skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There is other evidence of changes. But the evidence connecting climate change to CO2 is purely these models. If there's so much evidence, surely you can find evidence for this connection that isn't circulation model?

Code quality is extremely relevant. These models are nearly untestable. Climate is too chaotic and these models don't predict anything successfully on short timescales, and some of them don't predict anything on large timescale either - look up the term "flux adjustment".

So at this point the entire trust in these and the entire narrative comes from a code that any experienced programmer with physics knowledge would never put the faith of the world economy on.

Do you know what's even worse than not stopping a human made climate change? Destroying the world economy just to find out that it did not solve anything and still end up with worse climate but without economic power to deal with it. Somewhat similar to coronavirus lockdowns.
> I'd argue the biggest impact is on... the crab population?

The biggest impact of a lower crab population is a lower crab population. That's tautological, makes no sense, and why the article doesn't mention it. The decline in population already happened.
Company Documents Show Meta’s Flagship Metaverse Falling Short
A pi is not simply “a few tens of dollars” as you also need to buy a power supply, monitor/tv, keyboard, mouse, etc
> single engineer group

oxymoron
"The Floating Potato"
> Talk about producing less disposable crap, driving less, flying less, and cutting military budgets

That comment illustrates the problem pretty well. We could do all those things and we'd still be way, way behind on what climate scientists say we actually need to do, to avoid disaster.

What we need to do is reduce emissions to zero in less than thirty years, with steep declines starting now. That's not just electric grids, it's all transportation, industry, direct emissions from steel and concrete production, agriculture, everything. And then we need to start pulling massive amounts of excess CO2 back out of the atmosphere. Going to the moon was trivial by comparison; without a breakthrough in cheap fusion or something we're not likely to achieve all this.

SRM isn't a solution but it could buy us a little time, before higher temperatures get the planet releasing gigatons of CO2 and methane without any further help from us.
You're right, that's actually what we implemented, application-level hooks, but they needed development and maintenance effort that come for free with the adapter we're using for OpenSearch integration, which also comes with welcome features: synonyms, partial matches, and many others.

Spoiler, the adapter is Searchkick: https://github.com/ankane/searchkick
Well, on the one hand, Chinese manufacturers (90% of the market) have announced expansions for 2022-2025 of 645 GWe annual production, over and above 2021's total annual manufacturing capacity of 220 GWe.

On the other hand, likely all of that will be needed to meet Xi's 2030 target for PV power generation in China. (12,000 GWe capacity, up from 800 now? Something like that.)

So near exponential but not much slack for others to use, probably.
Absolutely agreed. No road markings, speed bumps also not marked. Lack of road signs, potholes, what about non-clearly defined sidewalks, because nature has taken most of the sidewalks' blocks or even overgrown with grass.
How Testability Supports Your Agility
Cars and trucks continuously degrade the roads beneath them. The infrastructure requirement is never satisfied -- it requires constant, very expensive upkeep.
I mean, 1.3M people die every year in road accidents. Real number is likely far higher since reporting isn't uniform across the world.

That's at least one reason to warrant the investment.
Never heard about RUM extension, I'll give it a look. Thanks!
What frustrates me about the software industry is the many failed lineages problem. There are many mountains of code that get the job done at various companies but isn't shared. The lineage of these in-house frameworks or effective solutions to problems kind of don't go anywhere, they simply end. The lineage ends and doesn't cross pollenate. So lessons aren't shared. We are in an era of explosive growth where there is a new framework or new library or new technology introduced.

I learn from whitepapers and reading English descriptions of people's problems. I find this easier than reading someone else's code. Code is extremely powerful but it has a very high maintenance cost and change costs. Just getting up to speed on the Postgresql codebase or the Linux kernel or any other system tool is hard work and an investment.

