skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There seems to be some (literary, rather than judicial) precedent for that meaning of the expression, but on the other hand I haven't seen conclusive arguments as to why they would have chosen that particular turn of phrase to say something other than "governed by rules."

Consider another part of the US Constitution, the Commerce clause: "To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;"

In this case "Regulate" is clearly used to mean the action of setting rules. It's a bit weird that they would use that word again in a legal context to mean something non-legal.
Maybe I am starting to spam the thread a bit here but I think the answer is canonical S-expressions, but proving that to be the case is more tricky than it looks although it is also kinda obvious from the surface level; vectors in s-expressions.

But yeah the real answer is lambda calculus, see lambda lisp and justine.lol
Looks interesting, but doesn't look like it has an option for end-to-end encryption.
I just tried Joplin - but found out very quickly that it's just another Electron "app", sluggish performance, heavy resource usage and not security sandboxed.
What does "very fast" actually convey that "fast" doesn't, unless you have a specific example of "fast" to compare with?

The idea isn't that "rapid" means "very fast" (I don't think it even necessarily means faster than "fast"). It's that people will use "very fast" when they feel that "fast" lacks the punch the sentence needs, even when they don't actually mean anything different from "fast".
Yes, that's the one!!!! :)
Thanks, this looks like a good alternative. One thing though is that people may find the presentation of results easier to search through in BookFinder4U. For pre-ISBN books, you need to use the Out-of-print Search. I use it regularly to find old, limited run, academic monographs.
Like the Fed with the 1980 election, non-partisan semi-governmental groups prefer to not make themselves to blame for election outcomes and risk inane increases to oversight by legislators.
> Wiring it is a different story, and if you're an audio app maybe you should allocate and mlock(), but not a database.

Why wouldn't you wire database memory?
Totally not anecdotal lol
A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed.

Who has the right to keep and eat food, the balanced breakfast or the people?
Why? Keeps you humble.
At the end of the livestream, the balance of the Syrian test account was $33. TikTok had taken 69% of the value of the gifts.
https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/ocean/

A Moto G7 Power like above? Motorola devices can be bootloader unlocked I think.

We have a couple Moto G7 Plus devices and use microG, I use VPN and have a firewall app. Works great. Even notifications can work with apps you choose.

I have been a LineageOS user for awhile. There's no guarantee a particular device will always be maintained but if is, it's not that hard to install. The instructions are pretty clear. I've used it on a old Samsung 3, an Honor5x, Samsung S5, and now Moto G7.
Three things remain true about AI driving:
1) Artificial Intelligence has a LOOONG way to go to catch up with natural stupidity - even really stupid people are better drivers in the corner cases than most AIs.
2) The first 98-99% or so of AI driving is difficult, but fairly straightforward. The remaining 1-2% is both incredibly difficult, and worse, we have no idea how to do it.
3) Better technology and compute power will NOT solve this problem. I can point you to thousands of articles (both scholarly and popular) from the 1960s saying that we would have real AIs (intelligent machines) just as soon as we had faster computers and better tech. Well we have both: Not only that, but compute power has grown at rates that no one expected: a $75 Raspberry Pi 4 has more memory, more compute power, and more storage than a Cray supercomputer had in the early 1990s, and our new AI/ML GPU/NPU chips are many orders of magnitude faster than that. We have effectively infinite compute power - and yet the problem persists. We not only don't have Rosie the Robot - we don't even have robot floor cleaners that can avoid literally spreading unexpected sh*t all over the house...
>Lots of people thought Japan would overtake the US as well, and that didn't exactly pan out.

not even comparable situations, Japan has a fraction of the population, natural resources, isn't a nuclear power, and is effectively militarily occupied by the US to this day. People using Japan as a comparison to China are either naive or just coping with reality to comfort themselves
What on earth are you talking about, mate?
Thanks!

