skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Would you not say that there's many many people that don't truly understand the intricacies of what science is and what it's become, but still follow it without asking questions?

Academically, I would assume that for the majority of people, science was something you were taught to trust growing up, being told that scientists have your best interests in mind while they spend time finding out everything about the world and coming up with reasons/theories for the way the world works and interacts with itself. The world wouldn't be anything without science, they say.

Religion is based on a set of beliefs, followings, teachings, determined and taught/shared by "qualified" individuals like priests/pastors - followers were raised from a young age to follow, internalize, and spread their faith. The world wouldn't exist without God, they said.

When you go to church (catholic in this example), you're asked/silently obligated to donate to the church when the collection plate is passed around. You're giving money, and debatably power (in form of money) to the church to keep spreading their beliefs.

I think it would be foolish to assume that there weren't rich kings/countries hundred of years ago giving money to the church to influence certain activities/actions through religious decree/law. I would also be a fool to not believe the church would influence the governments to act in certain ways based on how much power the church had had to control/influence it's followers.

Today, we have numerous examples of corporations lobbying governmental and scientific institutions to push whatever is the cause de jour. There was corn syrup lobbying in the 2010's and who knows how far back, you had the food pyramid in the 90's that heavily promoted food groups that the USDA itself was subsidizing.

There's so many outside influences, blind faith/trust, etc. etc. that I feel comfortable in todays day and age saying that society in general "trusts" science like they would "trust" a religion to keep them safe and alive, and healthy - and therefore this "trust" can be exploited to invoke fear, uncertainty, and ultimately convince people that the harm they're going through or the actions they're being forced to take, is for their own good - with the other followers chastising or guilting the others or "non-believers" into believing what _they_ think is the truth.

Do you kind of see what I'm getting at? It might seem completely odd-ball to you, but it's how a lot of people interpret and understand what's going on. Science isn't this 100% true, be-all, end-all thing because it will _always_ corrupted by governments, corporate interests, NGO influence, etc. etc. etc.
This is very insightful. Thank you for all your work!!
It stifles innovation because anyone who wants to use a new connector has to lobby some EU bureaucrats.

How long have we had to click through cookie consent popups on every website? You’d think the EU would be able to update their laws to fix something so simple and annoying. I expect their phone connector standards to be administered with similar competence.
One of my favorite Perl features that has been disappointingly under-appropriated by other languages is quoting with q(...).
Not knowing the exact details doesn't conclude it's not a neural net. Anyone saying otherwise wants to debate religion instead of facts.
> It’s amazing how much more effective a 10 line change to App Store rules was in protecting user’s privacy than a bloated 99 section 11 chapter law - ie the GDPR.

You should remember this in the future, when Apple have become even worse than FB in terms of advertising. Device growth has stalled, and services (i.e. advertising) is gonna be their new iPhone.
I too find that many mysteries become clearer when you look at them through the lens of the constant class warfare that is being waged. All too often in only one direction.

I'll be honest - I didn't use to think the rich/powerful thought like this. I thought it was just the tragedies of capitalism and the invisible hand needing more protection from market failures.

Then I worked for a billionaire's small company for five years right out of college.

Now I recommend "Wage Labor and Capital" to anyone who I think will be able to manage it's low-two-digit number of pages.
Reminds me of people wearing t shirts and shorts mianing “Call this British Summer Time”, I think they got the time zone mixed up with the weather.
> This isn’t about what you think, your opinion does not define what’s moral.

Err that's exactly what my comment was about. I was sharing my opinion on what I think is moral. If you don't want to hear my opinion on it why are you reading the thread?

I'm not threatening to codify this into law and enforce it on others if that's what you were worried about lol!
I promise you that it’s not. Maybe I’ll rethink this somehow, I just am trying to protect against bot traffic. Tying activity to a specific user makes it easy to ban access is all.
Why do you care about climate change when the world is going to end in nuclear war before we even hit +1.2C?

Don't question my projections, if you do, you're just rearranging deck chairs on the titanic.
Any jeans I've had that are actually made the same way they were in the early 20th century last. Levis on the other hand.
Note that California police steal millions a year
Absolutely. I don't discount that technically lightning is inferior in every way now. But the actual physical connection I think is superior. I would love USB-C with the physical lightening port.
As someone in the Apple ecosystem looking out, I disliked that the 30-pin connector replaced FireWire, but understood it was thinner. That connector then stuck around for around 10 years.

Look at nearly every other device manufacturer when the 30-pin connector was being used - Palm, Motorola, Samsung, LG, Sony, etc. all used proprietary connectors that were not only incompatible with each other, but often didn’t work between devices from the same manufacturer. There was no devices to replace (except chargers), because no accessory makers would take the risk of 30 SKUs to support devices that wouldn’t be sold in 6 months and whose bespoke connectors would vanish with the device.

