skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Particulate emissions are a solved problem nowadays For coal plants at least in Germany (see the purple bar in this graphic https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/38...). Traffic, wood burning and dry goods like gravel are the biggest sources currently.
The bigger issue is the CO2-emissions.

You’re not thinking far ahead enough for nuclear waste. Bad actors aren’t the only issue.
It’s entirely possible that people don’t know what they have in front of them, as can be seen with the Goiânia accident. Places for storage can turn out to be unsafe, for instance in Asse, an old salt mine in Germany there was a water breach leading to the creation of a radioactive salt slurry.

We have to safeguard nuclear waste for thousands to millions of years. So far states have only existed for hundreds of years in a consistent form. 30000 years ago Neanthertals still roamed the earth. It’s not impossible that societal collapse somewhere hinders safekeeping leading to containment of large landscapes.
> I am a minimalist and I live phone-free!

I tried that in an interview. They never called back. /s
The best check and balances against the government forbidding you to use your money is having cash. No need for a third party intermediary.
One thing I worry about is if the uncertainty around copyright violation cools down activity in open models while raising the price of commercial offerings. Commercial entities can afford devoting resources towards mitigating copyright violations such as eating the cost of maintaining a database of frequently copied code and identifying most likely origin combined with a large semantic database of code snippets.

An open equivalent might be wary of being accused of contributing to copyright violations since in that scenario, there is no way to force people to respect it.
Passive Cooking
Where in the heck do you live?
Even my kids school had a portal for payments. My yard guy does get paid by check. But I do that via bill pay and the bank sends a check. Even independent painters take Venmo cash app or PayPal
Is that a gitea feature or codeberg only?
I'm not against infrastructure to support walking and/or cycling. I'm an avid cyclist. I thoroughly believe people will bike/walk more if there is support for it in their neighborhood.

But is it serving as a car replacement for those people? I'd wager not due to a variety of factors. But I'd be curious if there was evidence it was for any significant percentage of them.
Sure, go increase those fines haha. In the meantime..
The land rush that wasn't tangible, is useless.
Can we first get an AI that's actually usefull as a Getty substitute? All I'm seeing posted is visually pleasing nonsense - as soon as I tried to use it for stuff like stock photo generator it's unusable (eg. key physical properties of the object would be off to the point where the object is useless, and in many cases it would look wrong even from a thumbnail).

The only thing I did see was designers cropping out the wrong part and filling in the blanks - I suppose it's competing with stock photos in that aspect.
And I deposit checks by taking a picture on my phone.
When you ask it a question, it will often simply construct an answer from the pages it indexed, so people don't have to click. Sure, it links it, but for what? Thankfully, the answers are almost always useless.
> If loading is interrupted by an error, the spinner just keeps spinning.

Only if written incompetently.
I'm not even being cynical --- this to me reads like: Sure, we will eventually shove it down your throat whether you like it or not, so there's no need to worry for the time being!
Absolutely incorrect, fair use applies to *reproducing* small volumes of work, not analyzing it. If I published an article gleaning some conclusion based on an analysis of 10,000 issues of the New York Times, that would still 100% be fair use; similarly, Google is absolutely allowed to publish word count metrics based on their scanned book repo, even though publishing the books themselves is not fair use. You are trying to read something into the fair use doctrine that is absolutely not there (to the extent that anything is there, which very little is other than "I'll know it when I see it" and prior case law, unfortunately).
To first order I think the explanation is just conversation of angular momentum. The moon earth system has to have it's angular momentum constant over time. If the moon is further away in a stable orbit, the earth must rotate slower.
It's explained here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_acceleration
Haven't seen that work in practice...
Missing the forest for the trees. Computer architecture courses often expose you to things like: caches, memory and storage hierarchies, I/O, software/hardware interface, parallelism, Amdahl's law, pipelining, vector processing, prefetching, speculation, synchronization, clocking, interrupts, vector processing, data encoding, stream processing, virtual memory, general virtualization, isolation etc., etc..

If you care about execution time, responsiveness, efficiency, or reliability, these things matter.

If you're doing systems programming, they are essential.
Exceptional Creatures – Ruby Error Handling Guide
> The current UI will remain available for at least two years, and we’re not going to remove it until we’ve seen that the vast majority of our users have successfully made the switch to the new UI. Also, very few of the design decisions you see now in the new UI are final, and we’re open to revisiting them based on your feedback.

I smell the Reddit moment of "well, we see that you hate it so we won't remove the old one, we will just subtly break it in more and more ways till we brownbeat you to move. After all we can't say we wasted money on redesign to our bossess" moment.
to be honest, not sure why they have to explain themselves. started using JetBrains products when Eclipse became a monstrosity. this is not the first time the UI has changed. and it has always been gradual, with options to customize.

they don't have to explain themselves here.
AI research is basically just “the history of computer science”. Alan Turing’s Imitation Game being an apt example.