I think I tried Control+F, and maybe looking through menu items (it's probably there & I just missed it).
Since the beginning of time man has yearned to destroy the sun.
>Wallets are here to stay

Why so? UPI obsoleted all the private wallet apps in India. Won't FedNow do the same for the US?
Good photography is so much more than megapixel density of a sensor. In some cases, people don't want the photo to be super sharp (e.g., would show blemishes on a face). Additionally, there are some who make their photos look as much like a painting as possible. Why? Because they aren't going for maximum detail. Instead they're going for a certain look or 'feel'.

Digital photography has done wonders for the average person by way of the smartphone. However, I would argue that except in very few instances, it hasn't necessarily made professional photography better (in terms of the final photo). By the way, I'm not saying that it hasn't brought some improvements to the process (it certainly has). There has been some phenomenal photographs produced before digital ever hit the scene. It has made it perhaps easier for the professional in that they can take more photographs in a specific span of time or have more dials to tune the style, but those things don't make the photographs automatically better.
Thanks!

I'm excited to hear that there's support for expanding it.

And I'll definitely go back and take another look at it! :)
Our CI test run includes mypy; even in the mode where it skips certain checks, it finds subtle, non-obvious bugs time and again.

I run mypy as a part of Emacs flycheck mode for Python.

Switching on a static analyzer is usually somehow painful, because old code does not typecheck, or has issues that static analysis discovers but which never get triggered in real life. You have to face constant (and rightful) nagging until you fix all key parts of your code so that the static analyzer no longer has concerns.

In his regard, Python is noticeably behind Typescript, because TS's type system and other amenities allow for more complete and precise descriptions of invariants that hold in the program, and which static analysis tools check.
Given all the stories about how Meta is struggling with its Metaverse offering, I don't understand why Microsoft would want to get tangled up in the failure?
Lisp can be ahead of time compiled, being dynamically typed doesn't impact that. It does impact what gets generated by the compiler. Compiled CL code is usually "generic", it has logic inside that helps it dispatch based on the dynamic types during the runtime but this is not interpretation (in the sense meant by TCL, Python, and others). You can also specify the types and a compiler can, optionally, make (or use) more specific code which should error on a type mismatch but can run faster if you give it the correct, restricted types.

As to your speechlessness regarding compiled Lisp, here's a quick example:

CL-USER> (defun foo (n)
(+ 1 n))
FOO
CL-USER> (disassemble #'foo)
; disassembly for FOO
; Size: 35 bytes. Origin: #x53641724 ; FOO
; 24: 498B4510 MOV RAX, [R13+16] ; thread.binding-stack-pointer
; 28: 488945F8 MOV [RBP-8], RAX
; 2C: BF02000000 MOV EDI, 2
; 31: 488BD3 MOV RDX, RBX
; 34: FF14250001A052 CALL QWORD PTR [#x52A00100] ; SB-VM::GENERIC-+
; 3B: 488B5DF0 MOV RBX, [RBP-16]
; 3F: 488BE5 MOV RSP, RBP
; 42: F8 CLC
; 43: 5D POP RBP
; 44: C3 RET
; 45: CC10 INT3 16 ; Invalid argument count trap
NIL
CL-USER>

(SBCL was used for the above)
Don’t get too far ahead of the results, but yeah, this makes things extremely interesting.

From the paper:

”However, whether these models encode, retrieve and pay attention to information that specifically relates to behavior in general, and to comprehension in particular remains controversial”

edit: Mapping from a statistical model directly to one specific individual’s brain may turn out to be intractable for things like brain implants.

But, the chances are pretty good that there will be strides made in unexpected areas.
I think it has more to do with getting around benefits, usually.

The expense for businesses isn't just the salary, in fact alot of businesses, if they could just pay the salary, would be able to retain / hire more people, but benefits + high salary is harder to take on.

This is a great argument for universal healthcare and a nationalized pension system, but I digress
Begs the question where should I use my "very" then?
Arguing against slavery and for freedom is dismal?

