PS Now service in 2015 on cheap Comcast internet on my 2014 MacBook Pro. Display was great and the streaming quality was great! Don't remember if it was 4k; very very unlikely. Perhaps it was 1080p or 720p. Anyways great experience!

Never tried Stadia; _even though_ I got their controller & chrome cast 4k for free in some promo offer! It was just too much work to end up paying full price for games I already owned! Such a bad bad product. The most greatest of technology/engineering! And yet, such a waste!

Google really has fallen in my eyes. As a software engineer, I would be so scared to go there to work on something new.
Copyright only protects against copying. Independently coming up with the same thing is not copyright infringement.
Come to think of it, I've never had almond marizpan. The popular stuff in the US is all from peanuts. For those who have tasted both, what is the difference?
s/expose/excuse
What I found incredible is that the new generation doesn't even know the feeling of working in an environment that gives you the power you had with something like Delphi, Borland Pascal, or Visual Basic. With one of these tools you could create pretty much any kind of application you wanted (with VB maybe you needed some Visual C++ for the difficult parts).

Today's new developers have to deal with a landscape that is, in my opinion, discouraging. You have to spend a huge amount of time setting up environments, creating sane default configurations, and learning about hundreds of dependencies, before you can even start creating something that would be considered semi-useful.
After decades/centuries of abuse, how does "forgiveness" fix systemic issues? Forgiveness can't fix the fact that black Americans were denied access to loans, houses, GI Bill provisions, and all sorts of opportunities that were the primary source of household wealth gains for the last 75 years. It can't fix the fact that those gains mean white people have, on average, more access to "a small loan" from a family member to start a business, a house or inheritance to fall back on if their take a risk starting a business and it doesn't pan out, and so on.
> It must be so difficult being so offended by the regular function of language. Context matters in language, and meanings and vocabulary change over time as contexts change.

The sheer irony of someone who's in favor of linguistic prescriptivism typing this out (when master record and master key have no linguistic relationship to master/slave) is astounding.
Like a CIWS? They get through far far too much ammunition to be mounted in a plane. Planes have just a few seconds of ammunition for a medium weight of fire, CIWS fire for tens of seconds at a much higher rate of fire at each missile.
Why do countries invade others? It's often portrayed as being for the greater good of the attacker, restoring their territorial integrity. But let's be honest, you don't spend billions if you're not getting anything in return other than pissed off invadees - it's for profit.
Reports: Hackers release stolen LAUSD data ahead of ransom deadline
If Linux was the issue, how do you explain the steam deck’s library of games?

This is really simple: people no longer trust Google.
I firmly believe that DEI and its neighbor ESG have become one giant scam. Anyway to demonstrate that your corporation, literature, or organization mimics the ideologically virtue-signaled narrative and you are more likely to get better funding/support/grants.
In a vacuum. The aerodynamics aren't possibly the same.
Sabotaging these pipelines would be bad news for Putin, removing his leverage this winter to try to reduce support for Ukraine.

Biden getting caught sabotaging this pipeline would destroy the critical European coalitions he spent so much time building.
You're saying the only way to end discrimination is for the victims to forgive the perpetrators? How would that work exactly?
IMO, the only way to move forward is to correct past wrongs by heavily investing in affected communities economically and afa education and health.
What Haidt is being asked to do here does none of these things and is purely for show.
I got a sauna blanket about a year ago and enjoy it enough (considering the price and space it takes up)

https://higherdose.com/products/infrared-sauna-blanket
He should have tested the statement requirement policy before resigning. All he had to do was provide a statement that his research does not advance SPSP's equity, inclusion, and anti-racism goals but that it is important to the field on its own. Then he would have a stronger case to point out the irony of the policy itself being discriminatory. Right now, he just comes across as a whiner.
Up to a point, yes, obviously
Any examples that are interesting?
Print it to the cloud
Amateur baker here. Perhaps the best insight into baker's math is that it depends on a lot of factors: the humidity, the type of flour, how coarse/fine it is ground, protein content, etc. And then it also depends on your technique and skill creating strength and structure. Handling high hydration dough requires a lot of skill and not doing it properly means you end up with a flat bread rather than a loaf of bread. If it doesn't hold it's shape, either your technique is lacking or your hydration is too high (or both). Or you bought the wrong flour. Seriously, look for decent bread flour on Amazon or wherever. Chances are your local super market does not actually sell any flour a baker would be happy to use.

The main point of baker's math is not to have recipes that you can share on the internet which people can then blindly follow but to have a repeatable process that works for the flour you use and whatever level of technique/skill you have.

Say you bake bread with a certain type of flour at a 75% hydration and you had a hard time shaping the dough; next time using the same flour drop the percentage to 70% and you might have an easier time and if you are happy with the bread you stick with that hydration. Or work on your technique. Or both. If you switch flour brand or type, you'll have to figure out the optimum hydration level again. But being systematic about weighing out your ingredients means you can at least repeat it once you get to the optimal ratios.
You mean FSMs? I don't really have any links about those, no. I learned about them in university. That's been a while and all of that info was in paper form. But I'm sure there are great online resources nowadays.

Just in general I do see in my history this which came through HN a while ago. I never read any of that but it seems a lot like what we did in computer science in uni from a cursory glance: http://infolab.stanford.edu/~ullman/focs.html
I’ve never understood cooking by volume and will reject any recipe that uses it. Especially for ingredients that don’t have a fixed density.

1 cup of flour? I can easily get double the amount in my cup depending on how I scoop it.

1 cup chopped mint leaves… wtf?

1 large potato… kill me! At the farmers market potato’s can come in very different shapes and sizes.

I’m confident enough of a cook to know how much mint and potato I want, but it’s impossible for flour.

My rule of thumb is if the packet describes it in grams, then why should the recipe use volume??