I don’t think AI research in a vacuum is as deeply unethical as you suggest. It’s about current societal context- people won’t like being worse at things; resources will be hoarded rather than distributed.
Sure. The earth is spinning faster than the the moon is going around the earth (earth rotates in one day, the moon goes around in about a month). When the tides transfer energy and momentum to the moon from the earth's spin, it slows down the earth's spin and gives the moon more energy. This moves the moon to a higher orbit, so it moves a bit farther away from us. The source of energy for the whole process is the earth's spin. It takes a lot of energy to lift a moon, relative to the amount of energy in the earth's spin, which is why it has such a dramatic effect on the day length.
Wow, that looks pretty much exactly like VS code!
I feel like even 51 minutes might be too long to wait before invalidating stale instrument data on an aeroplane...
"The whole interface is going to feel like turbulent molasses"
If you can fire people faster than they can quit, it doesn't count as attrition. Retention metrics are UP! Promotion is on deck!
WSJ just copy-pasted some internal documents that someone at meta (allegedly) sent them. That same internal report claims there are 200,000 active monthly users. Nothing was verified. IMHO its just a waste of time when so called news organizations just regurgitate things without verifying anything. It may be the flavor of the month/decade to hate on Meta, but this same shit applies to more important stories that impact all of us.
This isn’t just about OSS. If I have a public repo on GitHub without a license, you can’t rewrite that code and put it in your project. I own the copyright. The issue is that Copilot will still launder it into your project for you.
What constitutes a copyrightable creative piece varies. (And in a lot of places of course algorithms can't be patented either)
Makes the stalling on releasing 1.5 publicly more understandable. Hopefully they won't become the next "OpenAI" but the material incentives are not aligned with public releases.
After years of using IntelliJ I finally moved to VSCode.

IntelliJ simply could do C/C++ but they chose to push people towards a new IDE... C Lion. That was a huge blow for me, a polyglot.

Then I had a couple of bug opened with them... it took years for them to fix it. Except they marked it as fixed and it was indeed not fixed... Years later!

I kept paying until that point, I just couldn't do it anymore.

The company is a victim of its own success if you ask me. And that's a shame.

VSCode isn't perfect, but it does 90% of what IntelliJ does, and arguably 40% of it better. Also VSCode is faster which still boggles my mind as to how that's possible. I suppose the buttload of cash that Microsoft has thrown at it probably helps there... Since IntelliJ went through their "milliseconds latency blabla" years ago, it's gone downhill.

I imagine that retina pixel displays + java 2nd class child on the macOS platform = big oof (pre-metal).

I dream of a native vscode-like IDE...
I go to rural areas all the time. I have yet to see roaming charges and I have T-mobile. I don’t have data roaming charges anywhere in the world - just slower data outside of North America.
I've done that without issue in the past. It's argument compatible so never seemed to be a problem
There is one case where you can be "worse" off using tor. One student hacker got caught be because he was the only one using tor on campus so that identified him https://www.forbes.com/sites/runasandvik/2013/12/18/harvard-...
I believe the argument is that you shouldn't accept arguments against the use of copilot from people unless they have tried to use it. In a realistic context. That seems reasonable to me. It's the bare minimum to make an informed opinion. I think the wording was perhaps poor, but I think your interpretation is a little reductive/disingenuous.
Absolute bullshit. Not that communist countries were particularly environmentalist. But the US has mastered the art of offloading negative externalities to the third world while pretending to care about the environment. On the whole, the US is probably the most disastrous nation state to ever exist in terms of environmental damage.
I see two sides to standardized components. One is their efficiency and lower cost. The other is they lock in technology. The Soviet Union used standardized components which made many things easy to repair. The same electric motors were used in a wide variety of machines. But it made it very difficult to innovate because it was harder and more costly to use anything but the standardized components. If you needed a new size of electric motor you had to convince a standards committee that it would be useful in a wide variety of applications.
Similar to how some countries today are benefiting from starting with a mobile internet rather than a wired one, a standardized and widely adopted technology base can be a barrier. Maybe some day we'll figure out the absolute best way to make everything and we won't care so much about making new technologies. We aren't there yet though.
This sounds really cool; maybe slightly cleaner than an INSERT ... ON CONFLICT statement. However, is that the only advantage?
+1. And let's not forget too that "AI", that is, ML models, are not "autonomous" in the way that humans are autonomous. Sure, we use the word "learn" to describe what they do, which is one word that we also use to describe what people do. But ML models are always wielded by people or corporations for particular purposes.

If a corporation was to directly publish some copy that appears plagiarized, we'd call that plagiarism. I don't see how adding a piece of code—one that's fully created, owned, and wielded by the corporation—as an intermediary changes anything. If anything, it looks like plagiarism-as-a-service, which seems worse (at least to my eyes).

