skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> "The Swami retorted that if Watts was really enlightened, he would feel no suffering, not even a pinch."

This article really is a hatchet job. It's the worst take with the worst references to source from. Enlightened has nothing to do with not feeling pain. The article goes on to judge his personal life as well as his children. The article quotes Alan as having not been a good father, but who can say they have lived the ideal?

This is the same kind opinion piece that would call Mr Rogers an evil man [0].

[0] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fox-fred-rogers-evil/
Is this really an alternative to Emscripten? It the README makes it seem 100% Python focused. I want to switch from Emscripten to a more maintainable, modulare WASM build tool - how would I go about porting a simple C->WASM w/ Typescript library project to CoWasm? Does CoWasm support asyncify?
> How much would Boeing pay to reduce the weight of an airplane by 1%?

I don't know but this seems like a trivial decision given how many metrics they must track about the relationship between weight and capacity/fuel cost - either you pay less than you save, or you don't pay it.

> How much would Ferrari pay to make their F1 cars 1% faster?

Probably a lot, but this is a (somewhat literal) Red Queen's race.

> How much would car companies pay to be able to make 1% more fuel efficient cars?

Probably nothing, their precision is already several times that. Empirically, they also don't care much.

> How much would your electric bill save if rates were reduced 1%?

Less than 5 euros a year - though this year maybe more, could be as high as 10. So, negligible - not even worth the time to write this comment, probably.

Overall it seems like "1%" is often a fairly meaningless measure and I'm not sure what any of these examples are supposed to illustrate to me about compiler design or language choice since the context for each seems to matter more than anything else.
My personal experience is that, while you’re absolutely right for startups, large multinationals and companies that don’t see themselves as necessarily tech-first still use it as a selling point.

I don’t know if it is effective to do so or not, but I do see it highlighted on job ads/recruiting landing pages.
Great point. Renewables are getting cheaper, but are still interment and require baseload power. They also require significant investments in grid infrastructure, with costs borne by governments and utilities. Additionally, equipment must be recycled and discarded after ~30 years.

For perspective, it takes about 1 unit of materials to generate 2 units of power from wind and solar. Significant resources are used, often on land that was formerly growing food. Oil and gas are roughly 10:1 in terms of output, with nuclear around 100:1.

~85% of world energy is currently non-renewable, relative to ~87% at the start of the millenia. Even if the world suddenly started building hundreds of nuclear facilities and blanketing the landscape with solar, wind, hydrothermal, and hydro, these investments will take decades to come into effect.

Easiest solution is to tax externalities and let the market efficiently allocate resources. Charge 100, 200, or even 500/ton for carbon emissions, allocated globally. Distribute some of the proceeds to low income countries who are still developing. Every 100/ton in taxes is ~3.5B, which could be distributed to the majority of the world who subside on less than 20 dollars per day.

Furthermore, tax air pollution. There are ~10m deaths annually from air pollution, primarily due to fossil fuels. Not to mention shortened life and health complications for the majority of the planet. Air pollution taxes could generate another couple billion in revenue.

Finally - stop subsidizing both oil and gas and renewables. Current incentives are riddled with loopholes and tax breaks. A mix of carbon and air pollution taxes would efficiently incentivize far more renewables development. Viola - more renewables and a cleaner world for eons
This is true. I had a friend who programmed part of one of SpaceX's satellites, basically working as an unpaid intern. He spent 80 hours a week working on it non stop, sleeping in the lab, all while finishing his undergraduate CS degree.

The same thing with Elon's Hyperloop pod competitions. A completely meritless future technology still saw millions of free man-hours poured into being the creators of the first step into the future. As smart as everyone who participated in it was, the prestige of everything Elon blinded them.
>I’ve also been approached by a handful of folks from VC firms and while I have nothing against them, I’m not taking any meetings. I’m not interested in selling influence over the things I work on, and I’d much rather have many small donors who believe in me than one huge investor telling me what to do.

I wonder why. I love SerenityOS but it doesn't seem the kind of thing a venture capitalist would be interested in
Agreed. I don’t understand all of the “Can’t believe I have to pay (X < $10) for $service”.
I can understand being annoyed by logical fallacies in the arguments being made, although I wouldn't point to a Wikipedia article for a good example of it in general.

The K3 argument doesn't depend on directionality. If you use a lot of the energy in an entire galaxy for something you will alter the energy signature in all directions. You would expect more waste heat, and a dimming of the overall energy output. This is just basic physics. It's similar to detection of Dyson spheres or other mega engineering structures.

You can argue that they know physics we don't of course. It's certainly true that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
...and if you want all of CTFE, allocate memory and nogc at the same time, then yoh are screwed.