Late in that evolution, device makers decide to standardize on micro-USB, but even that “standard” didn’t last as long as the 30-pin connector.

Lightning was almost universally better (unless you wanted audio and power easily from the same connector), and it also lasted for around 10 years.

USB-C hasn’t even been around as long as lightning, so even though most devices have standardized on it, it has a shorter product life than Lightning has had. Even now, it’s still a mystery to me whether a USB-C adapter and cable will charge my device or fry it.

I’m hopeful that USB-C and whatever charging standard du jour sticks around for a while. The physical connector seems robust enough (though Lightning’s single metal block with no flimsy plastic blade seems pretty optimal), and small enough (again, Lightning).

The idea, however, that Apple is always changing cables when they’ve had two (2!) over two decades is an amazing feat. It’s suboptimal that they were proprietary, but the idea that there is a mountain of e-waste because of them ignores how long they were compatible and the effect of their ubiquity had on accessory makers.

I welcome a new USB-C world, but really think the issues with the 30-pin and Lightning cables ignore everyone else in the industry. I’m also concerned that when USB-D is released, will this legislation prevent device makers from adopting it for stupid legal reasons. This seems specifically like something that should be left to markets.
The issue is that the definition of a recession is vague, subjective, and as a term has become so politically important. If the definition was objective, verifiable, etc, then there wouldn't be room for the idea of political manipulation. I wish that society would not place such high value on terms that are so murky. It encourages discourse where the truth is not important.
Yes, this is real GDP, meaning adjusted for inflation. [0]

[0] https://www.bea.gov/news/2022/gross-domestic-product-third-q...
Sounds a lot different in firefox and chrome. Not bad in either but don't know what the more accurate one is.
As soon as: a) you precisely define "very different" AND b) versions 464 and 465 of Firefox and Chrome are available, we can continue discussing :)
I mentioned war in response to your comment relating to mass killing. Again, it's not ideal. But it is necessary, evil as it may be. Like capital punishment.
> They've switched every other non-iPhone device to USB-C

The only device I know of that started out on lighting and switched to USB-C was the iPad, and that was specifically because they're pushing it as a "creator" device, for which people needed to be able to plug in things like flash drives, SD card adaptors, cameras, mice and keyboards, etc. There's significantly less drive for those kinds of accessories on iPhone
> those "inalienable" rights mentioned in the Declaration of Independence

/me not subject to USA law.

I've already said that I think "rights" are a fiction; so to me, inalienable rights are an inalienable fiction. Just because they've been written down doesn't make them real.

What are these rights? (I'm not asking for their enumeration; I want to know where they come from, what they're made of, if you like). I did philosophy at University (a long time ago), including a module on political philosophy. I don't know of any basis for the notion of a "right", other than privileges freely granted by others.

So, for example, I have a right to a state pension; I've paid for it all my working life, and I'm over 65. But the government can infringe that supposed right simply by passing a budget that abolishes it. It's a privilege, not a right.

The US constitution claims to protect these "rights" from infringement by legislators, enforced by the Supreme Court. But I have to say, the Supreme Court nowadays looks more like just another legislative body than a superior appeals court.
Inflation means GDP can grow, with expenses growing faster.
There are libraries like Lombok that will generate the getters/setters for you via annotations. But tbh still feels very cludgy.

Why not add some first class immutable structure syntax to avoid need for getters/setters at all. Just so many better languages to choose from these days, Java is too far behind. And where they bridge the gap, they tend to do it in an awkward way.
We just had gone through an unprecedented global pandemic, there's a war in Europe that might become a world or nuclear war, and there's been unprecedented floods and draughts in many key regions of the world. I mean, it's good that they turned out to be wrong, but I won't blame them for expecting a recession in 2022.
> Example: you're granted 1 share today to vest in 1 year. In 1 year the share is worth 100, it vests and you pay PAYE in this (it can either come from your salary, or by selling the stock). If the stock rise to 150 and you sell it after, you pay CGT on 50.

Huh? Can you actually keep the stock and give revenue the money out of your post-tax? I wasn't aware that was possible.
Thanks! This was by far my most advanced PCB design so far - lots of reading and research involved. Pretty proud it worked at first try.
The FBI desires that you are referencing through Trump have been policy goals since the 80s when source code had to be exported as pages on a book. So it rings false when you claim he's just another president. You do get into your real reasons at least, but the soapbox betrays the real nugget of the question. Why cant we have a policy discussion because someone must derail it with their absolute need to tell us how badly they disagree with him.
This is true. Hard to call them “smartphones” by the current definition though. Blackberries were internet communicators, useful for work, calls and e-mails. Beloved by professionals for their utility, tactility.