Of course, this matter is a bit confusing. Because, for example, (1) it's not always plagiarism, (2) defining what exactly is plagiarism even in the purely non-technological realm is difficult (and likely somewhat subjective), and (3) there is a lot of corporate marketing which suggests this "AI" is "autonomous" (presumably to distract from who exactly is autonomous in this picture). And of course ML art is quite useful for many things. But I mean, so are artists.

Not long ago, a lot of Silicon Valley rhetoric was that the purpose of "technology" was to free up time so that people could be more incentivized to "do what people love to do" like, for example, artistic creation. But now it seems that rhetoric was just that: rhetoric, or what was needed to be believed/said at the time.

And now at our present time, when technological "progress" has been followed a bit further (that is, when we've developed our machinery a bit further under the incentives of our present economic system), much rhetoric has conveniently shifted to something else, something largely contradictory, but again precisely to what is needed to be believed/said to continue following the same incentive structure.
Literally the last thing I want in my IDE is anything to be animated.
If the moon wasn't drifting away and was in a static orbit, would the Earth's rotation slow and the moon's orbit speed up to the point where they're in sync?
No kidding.

It should read: "Don't code review for things that can be more effectively tested in other ways, and lean on other correctness methodologies as much as possible."
I finally figured out Twitter (2009)
The law does not concern itself with trifles.[0]

Programmers tend to think of copyright as a Boolean valued function. Either something is infringement or it isn’t.

Judges think of copyright infringement as a real-valued function of many arguments corresponding to the circumstances of the parties (e.g. what actual damage was done?).

A human quoting a human without attribution, without any profit made or identifiable damage, returns an infringement value very close to zero. Such cases, if anyone is petty enough to bring them, are likely to get dismissed.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_minimis
Not really because most often when working with APIs you figure out what you need then you disproportionately more time using it - UI is used for triggering short running operations - if the cost of finding it is high it's often higher than (not) using the tool. And often it's used to interact with rarely used or unknown features - UI clutter just leads to a mess - not discoverability.
My naive guess is that most floating point code uses FP32 and FP64 uses at least double the die size. So optimize for FP32 and have some FP64 for the rare equations that need it.
Why is VSCode eating their lunch? IntelliJ’s refactoring is miles ahead. As well as support for the jvm languages. Intellisafe and jump to declaration are also better imho.

The only thing that I can think of is that vscode is free and “good enough”. The integration for JavaScript and golang seems to be more “natural” in VSCode, somehow.

If you are using the free IntelliJ tools you get a crappy js editor when using the rust or Java specific IDE. Now I need to install another IntelliJ app.

Also I like being able to run vscode with a dev container. It allows new team members to instantly start working on a project and grt most things done.
Does the latest version of Tor Browser still leak info by contacting Firefox servers? ( https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/applications/tor-browser/-... ).
Actually those boards are a very popular secondary source of income for politicians. Boards are supposed to also supervise compliance to law, but often you get the feeling it is the other way around: make law comply to company interests. Not saying that the system is all bad...
Could someone explain to me in what why Kubernetes is complex and what alternatives are simpler? I’ve worked on non-k8s systems before and in my experience they all hang together with custom bash/python code which although line-for-line is ‘simpler’ it makes it harder to onboard new people and is less robust (excluding very simple deployments)

K8s is very modular in my experience so if you don’t need something you can easily ignore it and not pay a complexity cost. Nomad does not seem much simpler to me (especially because you basically have to pair it with Consul and Vault)

I am genuinely curious.
I know plenty of small businesses who would love to get rid of cash because of employee theft and robberies.
It's a little surprising that these UI choices are not a matter of user choice. Although when you think of the complexity of making a truly skinnable UI, or a component framework (I'm thinking Swing and the pluggable look and feel, or PLAF) Swing that IntelliJ used to be nominally written in. In that universe you could have made your own PLAF and rendered IntelliJ in that PLAF without asking permission.

It turns out, though, there is a lot of value in homogenizing your application skin. Users can recognize each other's applications, and help each other out. Whole categories of problems are avoided, like poorly written custom components that aren't PLAF compatible. I don't have the answer, but I find it interesting to consider the forces pushing for and against putting greater UI control in user hands.
You want to protect your privacy yet you watch Netflix that tracks everything you watch….
You are thinking too small. With enough 'nukes' we could suck the carbon out of the atmosphere, and use that to make syngas/synfuels for the applications where it would be impractical to replace them. That alone would be almost carbon neutral. Similar for hydrogen production by electrolysis and process heat
for many industrial applications.

Oh, and mass production of carbon zeolithes to regenerate the sucked empty agricultural fields, to make them into something like 'terra preta' without having to use too much fertilizer, instead of uselessly sequestrating it somewhere underground.