C++20 has limited support for allocating at compile time.
Having read the materials, it seems misleading to call it the invention of assembly language. More like the invention of machine programming, i.e. what the paper calls "coding of problems", i.e. turning a problem into machine code.

The mapping of machine code to symbols seems completely ancillary, and as a side comment says, without the demonstration of an assembler and an intent to translate in the other direction, it is premature to say any language has been invented, vs. notation for writing a paper.
Fingerprints are unique in the technical sense (i.e. no one has the exact same set of fingerprints) -- but matching is a completely different issue.

I don't know how far forensic science has come since a decade ago when I learned some of it, but at that point they were running "feature matching" instead of full-fingerprint matching. In other words, they looked for aberrancies (e.g. "islands," "deltas," "bifurcations" etc. at specific spots), and then checked those against a finger-to-person database. Then a list of possible matches would be found, if they also contained some set amount of same features in the same places.

There are two main issues here.

First, while taking an optical scan can provide very high-resolution images of a fingerprint -- field data is never like that. Fingerprints that are collected usually are not uniform, and dependent on pressure applied by the finger(s) in question and the amount of oil left behind (which powder sticks to "reveal"). Because of this, you're never going to get a perfect fingerprint in the field. Some areas will be faint, misleadingly separated (and even have false artificial aberrancies not present on the original finger), or outright missing -- leading to less "features" to check against. Others will be completely "blotched" out by a high amount of oil, removing vital information.

Second, you will almost never get an exact match because of this -- you will be getting a list of possible matches. I can remember one notable case of a terrorist's prints being wrongly attributed to someone who could never have been at the scene, much less anywhere near the country -- but was still whisked away by (I believe?) Interpol. Forensic evidence is just a piece of numerous possible stories that can be spun up any which way. There's something to be said here about human biases, incentives, and so on -- but I think it's intuitive enough (and frankly, I don't want to write more).
Yes, there's a difference.

One is mostly about getting a conviction - of anyone - so that you look like you're doing a good job. This is a real and strong pressure faced by politicians and law enforcement.
Use Hatchbox. With Linode. I love it.

https://hatchbox.io/
at the bottom of the barrel these people have moderate amounts of money and _noone_ to throw it at
Quest Pro – Impressive Hardware with a Value Proposition That’s Kind of a Mess
The Pantone colors used to be included with Photoshop. Now you need to pay for an extra subscription to use them, and it's retroactive: if you open any of your old .psd files without the subscription, all of those colors get replaced with black. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33369951 has a big discussion about this.
Youtuber "DIY Perks* has a great bellows case. Totally top of their game maker. Great DIY camera has made the rounds. Their awesome ultra super softbox slays me though.

Their bellows case is ultra well done. Looks crazy quiet. Would be interesting to see energy efficiency.

[1] https://youtu.be/C3GKe7eXbPE
My theory is that a lot of the "empowerment" philosophy is not very compatible with "dating and relationships". Most of the advice is "take time for yourself" and from my experience "time alone" is one of the last things a potential partner is willing to give you. Rightfully so? But I can see how people, regardless of gender, that are very self-sufficient and occupy their time with hobbies they enjoy would eventally sour on failed relationships due to the time investment required that they were unwilling to give. Finding the correct balance remains a mystery.
As sibling comments said, 50% faster means adding 50% of the nominal speed, so it's 1.5x the original magnitude.
> HTTP and Email are extremely narrow

HTTP is virtually running the World as it is.

I wouldn't call its scope narrow.

But probably I wasn't clear enough: we just need a way to access data and documentation.

You don't need to know what kind of web server is running when you send a request and the WEB server don't need to know what kind of client is sending the request to answer.

Interoperability is easy, if there is the will.

If there is no will, let's mandate it by law.

I don't see the problem.

Your argument is: the perfect solution is impossible so it's pointless to even try.

Which is provably false.

Even more so because software interoperability existed, before companies started to lock everything down, to push their proprietary tracking soft... ehm apps.

same reason they killed RSS

I could connect to Goggle or Facebook chat with any XMPP client back then.

WhatsApp protocol started as a a modified version of ejabberd (XMPP server).

etc.

Nobody asked for perfect.

Flawed is still better than no solution.