Apple made a successful bet that multi-touch screens/UI done with sufficient discipline could be not an enormous pain in the ass to use. And that a well groomed AppStore would create a plethora of opportunities for change. Without Android quickly following that model we wouldn’t then have the arms race of functionalities. This is probably something Meta is hoping for - that this time around they will have a better seat at the table than they got in that smartphone arms race. I’m looking forward to all of it.
Thank god the world is warming. This means a greener world, with more food for everyone. We are just coming out of an ice age; it would be muuuch more worrying if global temperatures were getting colder. Cold periods climatically tend to be associated with famine and war.
The reason has less to do with share of revenue and more to do with stalled or weakening performance in the business’s core value offering.

Facebook loses users of genuine content consumption to tiktok. Amazon has smaller baskets checking out. Google threatened on its buying into default search on mobile safari.

Ad revenue has padded earnings and shielded these companies from investor critique and urgency in “what’s next?”
So the post pointed out that home sale prices were increasing in time in terms of the performance of the asset class, and I pointed out that homes were growing in size, and you seem to have fixated on the age of the house rather than the fact that in 1950, the average home was almost 1/3 the size of the average home of 2022, and therefore you would expect it to be much less in price just on that basis alone.

I am not sure why there is a cognitive barrier in understanding this. When you buy a home, the performance of that asset will not benefit from comps of much bigger homes that are sold in the future. Is this really confusing? Why am I hitting a wall here? You need to look at price per square foot data if you are going to be doing comps across time, because houses are always getting bigger, but the house you buy is not going to get bigger.
> What lie exactly? Scotland had produced enough to power itself twice on Wind alone.

Doesn't say much for a variety of reasons:

- Even in Scotland, there's loads of days where there's "no wind" - on those days electricity has to be generated by gas or other means. So practically speaking as wind cannot be guaranteed it is impossible for Scotland to not generate carbon, via wind alone.

- As usual for breathless wind articles, completely fails to account for heating - which in Scotland makes up the bulk of domestic energy consumption and most homes are heated by gas combi boilers.

- Also as usual, neglects transport - another huge proportion of energy consumption

- Scotland is a best case scenario - it is very windy relative to other countries. It doesn't have a huge population. And as part of the UK national grid it makes sense to build a lot of wind capacity within Scotland. But then looking at statistics for Scotland in isolation doesn't really make sense - it should be done at a UK national grid level rather than trying to gerrymander things.

Wind is fine for reducing gas consumption when it happens to be windy. But if you really want to tackle climate change, you need to tackle having a need for gas consumption at all, and wind won't do it.
Depends on the model you have for how the universe ends. If that.

Certainly information on humans dies with the nuclear total war.
When I hear it from business leaders, there are three logical reasons 1) exposure to the housing market 2) poor performance by the company (its the economy's fault!) or 3) an excuse to trim fat from a high-margin company that's aware of how bloated it is.
Actually that para jumped out at me too. But more for style. As a kid and late into my adult hood I really sucked at writing. The kind of suckiness where you are deluded about your prowess based on length of prose!

Then I found Roy Peter Clark's Writing Tools book. Full of snack sized tips that can be used independently. Heavy curtains lifted for me. I felt regret shame and optimism all at the same time.

Reason I bring this up is one technique that got stamped in my mind was variation in sentence length to build suspense and action. This article (this para in particular) to me seemed like a masterclass in that!

Oh yes definitely +1 on the insinuations!
Good idea. There could be categories or priorities.
Oh man. Somebody always gets a way to make problems out of the entropy of diffusion. It increases with the log of the concentration, so whatever problem you estimate to happen, it can be worked around.

On the case of silicates, a trivial work around is to just spread them around and let the same diffusion bring the CO2 into them.
sfpd seize.
I bought RM2 last year and sent it back within 2 weeks. It is just a way too isolated experience for me - next to no connectivity sold as a “feature”. Instead I went with a Android-based Boox e-ink tablet, which allows me to run OneNote, Edge and OneDrive on it. All the connectivity with a similar writing and reading feel as RM2. Plus, RM2 also charges monthly for their subpar Cloud services.., I cannot recommend RM2
There seems to be a misunderstanding here, backups in cloud storage are a fraction of the cost of data in Firebase. I used to work with a 300GB Firebase instance and we never worried about backup costs.
I've been waiting for the real estate market to crash for 20 years... On the other, my savings are worth less and less.
I find your comment suprising. If by "explain" you mean "being able to control and predict", I would say that Skinner explains a helluvalot of the modern world, doesn't he? Facebook, Twitter, and even Hacker News work on positive reinforcement. One could argue that this has become one of the most dominant forces in our culture, spanning from advertising to politics.

I get that Skinner stopped being "cool" in the 70s when Chomsky et al appeared. But I have yet to see a Chomsky train a pigeon to play ping pong.

How do you think he was wrong? What model do you believe explains things better?
https://archive.ph/RvjW4
>It's a continuum that we are likely very low on.