I presume that, in supporting slavery (in the West Indies, with the intent of increasing productivity), Carlyle was not himself intending to apply for the position...
I used it once with my wife to see what it was, all it seemed to be was EXTREMELY LOUD MUSIC playing over various things, it was annoying. Not everything needs music. We didn't last two minutes.
I am not yet "very old" (still not 40 :), but I've been called that by much younger folk, and I even joke about being "very old" in different social settings.

It's obviously a relative term, so I would hope this isn't considered "rude" more generally.

Even objectively, if life expectancy is 75 in a region, saying that someone 70+ is "old", or someone 85+ is "very old" sounds "correct" rather than rude. Is "very young" rude as well?

Is it rude to say that someone is very short or very tall? I mean, that 6ft basketball player is very short.

Yes, some will take offence at any objective statement of fact, and some of these are cultural (tall is good, short is not; young is good, short is not), but if your point is not to denigrate, then you are not rude imho.
Economists don't favor democrats but rather seek reality, and the argument that conservative viewpoints are somehow not present in universities, especially in economics departments where Marxists econ profs and Austrian econ profs dine at the same tables and chair the same candidates, is both hilarious to people who have lived experience there and somewhat sad for those same because to communicate reality to folks espousing the silliness that conservatism is under attack at universities is not worth the effort. Truly a shame. Dinner parties are ruined by similar conversations around religion and politics, yet neither matter when the grill is ready.
Reminds me of the Maas Tunnel in Rotterdam.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastunnel
That missing separator bug in GNU Make
Not accurate. There are journals that try to evaluate impact and there are journals that focus purely on scientific validity. (PLOS One is a journal that has become famous for doing the latter.) The passage you quote is just the journal signaling that it's in the second camp. It doesn't mean the peer review is any lighter than at impact-focused journals.

It's a good thing for science that not all journals are impact chasers. Scientists are by definition not perfectly reliable evaluators of impact, because science is about exploring the unknown. Publishing work that's only passed a technically focused peer review allows for unexpected impact.
That doesn't work unless you also eliminate all cars under direct human control, which is not practical, possible, or desirable.

And BTW, forcing adoption of automated cars only will quickly lead to situations like the one where you can lay down a chalk line around an automated car, and it winds up being immobilized to avoid crossing the lines. Far worse sabotage will ensue...
I am using it and really loving it, but yes, it's concerning that it hasn't been updated in a while and the project might abandoned.
> and I know what you're going to say, but Matrix actually does really well.

I'm actually a fan of Matrix. I just see Matrix and Signal as different tools. You're probably aware of it, but if not, there is a Matrix bridge for Signal.

> But you've got me thinking about the data export option. Saturday is coming. Hmm...

Hey, I'm really hoping it works. Let me know how it goes!

[0] https://matrix.org/docs/projects/bridge/mautrix-signal
Him succeeding would mean no Twitter buyout. Though probably the board and/or the management would be sacked
Do you really think I didn't google before?

> for productivity, there's basically no measurable impact detected in studies, positive or negative

As I said, controversial at best.

But you're not being completely honest here. Most research is either inconclusive, or says dynamic is more productive. It is nearly impossible to find research that says static typing is more productive.

Which is quite obvious today, Uncle Bob and Steve Yegge were talking about this since 2000s.

https://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/is-weak-typing-str...

https://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=4639

> with just a little additional syntax

Unfortunately a little additional syntax easily turns into this:

f(): Array<Promise<ServerResponse.Response<Proto.Response>> | undefined> {...}

I didn't even get to the function body, and I already used multiple levels of my mental stack. Ugh.

And gradual typing is the worst. It is either a terrible idea, or at least a terrible implementation (looking TS/mypy). It combines the worst of two worlds.