Human body is deeply flawed too, we don't renounce to live because we have to die anyway.
Prohibition and the temperance movement in general enjoyed wide popular support, and many states had already introduced restrictions on alcohol before the constitution was amended.
Ask HN: What are some great items you own or want?
Is there anything you have that makes life better, or work easier?
On top of that, consumers still pay financially for ads since the price for them is built into the price of the products and services people buy.
cattle?
Watts and Osho were on the same wavelength when it comes to imparting their own definition of religion and philosophy. Both had their human flaws and didn't care. Their message was and is still sound (no wonder they are popular on YouTube).
For self-installing the thermostat. Previously, pretty much all thermostats had to be installed by a technician, they made it so you could replace your old one yourself.
You are thinking in UK terms but UK and EU are not analogous. EU Commissioner can't really make some big decisions and almost crash the economy like Liz Truss.

Anyway if somehow the EU commissioner manages to be bad and needs to be removed ASAP the EU parliament, which is made of the directly elected officials, can remove the commissioner.

EU is undemocratic and the members can't do anything about EU is a myth like Brexit is removing the red tape myth.
$85-$158/MWh is not theoretical, this is real life utility scale installations.

Tiny tiny residential scale battery installations have that 5x markup that you are observing.

If you were to build your own, it's not hard to get to $300/kWh-capacity, all in, these days, even for small installs of a dozen kWh, using Chinese LFP batteries. But you won't get any of the support that your local installer gives you, and you had better know what you are doing really well...
As written in the article talking salaries in Sweden is avoided, so there are probably many offers in that range.
The recommendation is for Sweden in general though, not Stockholm. It is for any kind of engineer, where IT is above average.
What do you mean it looks legit?

You think "gilimp.org" is legit website for gimp??
It's been 12 years since Amazon announced their free tier, and it's still going strong.

https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2010/10/21/announ...
This kind of sycophancy is disgusting.
I can say that back in the glory days of Nokia Mobiles they certainly got lots of money, you can find this out easily by checking the company history.

They can certainly play for Heroku.
C++20 has limited support for allocating memory at compile time. The allocations can't be leaked from the constant expression context, so that limits usefulness.

There are proposals to extend it, but there are some non-trivial const correctness issues to be solved there, AFAIK.
If your problem with Heroku is the price why would you use something that is even more expensive?
Some weird (probably made up) measure of "brand".

Is missing Saudi Aramco, for instance.[1]

Edit: I see the Visual Capitalist source page explicitly mentions brand. The intermediate page distorted what it was linking to.

1. "On 11 May 2022, Saudi Aramco became the largest (most valuable) company in the world by market cap, surpassing Apple Inc.[13]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Aramco
What's for you won't pass you. Maybe you just needed that message, at that time, in that way.

That said, I'm glad you're able to identify and parse out the less positive aspects of his perspective.

If you're looking for a similar no nonsense, but without the more controversial and negative aspects I recommend looking into David Goggins.
They mention their personal projects in the article.
1) That's not at all what he said. 2) In his message he also mentions that he is short on time and would be willing to elaborate on why the code is flawed as well as collaborate on getting a polished implementation of WG into the kernel a week later. 3)
As mentioned by the article I linked, he did follow up on his promises: https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/wireguard/2021-March/00649...
SAFe not only keeps middle managers employed and feeling important but also forces lots of unnecessary pencil pusher type work on the engineers and designers. It's a strain on all parts of the organization that are forced to use it.

This is why most companies will abandon SAFe after a couple of years, like the case studies show. I have personally left one employer (a bank) because SAFe made the job unbearable.

Both this company and their larger competitor abandoned SAFe after a couple of years. I now categorically ignore any gigs and openings at companies using SAFe - it's a glowing red flag to me.
That's more than enough unless he lives in a big city. At one point I even bought a waterfront apartment walking distance from downtown in a medium sized city making a bit less than him. Things are pretty affordable here. The taxes thing is just FUD/propaganda. (Well, ignoring the energy crisis that might be about to hit us hard that is.)
> This one’s notable in that it puts an entire passage in quotes, but it turns out the passage was not in Cheung (1983) at all—not on page 8 or anywhere else in that article—it actually came from a collection from 1998 of old Harvard Business School exam questions.

One of my pet peeves is the chain of citations that will inevitably spawn from this. No author can be bothered to go find the original source and just cite that, so this inaccurate (and since retracted) quote will end up propagating itself for decades if not centuries, with each author citing the work that they got the story from. Eventually, hundreds of years from now, someone will be crazy enough to try to work their way down the chain to track down the original, only to discover it isn't there.

For an excellent and humorous example, see CGP Grey's search for the original Tiffany: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qEV9qoup2mQ
That can't be true, or everyone would be paid in gifts and donations. (Anyway. He has to report his donations as his self-employed earnings.)
IMHO, the real DNA analysis is credible.

The problem is that there are some attempts to make weaker test and try to confuse people so they think it's the real test. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_profiling#Partial_matches

Quoting the Wikipedia article:

> We can see no reason why partial profile DNA evidence should not be admissible provided that the jury are made aware of its inherent limitations and are given a sufficient explanation to enable them to evaluate it.