Converting between volume and weight is also senseless for anything other than water.
That's almost exactly what my thoughts were. Its not a role, it's culture/mindset/ "this is how we fold security into our development and operations". An expectation perhaps. I've seen platform engineering roles evolve however to include security specialists, but again, with platform engineering the goal is to bake security and guardrails and general optimisations into to the platform.

I also want to elaborate on the flipside; having dedicated roles as devsecops, there is a high potential that security and responsibilities shifts to people in those roles, and from experience this leads to "someone else will take care of that", where as what you really want is something along the lines of "security is everyone's responsibility (including mine)"
"Snowflake?" Either you're projecting, or that doesn't mean what you think.

Don't forget that there were people like Rich Salz who took their ball and ran home crying[0] because of a freaking word. Was this just a fit of temporary 2020-insanity that was going around? Nope - apparently 1 year on, it's still intolerably reeecist to have a "master key" in cryptography.[1]

[0] https://twitter.com/FiloSottile/status/1279190119703085057 [1] https://twitter.com/RichSalz/status/1435327330335997952
Not yours, the one answering yours. It doesn't matter enough to carry this discussion on honestly.
Or you could just not assume any specific cause and actually study the problem, otherwise you leave such policies open to perfectly justified attacks, to say nothing of the fact that you're potentially persecuting a whole class of innocent people.
Computer Archeology: Space Invaders
The fishing one is the outlier, since in that case th cheaters were caught red handed in dramatic fashion in front of a crowd. With the chess and poker it's much less clear if anything happened and what to do about it.
In Spain, that’s when someone tries to kiss someone in the mouth and the other person reacts by moving their head back real quick in order to avoid it.
No, it’s a fucking stupid requirement. The best way to not lose a game is not to play.
>Keep in mind that in a kernel panic no hardware is assumed to work

So just change that assumption since for these edge cases that is an incorrect assumption.
In Finland there is like 2M saunas for 5.5M people. Most houses have one, larger apartments have one, and apartment buildings have a shared one. It usually built inside the bathroom and can very small one just to fit 2 people. You can probably build one with $1-2k (if you do most of the work yourself). The most expensive part is the heater. It’s no way only for the rich.

Finland might be rich in global standard in like other western country but most people are middle class and generally lower wealth than some other European countries. they still use saunas.

Time-wise, it takes 1-2h to heat up a sauna. You can have one that the heater is insulated and has a top so it can be always on. Then you just remove the top and sauna is ready in 15mins. If you are working class, you still have time to a sauna in evening.

Now the main problem is the electricity cost. Many have wood heated saunas in the contryside or at their family’s summer cottage where you get the wood for free from your own forest.
But the bullet will still hit the plane following you at roughly 1700mph (you could say, the plane will crash into the bullet at that speed, but it‘s the same result), because it‘s also moving at Mach 3.
It's clear to me that thinking there are only two sides to this whole thing is grossly oversimplifying it.
"You're gonna do WHAT" - Merlin
Others have mentioned QNX. There is also ThreadX, which is a "picokernel". Both are certified for use in safety-critical domains. There are other options as well. Segger do one, for example, and there's also SafeRTOS, and others.

"Performance" is a red herring. In a safety-critical system, what matters is the behaviour and the consistency. ThreadX provides timing guarantees which Linux can not, and all of the system threads are executed in strict priority order. It works extremely well, and the result is a system for which one can can understand the behaviour exactly, which is important for validating that it is functioning correctly. Simplicity equates to reliability. It doesn't matter if it's "slow" so long as it's consistently slow. If it meets the product requirements, then it's fine. And when you do the board design, you'll pick a part appropriate to the task at hand to meet the timing requirements.

Anyway, systems like ThreadX provide safety guarantees that Linux will never be able to. But the interface is not POSIX. And for dedicated applications that's OK. It's not a general-purpose OS, and that's OK too. There are good reasons not to use complex general-purpose kernels in safety-critical systems.

IEC 62304 and ISO 13485 are serious standards for serious applications, where faults can be life-critical. You wouldn't use Linux in this context. No matter how much we might like Linux, you wouldn't entrust your life to it, would you? Anyone who answered "yes" to that rhetorical question should not be trusted with writing safety-critical applications. Linux is too big and complex to fully understand and reason about, and as a result impossible to validate properly in good faith. You might use it in an ancillary system in a non-safety-critical context, but you wouldn't use it anywhere where safety really mattered. IEC 62304 is all about hazards and risks, and risk mitigation. You can't mitigate risks you can't fully reason about, and any given release of Linux has hundreds of silly bugs in it on top of very complex behaviours we can't fully understand either even if they are correct.
The price of a Switch got you 3.5 years of Stadia. That's not bad, if they had sales too.
I read the article with the view that since some workplaces will never change, offering medically fragile workers some accommodation is useful. Her advice to the writer to look to a better place also rang true with me - places that refuse to give up on crunching employee skulls under their boots deserve to lose good employees. I didn't see your previous reply but I want to say we're on the same page I think - WFH is a huge improvement to our quality of life and to the environment and any employer that wants good people and a high real rating on the E aspect of ESG had better keep this in mind.
In the United States coming from a position of "maybe there is or isn't an effect from racism" is simply naive. A quick glance at history will show you that many differences in both outcomes AND culture have deep-seated intentionally racist historical sources (in different ways for different races).

How do you fight intentional racism, with a healthy dose of residual lasting generational effects from past racism, with passivity?

It's like creating a game with rules, but having no penalty for breaking them for the first half of the game, and then saying it's just the fault of the loser if someone cheats to beat them.

Or saying "I can't tell for sure if it's below freezing, my thermometer has an error bar of +/- ten degrees" and ignoring a bunch of freezing water around you.