You kind of need to work 40 hours a week to get familiar with a codebase to be effective in it. But I can get familiar with a problem outside the context of a codebase by reading a whitepaper and writing some code. Reading a whitepaper feels more effective use of time than reading someone's codebase. You need to jump around a lot of code to understand the codebase.

I think the effort for the ideal solution is underestimated. People abstract to their own understanding. And that abstraction might not be intuitive to other minds.

I would prefer to work on a codebase that solves problems effectively than a codebase that is novel.
I'd rather see we remove all non professionnal motorized vehicles from the road and invest those billions in high frequency and coverage public transport. That would mean more accessible transport to everyone, including disabled people, less people dying on the road, safer transport for pedestriants, cyclists, bicycles, scooters, rollerskates, better emergency services who don't have to deal with ugly traffic.

Our world do not need one car for everyone.
economist.com
Designing a next-gen ionic thruster
Isn't pretty much everything supported these days? I haven't run into any recent laptop that isn't ac or without monitor mode available.
If it makes it easier, our title is Incubation Engineering, because it reflects better what we do: finding new areas to explore and kickstart, searching for new markets, or how to expand existing markets. We need to choose initiatives within our scope (mine is MLOps) that fit the scope of a person in a short period of time, and test the idea by putting stuff in production. Ideas that are too uncertain or risky to dedicate a full team on, but would make sense for a single person initially.

Other recent outputs of the team are CloudSeed[0], improved GitLab pages setup [1] and Code Reviews for Jupyter Notebooks [2]

- [0] CloudSeed https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/incubation/clo...
- [1] https://about.gitlab.com/releases/2022/09/22/gitlab-15-4-rel...
- [2] https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/repository/jupyter_n...
How does Groonga compare to it?
What are you referring to? Was the link changed and if so, why?
I think computers will become superhuman at driving under the right conditions.

However, there will inevitably be conditions that require the use of general intelligence (rather than driving heuristics), and in those situations all you can do is pray the computer acts rationally despite not having GI.

I think self driving cars have already passed the test of "number of crashes" or "number of fatalities" per mile driven. But I don't think that's enough to sway the public, if every once in a billion miles a self driving car slowly drives off a cliff for no apparent reason.
Substack has been great for this. Lots of long-form blogs, some of which readers pay directly. Journalists like Matt Taibbi and Matt Yglesias are there.
I haven't used one in a log time so can't recommend anything. I'd be surprised if they were hard to find though.
A) people want transportation as a service without the human of a taxi or driver, not just for cost but comfort and not having to associate with people (of a lower class)

B) creating a scalable transportation as a service business for profit and power (data)
not the parent, but the others who responded with "whataboutism". Holding one accountable to the same standards that he holds others accountable isn't wrong. I refuse to take anyone who raises the bogey of "whataboutism" seriously. It has the same validity as someone responding to an argument that it's wrong to make that argument at this time of the day.
Been using docker in prod for over 5 years now...
What's corr^w?
Although the support isn't amazing [1], I believe you can capture C-w and friends [2].

[1]: https://caniuse.com/mdn-api_keyboard

[2]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Keyboard_AP...
> hundreds of billions

Lol, is that supposed to impress? Tens of trillions, and you're talking money.

Global spend on oil and gas is in the neighborhood of $4T per year. Coal is another $1T. Per year.

$0.1T or $0.8T spent on making batteries, that last ten or twenty years apiece, is small change in comparison.

The argument is about who gets the money.
I'm also a proponent of nuclear, but modern nuclear power plants seem to take 15-20 years to construct and typically go 10s of billions of EUR over budget. So one does not simply "build a reactor".. look at Olkiluoto 3 in Finland, Flamanville 3 in France and Hinkley Point C in UK.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_(nuclear_reactor)
I just read the comments on HN (often without even reading the links).
UL2 20B: An Open Source Unified Language Learner
> Something that assumes its conclusion and doesn't explain anything is not even wrong...

No. It can be entirely right. It just isn't useful in any way.