This is said often, but there is no evidence for this. It's just a kind of cynical self-hatred.

A civilization that directly visits us, which would mean having some kind of interstellar travel, would be, yes, more intelligent. But we have no evidence of that. A civilization that has dispersed some kind of Von Neumann machine to watch over us, yes, would be more intelligent. But we have no evidence of that either.

I've seen a few (optimistic) calculations using the Drake equation that puts anywhere from 2 to 50 possible intelligent civilizations in our galaxy. Those are some seriously large error bars. Stretch this out into the total number of galaxies, then yes, I can easily see there being another intelligent civilization in the Universe. But interstellar travel is already difficult. I'm pretty sure intergalactic travel is more than "just a little bit harder." But to assume that it is likely that we are low down on the intelligence scale is utterly without basis. It's just as likely that we're the best the galaxy has seen thus far.
One time my mother ordered a power cable for an old coffee maker, I think a Revereware percolator or something similar. I remember she found one specifically for it and waited for it to arrive so she could test this and re-sell it. I took a look and it's just a regular ATX computer power cable (type C13 but I had to look that up), and I was like, I've got a pile of those and could just have given you one.

People just don't realize what are standard cables vs what are bespoke for their application, and this sort of thinking has bitten me personally as well.
I spent five years at Facebook (2013-18) and the best move I ever made was to ignore the existence of my shares until 2017. But yeah, generally the right approach is to diversify.
Once you get to a high enough level in chess it's a ton of memorization. It's not that deep.

Some games are shallow but lots of games have far more depth than chess.
The Stack – A 3TB Dataset of OSS
I have a tagging tool for HN and the more used tags are: big-tech, oss, cryptocurrency, dev-language... The only missing tags are "climate" and "entrepreneur".

Edit: the perfect headline would be "How Facebook acquired my climate friendly cryptocurrency startup, rewrote it in rust and open sourced it".
That's fair, that example would be better with a modest timeout (e.g. if podman had a bug that caused it to hang), without taking away from the main points. Updated.

Someone asked about the opposite on Twitter: https://twitter.com/DannoHung/status/1585350836074446869
They're placing all their bets on their meta quest pro and pushing people into the metaverse.

Complete control over that environment, combined with the new vr headset's eye tracking+other sensors, would likely make them the best A/B testing / irl ad performance data platform on the block... if it's successful.

Imo, they haven't really proven their case for their metaverse, the price point for the headset is wayyy too high for mass amounts of users to join in, and likely wouldn't join anyways since I'm not on fb/ig and don't trust em
Wow, this is the future.
YouTube opens up a verification program for healthcare professionals
Oh, that's really interesting!

We've got containers running for each instance of the runtime a user needs. And for now we just keep them running forever as long as the project is up. But that's very inefficient, and we're definitely looking for a better way to do it.
Did you try getting directions on a smartphone in 2004? How about showing your grandma how to send an e-mail in 2004 on a smartphone?

You gain nothing - not right now, not today. Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is saying this stuff works today.
Do you understand that a dike is a thing you build, not just find?
Do we have any evidence any of those are filters. For (1), there was practically no gap between the development of powered flight (e.g. airplanes) and plausible fission powered powered (abandoned for political reasons). Further, space flight, while useful, has not been critical for our technological development. I see no reason a high tech society couldn't develop in a deep gravity well then escape it once their technology reaches a stage where doing so is possible.

For (2), energy reserves definitely accelerated things, but I'm not convinced they are nessasary. The fossil fuel age was only a few hundred years. Even if it accelerated technology development by an order of magnitude, we still would reach what we would now call the green era in an evolutionary blink of the eye. Even in our own development, wind and water power predate fossil fuels.

In fact, the lack of fossil fuels may actually help a civilization, in that would completely avoid the carbon based crisis we are facing now. That could easily outway the slowfown that non carbon power sources would have caused

(3) seems important though.
The spoiled part is saying that it's unattractive due to limiting upside, without appreciating that it limits downside too.

Most who got RSUs over the last two years lost big, and I bet they regret having a variable comp component now. Choosing RSUs over cash was a horrible choice for most in recent years

Hopefully GenZ/Millenials are learning the important lesson about fair value and fundamentals
Sorry TSMC I think we'll do just fine and you'll have a challenger for the crown within the next 10 years. The USA knows that China with Xi at its head is only going to become more belligerent and isolationist. The government will be pouring a lot of money into onshoring this stuff so when war with China inevitably breaks out we'll only be caught with our pants down to our knees and not our ankles when it comes to manufacturing and semiconductor tech.
The architects who design buildings for the metaverse
Awesome, thanks for sharing. We use cyclone for 3D CMS scans of open holes at the mine I work at. Cool to see other use cases. Were you using 3DReshaper before the rebranding?