skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> That you introduce more coupling is a tradeoff. That the program (sometimes) gets harder to change is a tradeoff.

You don't introduce more coupling, you document the coupling that already exists. If your program is hard to change with types, it would be hard to change without types - but easier to change incorrectly.

> That is becomes easier to write large, messy programs because programmers feel more safe in the future to refactor, is a tradeoff

Sure, I guess this is true in principle - but you could say the same about IDEs, or version control, or grep. The effect size is small.
The intro really sets a great tone right from the start:

> The Onion is the world’s leading news publication, offering highly acclaimed, universally revered cover- age of breaking national, international, and local news events. Rising from its humble beginnings as a print newspaper in 1756, The Onion now enjoys a daily read- ership of 4.3 trillion and has grown into the single most powerful and influential organization in human his- tory.
This could be huge as a technology.

It's a small script away ("if gun, then alert using recorded PA message and call police") from protecting capitols, grocery stores, rodeos, and dance clubs.

This is the next seatbelt with regards to perceived public protection. Even sexier because you don't wear it.

AI sucks, it'll kill or enslave us all one day if left unchecked, but this gun detection camera project is the begining of something safe and cool and can be implemented using cameras and equipment already in place.
I have no idea of what the commenter is actually trying to say, which is why I asked. I have to admit that usually when I hear people make statements like that, they're being deceptive in a couple of ways.

Sometimes, when people claim a logical implication (if A then B), and people object to them by saying that A doesn't imply B, they will 1) follow with a claim that the objector is claiming that nothing can imply anything else, or 2) follow with a claim that "A doesn't imply B" is equivalent to saying "B doesn't exist."

In these ways, a claim of "all birds fly" responds to a counter-claim of "not all birds fly" with: "so you're saying that there are no birds that fly, then" or even worse "so you're saying that nothing can fly, then." I've even seen "so you're saying that everything except birds can fly, then."

So I have no idea where it is going, but precision in the definitions of "equal" or "egalitarian" used in this context would help me to understand.
The renewed interest in them and the PR hoopla is closer to 14 years...
<3

There should be a standard of though-puts every X distance whereby a road MUST provide an under-pass FULL STOP.

Animals need to be able to roam
These stunts are pointless, irrelevant and, in the end, counterproductive. You could ground the entire aviation industry --all of it-- and it would do exactly zero towards atmospheric CO2 reduction. Zero.

The problem with activists is that they are low information zealots who, for the most part, are ignorant useful idiots. Sorry to be so harsh, but I believe this to be the case for most any domain where, for the most part, young "activists" are the result of finding people who never ask tough questions, can't evaluate matters objectively, are driven by emotion and are supremely susceptible to indoctrination.

Want to get a sense of just how dumb it is to go after private jets or the entire air transportation industry? Here:

https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/each-countrys-share-co2-emi...

Scroll down to the pie chart titled "Top Annual CO2 Emitting Countries, 2019".

here's a simple reality that requires nothing more than being able to add and subtract:

If the United States --all of it-- were to evaporate from this planet tomorrow --all of it, gone, no more CO2 emissions-- you would only cut down CO2 inputs to the atmosphere by 14%.

Stopping private jets or the entire airline industry is a rounding error compared to all of the US evaporating tomorrow.

OK, let's get rid of the US and China. That will only reduce CO2 inputs by 43%.

Stopping private jets? As an idea, this is between ridiculous and demented.

And, BTW, these numbers aren't even correct. You cannot bring down CO2 inputs to zero. You just can't.

Why?

Well, the simplest explanation is that you have forest and other fires that would still be there and constantly contribute CO2 to the atmosphere. In California alone, one year of fires is equivalent to nearly 20 years of emissions savings. If we all evaporate from this planet --all of humanity-- it will probably take somewhere in the order of 100K yeas for atmospheric CO2 to drop by 100 ppm (we have accurate data on this, it isn't a guess).
This must be like Musk walking down the halls at Twitter, taking out fools.
What do you mean?

I remember cassette tapes having terrible hiss in the day. I have been listening to a lot of music on Minidisc lately and overall like it but after somebody pointed some thing out to me I think ‘are they using white noise as a coding tool?’ (AAC Pro does) but I really have to listen to the CD next to the MD to be sure.
That is a bit too strong a claim (even taking "NP" to mean "NP - P", since all P problems are also in NP).

First of all, while not proven, it is considered most likely that integer factorization is not in P, so potentially we already know of 1 NP-P problem which can have an exponential speed-up from a QC (Shor's algorithm).