From your link "Analytic Idealism is a theory of the nature of reality that maintains that the universe is experiential in essence"

Maintain all you like. It might even - per my prior statement on pan-psychism - be true. I want quantifiable evidence before we accept it as true. Cough up.

Anyway, thanks for the descriptions of the tech terms.
What is the value add of AVs if they are only restricted to well-understood, national roads? Wouldn’t their purpose be better served by high speed trains along those roads instead?

My (and Doctorow’s) definition of AV is so stringent because AVs need to deliver the same value add of regular cars relative to other forms of transportation: i) relatively fast, ii) unscheduled, and most importantly, iii) point-to-point transportation between any two points connected by roads. Trains are bad at iii), decent at ii) if run often enough, and far superior at i). If iii) is off the table, then the relative value add of cars is greatly diminished.
Crypto scam victims seek to hold Coinbase responsible for losses
Self driving trains would be far more achievable and practical…more tiny engines and smaller cars means latency and switching delays would go down. I don’t think it even needs much technology.
You mean like in this very article? ;)
A hyperloop is a much, much harder problem. Not technically, but practically. Just look at California's high speed rail and how that's gone - with that history, the idea that we could introduce hyperloops in US cities is, to put it only mildly punnily, a pipe dream.

As others have pointed out, millions are dying in car accidents now, so a "more compelling vision for the future" is much less important than something that can get done. While we certainly haven't seen the progress many have hoped for/promised on self-driving cars, I'd wager everything I own that we'll see a significant percent of cars on the road in CA operating autonomously before we see that high speed rail finished.
Momentum isn’t far left, the Communist Party of Britain is. Labour wasn’t taken over by Momentum, people that liked Corbyn joined Labour. And finally, antisemitism accusations were used cynically by the right of Labour for years, trying to equate anti-Zionism with antisemitism. Have a look at the Labour Files at least.

So not even a little.
Those can also be had for tens of dollars. But my general point was not about the Pi; it was that even poor teens likely already have access to their own Linux-capable machine.
Maybe he did. But a letter of intent isn’t the same as a contract. Yet it warrants the statement “funding secured”.
Too bad all the DNS traffic just goes to Cloudflare instead of using their own resolvers.
This leads to a circular problem: if we resist the notion that we're just scaled-up Petri dish brains (perhaps because we "feel conscious") how can we be sure the Petri dish mini-brains are so different from us? In which case, are they conscious after all, to some degree?
To play devils advocate:

€400M sounds a lot but how many of these devices are there? If there's one in every medical practice that could be 100-200,000. [EDIT: this article https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/emea/error-which-cause... suggests there are 130,000 clinics, that would be €3K per clinic]

Having a technician visit each and do a firmware update - could well cost over $5K or more, as long as introducing downtime at the surgery, the changes would need to be done by people who are trained and this is a device that is involved in personal medical data - they need to be managed and monitored.

Delivering a new piece of hardware with the new certificates that could be dropped in could well be cheaper (how ever bad for the environment) than updating them within the legal requirements that may be in place for tech that handles medical data.

There may be good technical and legal reasons why the certificates can't be updated remotely or are set to expire, but if I were the companies involved I would take in some devices, 'refurbish' them with new certificates and send them out to medical practices for drop in replacement, rather than sending out new devices.
But a lot of people freak out about attempting geoengineering at all, even at a small scale. There's a UN treaty prohibiting it.

No treaty prohibiting the emission of 36 billion tons of CO2 every year though.
CLIs are family of UIs, whose name is normally used to identify TUIs at a whole, while GUIs tend to identify ONLY modern GUIs, so ignoring the classic Documenti UIs and that's the trick.

My point is:

- modern TUIs, called by most CLIs, compared to modern GUIs (widget based GUIs and WebUIs) are more powerful because AT LEAST they allow limited easy user extensibility and composability (scripts and unix IPCs);

- classic GUIs, in the sense of document UIs, like Emacs, like old Xerox Tioga etc, on contrary can be called 2D CLIs in modern lingo and they are FAR superior both of TUIs and modern GUIs because they are "graphical" and they are even more extensible and composable than TUIs.