That sound good, but every time I read it again it looks more and more fishy.
He said that? Sounds like straight out of David Graeber. (I agree.)
> In terms of OOM, there is little point of discussion here, you're too far out in left field, too far from the admin world, to even hear me.

I'm not sure why you feel the need to attack my experience, but I maintained an internal Linux distribution for a Fortune 500 through the transition to systemd, managed fleets of 10-100k concurrent hosts, written hundreds of systemd units...

You're simply fighting against the grain. As a systems administrator, systemd helps you get stuff done. It's very powerful, and almost every feature can be simply ignored if it's not for you, which is great. The problem is that so much is intrinsically coupled to init. Want to start per-user daemons at user log in? Manage logging uniformly without the pitfalls of traditional syslog? Define reliable service state targets across network state changes? Isolate subsystems? Zero-downtime deploys without writing complex application daemonization logic? Portable services? Snapshots? Peripherals? Not to mention all the incredible work to make multistage bootloaders (and single stage!) completely integrated. Straightforward to debug, patch, build yourself.

It's definitely the worst, except for every alternative. I'm sorry that you find it so miserable. You linked to Ubuntu, so if that's the bulk of your experience, I encourage you to try a better managed distro. Debian, Arch, NixOS, or roll your own.
They do, it's called "COBOL."
Terra Nova Expedition
In the UK eating example, it would be better to examine the feature-space singular vector associated with the first singular value instead of instructing the reader to "go back and look at the data in the table". PCA has already done that work, no additional (error-prone, subjective) interpretation needed.
And yet, all battery makers are continuously reducing the need for expensive materials in their cathodes, because humans respond to incentives. Never bet against human ingenuity.
No, that's not what markets are saying. They are saying "build more extraction capacity" but they certainly are not saying "there are fundamental limitations on lithium supply"
Jordan Peterson is a mixed bag; a little good, but a lot of bad.

The good: Some of the rules from his "12 rules" are legitimately good advice that I wish I had embraced sooner in my life.

* "Treat yourself like you are someone you are responsible for helping." (this is just good advice)
* "Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to who someone else is today." (mixed bag on this; a shoulder chip was a great motivator and learning that I'm not an imposter and never was has made me healthier but it's harder to motivate myself on work I'm not interested in),
* "Tell the truth – or, at least, don't lie." (I lied to myself a lot when the facts didn't support my beliefs; that was a mistake).
* "Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don't." (I started learning much more quickly when I realized that I didn't know everything).

The bad: Peterson doesn't live up to his own rules and confidently asserts expertise in areas far outside of his area of knowledge and when pressed he'll serve up some word salad variation of the absolutely mind-destroying (for young minds) position that "there is no right answer/it's impossible to know what's true so you can ignore that evidence that contradicts your beliefs" (paraphrasing based on things I've heard him say on climate science, epistemology, science, biology, etc).

Also, he really likes pushing some pretty racist or offensive theories when far more plausible explanations exist without being grotesquely racist. For example, in this clip [0], Peterson and Stefan Molyneux (a deplatformed eugenicist, as you may infer from the clip) assert genetic are the explanation for differences observed in IQ testing when grouping by race. Peterson just asserts that genetics are the cause of the measured difference, even though that theory is contradicted by many studies of twins [1] that show socioeconomic status has far more explanatory power than genetics do. Further, the difference in socioeconomic status by race is a direct consequence of explicitly racist federal housing policies [2] (seriously, ctrl+f through this underwriting manual for the string "racial"; it's explicit about the intention to push black people into ghettos far from economic opportunity, while creating economically prosperous and racially homogeneous neighborhoods for white Americans that have natural defenses against "infiltration of inharmonious racial groups", all by only underwriting mortgages for homes in racially homogeneous neighborhoods located near abundant economic opportunity). Why would Peterson assert some races are genetically inferior when the facts invalidate that hypothesis and much more explanations that haven't been refuted by reality exist?

TL;DR: Peterson is not a good role model. If you need a role model for coming into adulthood, you can do much better than Jordan Peterson.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HPiDbPjUzg

[1] http://ibg.colorado.edu/cdrom2016/franic/Moderation/Lit/Turk...

[2] https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/Feder...
You raise a good point. Self-love and extreme ownership are orthogonal. You can practice extreme ownership and hold yourself accountable for your life, but you do not need to do it in a toxic self-destructive way. I've always held myself to a high bar and would often harshly berate myself when I did something wrong. Now I do it in a healthy constructive manner while still holding myself accountable.