Secondly, there is one non-exponential speedup that can potentially apply to even NP-complete problems - using Grover's algorithm to find an element in an unordered list with complexity O(sqrt(n)) instead of the classical O(n).
Yes, but this is an allocation problem. Is it feasible for India to allocate 100% of its budget to toilets when it has border conflicts with its neighbors and terrorism around?
Bit of a large up-front fee to swallow though for the equipment
At work, I put in a change which allows multiple assertions in a C testing framework. There is no exception handling or anything.

A macro like

EXPECT_ASSERT(whatever(NULL));

will succeed if whatever(NULL) asserts (e.g. that its argument isn't null). If whatever neglects to assert, then EXPECT_ASSERT will itself assert.

Under the hood it works with setjmp and longjmp. The assert handler is temporarily overridden to a function which performs a longjmp which changes some hidden local state to record that the assertion went off.

This will not work with APIs that leave things in a bad state, because there is no unwinding. However, the bulk of the assertion being tested are ones that validate inputs before changing any state.

It's quite convenient to cover half a dozen of these in one function, as a block of six one-liners.

Previously, assertions had to be written as individual tests, because the assert handler was overriden to go to a function which exits the process successfully. The old style tests are then written to set up this handler, and also indicate failure if the bottom of the function is reached.
Exactly, this is just our boiler plate response to new things and we should ignore it. There are definitely criticisms and conversations to have about the fediverse but you are completely right, this is just an unintentional distraction.
It's not just that representatives in a typical representative democracy wield disproportionate amounts of power, it's also that the people who are able to become popular enough to get a significant share of votes are people who have time and resources and connections for campaigning, PR, and so on. This is a very specific stratum of the population. It's an elective kind of aristocracy, basically.
The EU forced Microsoft to make its SMB protocol documentation available (2007)
A raspberry pi is only like $40 also
Looks intriguing. A few questions:

(1) Are you planning on having support for more than 5 devices at a future point?

(2) Will you have any features to support parents protection of their children?

(3) How easy is it to integrate Safing into a home security stack, or an enterprise security stack?

(4) Have you considered a one-time unlimited buy-in level in lieu of monthly?

(5) Is this coming for iOS & MacOS?

Thanks for pushing the privacy front.
> The trade-off is obvious: you gain confidence about your program but you need to Learn More Stuff.

You still do need to know that stuff if you have no types in your language, but the compiler won't help you.
No, from the abstract of the paper "The orbital period, 185.6 days, is longer than that of any known stellar mass black hole binary. [...] How the system formed is uncertain. Common envelope evolution can only produce the system's wide orbit under extreme and likely unphysical assumptions"

See section 8.4 for details: https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.06833
But basically the idea is that they are assumed to have interacted in the past (based on the distance), and given that, all current models of such interactions would predict a very tight final orbit for the solar mass star.
> Every GB counts if you have "only", say, 0.5 TB.

It doesn't. You can make the overhead partition take 200MB. That's immaterial fraction of 0.5TB. You ain't gonna see impact of this loss. Additionally, by partitioning the drive, you protect it from dumb programs who like to create partition tables.

Yes, there are reasons for not partitioning your OS disk, like full disk encryption. But it is more work.

> when you mess up the data alignment on them. In case of FDE with partitions (maybe on top of LVM even) the alignment issues isn't trivial.

This sounds interesting. What are these alignment issues? Why do you think they are present on disk with partitions (I never had those issues) and why do you think they are not present on disk without partitions (may be they are, due to compression/encryption)?
My most productive days are when I delete code. Do you think they calculated absolute values, or would I be at the bottom with -50,000 LOC?
> I'm 100% not smart enough to get it right unless something stops me getting it wrong

IMO, type systems are harsher on modeling mistakes than something like Python is. Sure, you'll get it wrong the first time (sorry Grandma!). And in Python, you can mutate your system rapidly into a new state that can accommodate the old model's mistaken assumption. If your program starts getting complex enough that the mutation speed is dropping -- deconstruct it into smaller, manageable problems.

Humans are 100% not smart enough to build systems the way a lot of corporate shops keep trying to.
Not really workstation-class graphics.
I guess a switching amplifier with digitalized PWM could have LDPC in feedback loop?

If you pay me a lot, I can write a patent for you!
How do you negotiate a settlement for redundancy? There’s a legal minimum. When you negotiate what do you offer in exchange for anything above that? Give me more or… I’ll quit? Or was it trading some benefit you didn’t want for one you did?
This comment is there under every article that has nm in it. For the millionth time, 1 nm should be read as "1 nm equivalent". The purpose of the naming is to continue to scale with density.
With the Quest Pro I could actually see the feasibility. Just good enough to code in comfortably.

The color passthrough means you can actually have coffee at your desk among a million small things it adds.
That's a constant value, not a variable.
This must be part of the policy that the New York Times has that they have to report negatively on tech.
This is one of those things where op needs to do something similar to what I think midjourney is doing and do prompt optimization.