That's is. Modern developers regularly push toward classic GUIs without knowing them, think for instance how popular Notebook UIs have became. WebUI themselves as a "more like documents" widgets-based GUIs. Still are are far behind classic document UIs.
Hyperloop is crap, just go with highspeed trains. They get the job done in city corridors.

But you can't have a train stop in front of your house... Nor can you build massive tubes everywhere in place of cheap roads.

Walking, Bikes, Busses, Metros, Trains, Cars, Planes. They all have a place in how we transport, right now the distribution between them is just out of whack.
I was under the impression that you buy a cheap burner for whatever app is required and only use that phone for the required function and not put any content or connect services to it.
You'd think that GitLab would pause from chasing after GitHub's tail for at least long enough to question whether or not these features are ethical.
Laugh all you want. There will be a year of the Linux desktop
They wont go anywhere until theres a legal way for the company making the tech to shift liability to drivers for the odd chance it'll crash. That's the issue, that needs to be solved more.
Or the cost of not doing geoengineering might be higher. You can't just look at one side of the risks.
Senior engineer reported to management for failing to fix a stapler
I think non-human payloads make more sense for virtually every kind of innovation:

-- Radically reduced safety margins, if the vehicle itself contains no humans.

-- You can often move cargo at any time of day or night, and therefore do a much more sophisticated job of collaboratively load-levelling traffic.

-- Doesn't matter how uncomfortable a non-human payload is with in reason. Acceleration, cornering, waiting, daylight, motion sickness are all constraints that are eased for cargo.

-- It would be nice if you can move freight anywhere, but even if you can only serve a very limited network its still useful - say between fixed points in major cities. By contrast, a car that can't go almost everywhere is very severely limited.

Example: in major cities, all the freight moves in lorries, which are extremely dangerous and polluting. Meanwhile, the humans are packed into trains in underground tunnels. Surely freight should be moving in autonomous underground trains and the humans enjoying lorry free surface travel?
It means you have root access.
That's irrelevant as the real issue is that if anyone gets access to your device, they can then get access to all your online accounts.
Practically all the AI-assisted automation systems I'm familiar with, whether its identifying objects in an image or parsing documents, have the same problem. They work for 90-95% of problems but get trumped up by edge cases and a human has to intervene.

That's not a problem when you're transcribing a video, but becomes a matter of life and death when you're driving a car.
Every time this topic comes up, it reminds me of a web app I wrote back around 2007 that was deployed to a over 2000 locations. I deliberately used "boring" technologies. The entire front-end used under 100 lines of JavaScript. The backend was simply SQL Server, and the queries were written in SQL instead of some ORM. The output was just HTML. No special tooling was used, no "minification" or "tree shaking", or any such thing. Just hit the build button and "copy to deploy".

For about a decade I used to turn up to that customer annually for "maintenance", which primarily involved importing some CSVs that changed every year, and also updating the logo images and icons to match any rebrands.

In that time the system had two million users, went through 4 OS upgrades, 3 database upgrades, and went through the 32-bit to 64-bit upgrade also. The underlying runtime had 3 or 4 major updates, depending on how you count it.

Zero outages, no problems, only the occasional performance regression that could be fixed by poking the database statistics to get things back in their groove.

The problem was...

You see, all of the above was a problem, because it didn't keep me employed. I was not the "hero" for saving the day. Entire teams of people weren't involved. There was no visibility at the senior management level. Nobody got scared, or had to throw money at it, or hire consultants to review it.

So it had to go.

It was replaced by a system that cost about 500x as much (a 9-digit sum), got rolled back for failing to meet requirements, and then got additional funding and was eventually forced upon its hapless users.