Terraforming, so to speak. Like the 'atmospheric processors' from Alien II(Aliens).

edit: Instead of thinking all the raw materials for wind,solar&batteries grow on trees, without any externalities, sustainability problems, and no emissions at all. Which is a fucking cargo cult!
A curious effect of this is that total solar eclipses past and future look different from total solar eclipses today. We live in a time when both the Sun and the Moon are roughly the same size (~32 arcminutes) when viewed from Earth. This coincidence results in the image we associate with total solar eclipses where the Sun’s corona is visible as a ring around the Moon.
I think it’s also probably because it gives people a “predictable” way to do things.

That being said I sometimes ask myself why we can’t constantly think KISS and YAGNI. Like, do we really need this level of abstraction and complexity? I’ve been “working” with k8s and I would probably fail any interview on it because I feel like I’m always googling my way through issues. I don’t even care anymore because I know for my own purposes outside of work, I keep my code and systems stupid simple.

And maybe this sounds cringey to some but I’m happy to write a few scripts on my own to handle deployments without needing to break my software into a thousand pieces. Single responsibility code using a few languages that are best suited for the task at hand (in my case it’s mostly node, elixir, go) that’s easy to break apart and ship separately is so nice. Why can’t we do the same at work?

Oh well, I’ll collect my check 2x a month thanks.
What was discriminatory in the "We will not act on complaints regarding" section?

* ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’

These aren't real things though - they're usually brought up in the context of methods to try and address underlying biases due to historical ("reverse" -racism, -sexism), or that I have never even heard of anyone claiming 'cisphobia' so I am unaware of when/how that would be claimed.

* Reasonable communication of boundaries...

Seems like there's nothing to discuss here at all - once a person says "stop talking to me" you can move on

* Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts

No one owes anyone their time, this is all stuff that has been covered extensively, and is easily googleable.

* Communicating in a ‘tone’ you don’t find congenial

If anything this seems lax compared to many current CoCs that expect/require professional communication. This is "person X came across as angry/belittling/dismissive and it makes me upset" isn't something that they'll act on.

* Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions

e.g the CoC won't act on someone complaining that someone else criticized racist, sexist, cissexist, etc behaviour.

Again, I fail to see the "exclusionary/discriminatory" rules.

I see the bigger issue with this section is that it makes an explicit list of things that don't matter and will be ignored. This is tricky as it means they ignore things that I would say should not be ignored, and vice versa. It also kind of means any kind of assholery that comes up in future isn't explicitly covered, so what rule applies?, etc
The WiFi Coconut is a router’s evil twin
No.

You can also dissent.

You can also resist.

And if newer is worse (for you), it's your obligation to do so.
Large companies are done with huge k8s clusters. Now every app team and their SRE team rolls out their own k8s cluster. I am not sure whether these companies are solving Google scale problems.
And please stop using QWERTY. Well, of course you are not able to do so but at least do not teach next generation that there are no other layouts.
Does progress discriminate against those who don't adopt new practices?
TOTP tokens on my wrist with the smartest dumb watch
> It’s why private arms ownership (in the millions) and ability to use cash (also in the millions) IS one of the (only effective) checks and balances

Yes because private arms ownership is all it takes to fight a government with access to tanks, missiles, drones, and unlimited resources.
What tests are "necessary?"

> no awful regressions are introduced

What are those?

> with sufficient confidence

How much?

> Having hundreds of tests for trivial functions

If you can have _hundreds_ of tests for trivial functions, either the tests are redundant or the functions are not trivial. So which is it?

How do you communicate what you think you know to neophytes on the team other than very lossy generalizations?
Maybe they could make it a user-choice between the old and new GUIs.
Docker is indeed looking for a "unpigz" executable to use:
https://github.com/moby/moby/blob/c9d2b7df777b38f7239a882c27...

So interesting if they implemented and tested that and get only a marginal CRC speedup.

edit: someone here seems to observe a ~ doubling with unpigz vs zcat: https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/363739
I was recently looking at some data about day lengths, and basically it all boils down to the fact that the earth doesn't orbit the sun in a perfect circle, which causes slight accelerations and decelerations; along with its wobble. That wobble as I understand is due to the effect of tidal forces due to the moons pull on our ocean.

Tropical/Solar days = 24 hours

But

Sidereal = 23 h 56 min 4.0905 seconds

Why the difference?

Because of those prior mentioned forces causing the location of the sun to be slightly out of alignment from where it started the day prior. Or something like that.

Tropic/Solar days are determined by the position of the sun, as per the name.

Sidereal are based upon the position of the stars. or so I understand.

To be clear. I am not an expert. I am just regurgitating what I read from NASA.
Huh? If you buy the full IntelliJ you get all the modules. It’s no different than running CLion.