They need to do some research into what additional prompt cues they can add for the user automatically to bring the user's prompt quality up.

They can append these to the prompt behind the scenes or provide a second text input of the additional prompt data to allow the user to modify that separately from their initial prompt input.

It might even help the user better understand how styling works with prompts.
All true, but in the context of the thread, the future of quantum computing will probably be remote. So the bulk of the machinery is irrelevant.
> Why is “not subscription software” necessarily a good thing?

I personally consider that a "pro". You may not have experienced subscription fatigue yet, which is great.

> Don’t you want to be the customer rather than the product?

You may have misunderstood — Little Snitch is a paid product that collects no data.
The video is pretty clear though.

The hands are off the steering wheel, the accelerator / brake pedals are clear in the Youtube video, and the youtube videos themselves are uncut footage.

What possibly could be "inaccurate" about these tests?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgUPOM7oIxo
Both Vim and Emacs have plugins for intelligent code completion and viewing inline documentation. I personally prefer to use VS Code or Jetbrains IDEs with Vim emulation, but I've seen setups for both Vim and Emacs that basically made them into full-fledged IDEs.
How does this get enforced for string content changed at runtime? Or does this apply for only to strings initialised in code.
What if the employee knows the action, or results, violate the law? What if the employee is part of an important community or organization in the field that has ethical standards that would be violated and result in the employee's ejection from that community?

There are many reasons why in many engineering fields there's a licensing process and exam, but one of the most important ones, from the employee's perspective, is being able to say "No, I can't do that, I would lose my license".
> Teams meetings with the other participants on a virtual monitor about 2 metres away were very noticeably less psychologically stressful.

How were you projected? Was everyone else looking at a person gazing vaguely in the direction of the camera and obscured by a bulky headset?
I'm of the view that users subjected to an outright shadow ban should at least have a civil cause of action available for all the time they unnecessarily wasted writing comments that no one else will ever see.

If that was established perhaps we'd see the despicable practice go away.

There are a few cases where I can almost see it as justified-- not spam as its trivial for spammers to automate detection of-- but certain kind of obsessive mentally ill-people that will forever shout their abusive and disruptive comments into the void if shadowbanned but get a new account if they are informed. But that fringe case just can't justify the abuse against more reasonable people, particular in a world where users are frequently actioned against in error.
Admittedly I don't use social media like most people, but I dont understand the "discovery problem", personally. I've never wondered "how do I discover user email addresses?" for example. Don't you already have friends or folks you're interested in following? Can't you ask them what their ActivityPub instance/identity is? Once you have even a small network, can't you see the folks who interact with those you're already following?

I don't mean for this to sound callous or dismissive, I'm just wondering if y'all can help me understand where you're coming from. Is it FOMO? An issue of optimization? I feel like time and attention is already limited and the last thing I need is to find more things on which to waste either.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, perhaps consider a more organic approach? Even on HN we see threads like "what are your favorite youtube channels?" from time to time, despite that one major draw to YouTube is the "discoverability" (it's one reason why folks post content there instead of on their own site, no?)
I totally agree it reminds me of Sitting In A Room.

It also feels like there is a vaporwave vibe in here somewhere... the slowed down loops with reverb... Apparently a bunch of vaporwave artists created a tribute to The Caretaker, which is also excellent.

https://noproblematapes.bandcamp.com/album/memories-overlook...

There has to be a name for this style of music (beyond just Ambient or Avant-Garde) of which vaporwave must be a subgenre of.

Love finding new stuff like this!!
That's true, the state pension is tiny. So small it has to be topped up with other benefits if it's all you have, especially if you're renting as the state pension usually isn't enough to cover rent. Some people don't even qualify for the full state pension.

But a large number of pensioners have a ridiculously tiny private pension (or none), so the state pension is a large and essential fraction of their income and the triple lock remains relevant to pension-age voters.

Many pensioners have a spre property by one means or another (often inherited - "accidental landlords"), which they rent out to supplement their pension. As rents have tended to go up with or even faster than general inflation until recently, this buffers the effect of inflation on those pensioners too.
Do you expect to be part of every conversation that you eavesdrop in the office?
Broad strokes this article raises some ok points. She’s wrong about SC qubit coherence times and she’s wrong about refrigeration being any kind of bottleneck. You could buy a dilution fridge from bluefors off the shelf. The microwave hardware and optics and all this stuff costs an order of magnitude more. Just kind of a low effort article. If you want to beat on SC qubits, bring up cosmic rays. She’d know that if she passed this by an expert, which I guess she’s too smart to do.

Either quantum computers pan out over the time investors stay interested or they don’t. It’s not unlike any other technology. As far as physicists feeling embarrassment, why should we? One, we’re largely incapable of feeling it, and two, we tried and that’s cool.