The only viable benefit of gradual typing is making dependency hierarchy explicit.
You could set up something like https://github.com/godaddy/tartufo in a pre-commit hook. Not sure if github has a way to hook into the push hooks on server side, they might though.
I think we have vastly different values and even if we agreed on the same set of facts we wouldn't agree. Interesting talk, though.
> I think people need to look more carefully at these PaaS guarantees and look at what that 99.999% reliability Microsoft are claiming actually means.

Hypercloud managed service SLAs: all the fun of novel complex, technical solutions in production + the transparency of cast iron + the pendanticism of being a contract lawyer

Which leaves exactly zero people who are excited to be at that intersection.
I wonder what Montgomery Burns is charging for his consultation.
That’s already how it looks though… I’m confused
That's kinda surprising given apparently it was only a few months back that iPhone's market share finally surpassed Android in the U.S., and it bodes pretty well for Apple's long term future - are there stats on how often people change between Apple/Android (and is it predominantly in a particular direction)?
(FWIW I think I went through two iPhones 15 years ago when they first came out I guess, but found their screens overly prone to getting smashed and switched to Android/Samsung, lots of reasons I doubt I'd ever switch back now, though it's certainly not impossible).
They love active solutions that distract from the fact that the only permanent solution means there can be no more oil, gas, or coal companies.
You're not wrong :)

Did you miss the aftermath where Google pulled the rug and people's game data was lost (or would have been if Bung and Ubisoft didn't dive and save)?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33057354

(11 days ago; 159 points, 198 comments)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/2022/10/02/ubisoft-bu...

Disclosure: my submission
nope it's 100% the boomers up to their usual antics /s
Paying for services doesn't mean the company is no longer able to track you. If anything it's worse, you're paying monetarily and they're making extra money with your data...

Edit: also a paying customer is way more valuable to advertisers because unlike your average Facebook user you're actually willing to pay for stuff :(
Tories have always hated the NHS which is a great pity. Years of cuts have left us with this disaster and it's going to get worse.
In the first case all of the money is donated. Handing money to people to buy nets would absolutely be counted as programs.

I think that givewell and charity navigator are valuable things. The charity that receives the bulk of my giving is considered highly efficient by both. But I do think that a narrow definition of efficiency does limit certain kinds of charitable organizations.
The underlying writing issue here is that people will use "very" because the sentence feels too bare and simple without it, so they add "very" (or "really", "extremely", "truly", etc.) as a way to add interest and emphasis. A good example of this is that they have "incomparable" for "very unique". "Unique" and "incomparable" are synonymous, and "very" isn't necessary here at all, but the latter word may have more punch.
The website's design is great and simple with no explanation needed of how to use it. Would be snappier if it matched on words automatically so I wouldn't need to press enter.

I noticed with my own writing the use of lazy structures, such as too many adverbs, very, "statement, but concession" sentences, or parenthesis for tangents.

It isn't that these things are always bad. It was only when reading my older works I realized how much I was over-using these that it made my writing as a whole worse. My way of thinking about things, imagery for scenes, everything was getting impacted by the constant use of those sentence structures. Your thoughts can't help but be impacted if you're upping the "impact" of each emotion, phrase, description to be "very" or "lovely purple".

Its OK for descriptions to stand on their own, and the same is true for simple words. A blue coat, the sad man, the lone frog in a pond in the rain.

Write different; you'll be surprised how much you think different, too.
Historically military slang referred to the “regulars” which was the way to say “they guys you call upon to get dirty” and would mean different things depending on the army… a British regular would be a redcoat conscript, a US regular would be a militia volunteer from one of the colonies.

Guns were not issued to citizens, but were owned personally. It makes sense that the resulting law would read “we want the ability to have a militia and have those guys bring along their guns”. Especially because there was no standing army at the time, it was envisioned that the US Army was simply a way to refer to a conglomeration of state militias, not an organized Army.
Here's the thing chief: I'd rather go to the office than use the metaverse to work. And I really don't want to go to the office.