That, apparently, was doing things "properly". That got everybody involved. Everyone got their beak wet. All the way up to government ministers and their lobbyists. Multiple consultancies were engaged. Reports. Audits. Reviews.

This is why we can't have simplicity: because it doesn't scale.
Just use a vpn
Is it a data problem? If you have data modeling every nook and corner of the world and every possible combination of human, objects, roads and traffic/ weather conditions, then the AI can learn. If not, it keeps getting confused, will enter private driveways or get bamboozled by traffic cones. Till then it will be an iterative process where the AV companies will keep learning from incidents like those described in the article.

On the other hand, I do think the biggest impact of AV will be in controlled environments like the mine dump trucks in the article or the relatively easier long-distance highway only trucks (AV trucks haul till city outskirts, human drivers supply into cities).
> You're stealing from companies that create economic acceleration to create economic friction.

At the margins, there's going to be some truth to this, but the kind of financier who is wowed by this kind of demo isn't skilled at telling what innovations are deserving.

> If we keep rewarding scammers with this notion that they're doing anything remotely of value, we end up with a society of Roger Stone and Trump types who are really good at seeking out and winning negative sum games.

I'd really drain a lot of money from the class of financiers as a whole and move it to households and non-financial industry. If we'd responded to 2008 with widespread haircuts on bad lenders and nationalisation of failing banks, instead of bailouts for banks and inflating the financial system via QE, we would have moved int this direction.

Musk is not a good example of the entrepreneur, but he's not in the same class as Stone, who kind of mobilised the Oath Keepers as his private heavies, or Trump, who depends on intimidation and personal dominance to run his business affairs.
> Sure but you can't legally sell a product using the leaked keys AFAIU.

I’m sure Chinese manufacturers care a lot about what the HDCP people want.
I find these numbers a bit weak. Your life is not a flat basket of goods, it's more of a graph (pyramid would say maslow) and today it's hard to get a flat but easy to get Gbps link on your flagship smartphone, but it doesn't make your life great in the end.
Maybe he did... What we know for sure is that he settled with the SEC and that a court ruled recently that there was nothing concrete and that it was inaccurate to say so.

"No reasonable jury could find that Mr. Musk did not act recklessly given his clear knowledge of the discussions."

"There had been no discussion about what the purchase price would be for a share of stock. Nor had there been any discussion about what percentage of the company the PIF would own or the total amount of money the PIF would contribute."

What we don't know yet is how much damages he will be told to pay.

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/court-...
How many people are even aware that there is a problem, and among those, how is it realistic and reasonable to expect them to simply "buy a new phone and create a new burner google account (if you use your own you defeat the purpose)"?
> existing infrastructure (roads) isn't going anywhere (no need to build anything)

I think that this is a sunk-cost fallacy. Sure, you would need to build infrastructure for trains, but after that trains are now reasonably automated, can carry cargo, and do other things with the exception of stopping at the exact destination you wanted to (in other words, it requires predetermined stops which people outside the US shrugs and just walk or bike the last feet). Also, they're proven to work: even China (which previously didn't have trains to its far-flung places) and they've done what you've expect. I think that the sole reason that anyone wants to invest in automated (non-train) driving is because trains are boring while AI is oh-so-shiny.
There are already many self driving trains operating around the world:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_train_system...
The article cites "gas and nuclear were labeled as "transitional" energy sources in the taxonomy".

So the news itself is correct but the headline abbreviates this very badly.
> "more tiny engines and smaller cars means latency and switching delays would go down."

Thorougly disagree.

The whole reason why trains are so efficient is due to their ability to haul so much weight in one go without practically any other traffic being in the way. Train track infrastructure could not handle multiple mini trains without more track which, as we know from the excessive road construction for car traffice, does not solve the congestion issue.
We're already making massive interventions to a complex system. It's way too late to get all precious about not messing with it; now we have to muddle through and make our best guess about what set of interventions will do the least harm.