You have these VCs who have a very narrow view of how the future should be (chiefly being that which makes them richer) so you can only pitch so many technologies that fit that mold. To be blunt, find me a better technology that could potentially push the boundaries of human capability or understanding or whatever that VCs will invest in. Beats the hell out of VR. Is it cooler than shooting stuff into orbit? Seems on par to me.
Because pitting certain tribes of constituents against each other is a big problem in US politics, works against efforts to redistribute wealth for all. Now that the old voters have their healthcare, they have less incentive to vote for plans for others to get it.

Most importantly, it avoids politicians having to address the root problem, which is the lack of taxpayer funded R&D into medicine that would be in the public domain, hence not subject to the high prices of patented medicine. And of course, this helps the businesses that patent medicines.

It is also ridiculous to me how much more my country prioritizes the elderly over children, who are literally the future.
any good servers/networks you could recommend?
I'd love to see a standardized sized titanium reusable wide mouth jars, that could be returned and reused almost indefinitely. While titanium has a high upfront embodied energy, it is super light weight and doesn't react with most things in our environment that you would expect purchase in it.

One could imagine purchasing food (sauce, milk, oil) then reuse it to hold your left overs. You could reheat on a stove, but sadly not in the microwave. With a cozy of some sort you could even hold hot and cold beverages.

Bonus points would be that you could easily compare prices as a 1 liter jar of one marinara sauce would be the same as another brands jar.

On the same note, I'd love to go back to reusable glass jars that were manufactured for reuse and cleaning capabilities. Sadly they are a bit heavier and more fragile than a titanium version, but at least you can look into the contents.
A sociocultural comparison of Japanese and American high schools
I was really hoping the *.cdf format would take off and interactive science papers on the iPad were going to be the future.
CA seems to have some of the strongest worker protections in the US. Wouldn’t be surprised if Musk moves Twitter’s HQ and employee base.
I'm afraid I'm unaware of any funds. My state funds restoration areas on the scale of 80 acre+ parcels, but corridors would require an unbelievable amount of contiguous spaces. I imagine it would be a multi-century project to establish such a thing with all the arm twisting.. I mean incentives required.
That was the whole point of the 2A.

The government being too powerful doesn't mean "well it's over, let's just make them more powerful."

Y'all take an existing problem and jump in the totally wrong direction with solutions.
Note that Emacs had these features and more for Lisp since about the 1990s or even earlier, while being free.

Now, for C or Java or most other popular languages, you're absolutely right.
>Firing based on LOC is stupid

This is much more than stupid, people who do educational workshops, training, assist others with their problems, SREs and performance engineers, database maintainers, people who delete code by adding functionality are one of the biggest investment in corporations like Twitter. Firing based on LOC is probably why self-driving Tesla is coming next year https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7oZ-AQszEI
first world problems..
The active part of a FET is the area that is under the gate or surrounded by the gate.

It makes no sense to speak about a transistor that would be smaller than the gate, there is no such thing.

Besides the active part, whose conductance is controlled and variable, the transistor includes parts that are either electrical conductors, like the source , the drain and the gate electrode, or electrical insulators.

While those parts may be less important than the active part, they also have a major influence on the transistor characteristics, by introducing various resistances and capacitances in the equivalent schematic.

What matters is always the complete transistor. The only dimensions in a current transistor that are around 1 nm are vertical dimensions, in the direction perpendicular on the semiconductor, e.g. the thickness of the gate insulator.

The 2D semiconductors that are proposed for the TSMC "1 nm" process are substances that have a structure made of 2D sheets of atoms, like graphite, but which are semiconductors, unlike graphite, which is a 2D electrical conductor.

In this case the thickness of the semiconductor can be reduced to single layer of atoms, which is not possible with semiconductors that are 3D crystals, like silicon, because when they no longer form a complete crystal their electrical properties change a lot and they can become conductors or insulators, instead of remaining semiconductors.

There is little doubt that for reducing the transistor dimensions more than it is possible with a 3D semiconductor like silicon, at some point a transition to 2D semiconductors will be necessary. It remains to be seen when that will be possible at an acceptable cost and whether such smaller transistors can improve the overall performance of a device, because making smaller transistors makes sense only when that allows a smaller price, smaller volume or higher performance of a complete product.
Sure, I just don't think error-free qubits are a thing (or will be in the future). I don't think anyone seriously expects quantum computing to work without error correction.
I also couldn't find it on their website, but their GitHub says it means Safing Privacy Network. https://github.com/safing/spn/
Well, if I'd tell my employees to do something stupid, I'd expect them to tell me why it's a stupid idea. But I also wouldn't fire them for talking back to me...
People havent forgotten anything. People are generally the same as they have always been except perhaps on average they are more educated at a global level.
Just so you know, you can do those things in vim now (I do), and the whippersnappers may well be.