When I see this space, I actually think Roblox and Fortnite are doing a much, much better job at pushing the "metaverse". Metaverse defined as some kind of enclosed expandable universe where people spend large amounts of money and time in. Imo, targeting children and young people is a much more effective strategy because they are the ones that are open to these kind of experiences.

What Zuckerberg is trying to do is teach old dogs new tricks and I don't think that's really going to work out very well. Working people tend to be on the 25-50 age range and these people have already gone through a massive shift in "the way we work" which was the shift from always-in-office work to stay-at-home. Is Facebook really pretending like these same people are going to go through yet another monumental shift and move to a virtual-reality work? I don't think so.

In any case, maybe by the time the roblox kids are grown up they might want to engage with the facebook's metaverse. But these are the same kind of people that are ditching all things related to facebook. So I do wonder if facebook is targeting the right people at the right time with this massive project. Though they do have a good point in the interview: people will be much more likely to try this out if they're given one of these headsets "for free" by their employers. But the employers, the ones that make decisions are going to be people who are currently millenials/gen x and even gen z and not the children that are currently growing up with roblox.
BLOCK IT OUT!

For those that don’t get the reference:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Shot_Mr._Burns%3F
"Since the dawn of civilization mankind has yearned to destroy the sun!"
How about a way to reflect HID headlights on 3'6" high front end trucks?
A few off the top of my head:

Go - https://go.dev/

Python - https://www.python.org/

Rust - https://www.rust-lang.org/

React - https://reactjs.org/

Framework - https://frame.work/

Hegel - https://hegel.js.org/
The first random one I got was simply incorrect:

very + old = dilapidated

And several others weren't much better:

very + helpful = essential

There are definitely words for which "very" is unnecessary and an alternate would be better, but in other cases the intensifier is actually the right choice.

And if you do want to reduce your usage of "very", at least check a dictionary before you trust the site's output.
That's an interesting take; I haven't ever heard that argument used a defense of the Jones Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920 , which is the classic example of protectionist/anti-foreigner-employment legislation.
Those aren't the rapid climate interventions this seems to be about. This about injecting massive amounts of material into the atmosphere and/or ocean.
I feel like stratospheric aerosol injection would have some crazy unintended side effects. The size and complexity of the atmosphere is mind blowing. A mistake here could literally ruin the atmosphere for the entire globe.

Reduction of Carbon Emissions is and always will be the best strategy to slow down global warming. These moon shot initiatives are necessary but should not be taken too seriously given their low probability of success.
Really great stuff, I would love never having to interact with python ever again and this is a nice to see.
Mismeasure Of Man?

SJG is underrated.
The constitution assumes the government will be run by bad people. Hence all the limits it imposed on government.
I'm in the UK and I've noticed the same thing. I have a job, but currently looking for something else at the moment as it's looking quite unstable.

I've been getting maybe an email or two a day from recruiters and I haven't received a phone call in weeks, which is at lot less than I would usually get. I emailed two recruiters back this week with my CV and neither replied. I'm fairly experienced too (12+ years) so I was kind of surprised. Normally I'd at least get a call back.

It didn't seem too bad a couple of months ago, but this last month things seem to have really slowed.
Solar panels heat the earth: https://www.greenbiz.com/article/giant-desert-solar-farms-mi...
Please don't resist too hard.
Not in a recession only in the sense that recessions are self fulfilling as people stop transactions

But by several other metrics we are
Have you tried to call an electrician or plumber recently? Assuming you can even get one on the phone, they can basically name their price for any job.
Billing seems much simpler though. If this comparison is apt, it's not a great look for Stripe.
Community is keeping this aughts Wikipedia gadget alive
Notes from the road: America observed at 70mph
but why is it your backup option? Any reason you don't use it as a first option?
That’s a very hard prediction to make. The most expensive part of software is maintenance and it’s not decreasing over time.