skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I read that book when I was pretty young, maybe 12 or 13. I'm not sure if I understood everything in it at the time but it started my fascination with computers.
Avocado Oil is supposed to be a good option too with high smoke point. Costco has a reasonably priced option.

I’ve read though that the whole fear of over-heated olive oil is overblown, so who knows. Like everything in nutritional science it is unclear.
Diagnosis criteria have definitely gotten broader, and plenty of adults go through with it (I probably will) just to not feel self-conscious about the "self-diagnosis" thing. There is a lot of upsides to framing yourself as autistic, as it makes navigating the world so much easier. These better diagnosis standards, along with better accomodations for autistic people (vs just brutally forcing them to conform) is what made life so much better for my nephew, for example.
There can be a variety of factors from learning disabilities to time required to form thoughts correctly. May be they would provide you with a better answer if you ask a question and let them answer it in a couple of weeks.
Related paper submission (that didn't take of until now):

"Do Users Write More Insecure Code with AI Assistants?"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33645522
Yeah, I'm sure EY will be totally nonplussed and have no further questions. Oh, you used ephemeral messaging for requests and approvals with no audit trail? Totally compliant, ok, now, let's look at dual approvals...
> Why some people do not communicate clearly?
> P.S. Apologies for this rant (that probably lacks clarity as well)

Sigh.
The scale and necessity are not sidenotes - those are the substance of the problem. Killing 100 animals out of necessity? Fine. Killing 1 animal for more abstract-than-subsistence needs (connection with nature, culture, etc)? Still seems dramatically less bad than killing billions of animals mechanically and without necessity.
That's because, up until a few weeks ago, joinmastodon.com was a spam domain. It's only recently been purchased and redirected to the real domain: joinmastodon.org
"Everything is a lie"
Show HN: A silly puzzle I built
For some context, I have been playing D&D on/off for the last 2 decades with the same group of friends. In the last few years I have started working on a website that helps us play our game online. I know there are already tons of them out there (Roll20, Foundry VTT etc) doing an amazing job, but I like building things and this one is geared towards roleplaying rather than managing combat/dice.

Long story short, this is a silly puzzle box built by a character in the game for the party to interact with. There are really no instructions or anything. If you are into escape room type of games there is a slim chance you might enjoy it. Images are made with Midjourney.
Why? Why even get in this race, there is nothing to win. Win by not playing, and just give those millions of dollars that were about to commit to losing anyway to local schools, community centers, food banks, and hey maybe just buy housing for the homeless (oh no, so unfair! they got a house for free! All they had to do was be on the brink of death every single day!). Do something good with those dollars instead.
Accusing half the world of awful behavior with absolutely nothing to back it up literally is trolling. When I'm called a troll (it happens!) and I feel bad, I resolve not to troll in that particular way in future. Sometimes being called a troll feels good, which has a different result.

I often make "blanket statements" online, but the implication is not what you seem to think. Such propositions invite correction with specific contradictory information, which helps me learn. I don't always see such correction, which imparts a different lesson. I don't need to always be "correct", which is why I'm comfortable writing this way.

Try to respond to the literal meaning of others' writing, rather than how it makes you feel. You could have responded to my first request with a simple "I don't have a link" and we would all have forgotten this silliness.
This from a site that brings you such nuggets of wisdom like

In the past few years, I’ve become increasingly more aware at how conservatives will simply state the facts, or praise what they appreciate, when an ideological adversary dies. In contrast, progressives and our legacy media will often write horrific hit pieces when someone on the opposite end of the spectrum passes away.

No bias there at all.
Well, at 8%, you double your money every 9 years, so isn't this just an over/under at 9 years for the next default? Seems reasonable to me
It's just 12B parameters, not 175B. You can probably use int16 or int8.
Keeping Syncing Simple
Maybe we shouldn't allow the US government to chain people to a company with no way out.
Pretty general programming/SWE advice
YES. Absolutely!

Many people seem to totally lack the capability of understanding simple questions. I often have to ask yes/no questions, and even then I have to say "please answer yes or no". Then I have to go beating 1 bit information at the time... really frustrating, specially with people with master or even PhD degrees! Ok, where I'm now it seems a PhD can be bought around the corner for 2 cents.

In my experience this also happens when they try to explain something. Right now I'm relatively new in my position, and it was a real torture to understand the system, because nobody seems to be able to explain it in a linear way. They start "there is this function, and this function, which depends on that, btw, there is also this here... did I mention this other module?!... ahh ok... no no.. sorry, I forgot this interface..." It was really exasperating!

I think this may correlate strongly with the lack of ability for text comprehension, that is often reported in school tests.

EDIT: I see some answers referring to learning disorders, disabilities, anxiety, not knowing the issue at hand. I'm talking about people which do know the topic (explain the code they have written, for example); in a situation where I'm not the boss, and is no interview, just a coffee talk between equals; witout any diagnosed problem oder disability. As said, even with PhD titles, which imply they had to defend a Thesis in front of a panel with complex topics...
Most systems discussion could benefit from the use of a whiteboard.

Most systems discussion devolve to describing a few key structures that are better represented graphically. Think protocol sequence diagram, flowchart, logic table, state machine, stacked graph.

It's actually your fault for demanding a verbal answer to a graphical question, and rejecting the feedback you receive.

Additionally, highly-educated folks are trained to do this because it is a popular way educators verify comprehension, since asking a verbal question about a graphical fact simplifies the process of "hiding" part of the solution, and verifying that it's been comprehended rather than regurgitated.
Wow, no.

I suppose it would be fine if you had a Slack integration that was a front-end to a proper piece of accounting software.

But a completely ad-hoc system where accounting and auditors have to grep a giant chat log for an emoji is going to get you sent to some special level of finance hell. Nobody will have any transparency into why a request was approved, who approved it, and why. How do you possibly hand off the history of reimbursements to someone who is hired later, and how do you possibly create a structured report for auditors?

And I’ll even object to your supposition that finance software is hard to use. We use Brex for a corporate card, and it’s a totally smooth process, with a great app and website.
In my experience it's typically a lack of skill. I've had to mentor people on being better communicators, and some of the typical problems I've seen along the lines of your points:

* They don't know how to politely communicate that they don't understand the question or disagree with the premise. The mental transformation from "that makes no sense, I don't understand what you're asking about" -> "I may be missing context here, but..." isn't something that comes naturally to everyone.

* They don't know precisely how focused they should stay. Sometimes the discussion really is too narrowly scoped and needs to be broadened, and it can be hard to calibrate.

* They don't know how to prompt other people, who may have a very different sense of which angles are relevant or how wide the scope of a conversation should be, to focus back down on what they need to talk about.
> Thus, in general, Wikipedia is not a source for anything - it is a medium for information from other places

How you choose to present that information + which particular sources you choose to cite on a given topic is absolutely susceptible to bias and propaganda efforts.
I'm confused about what you're implying has been "sanitized" from this article. there's no indication in the edit history that someone has added or removed any information about the vaccine strategy.
As has been stated voluminously elsewhere in this comment section, and better by others than my attempt here: we have a (quasi-?)democratic apparatus and constitutional framework that governs our country's use of this power.

Does China or Russia allow for those kinds of tools for holding government accountable? Not as far as I can tell.

Therein lies a massive difference in kind.
The phrasing "Twitter alternative" is my fault in setting the title for the thread-opening post here. The "Twitter alternative" phrasing should not be attributed to the founder of Post.

I get the impression that the founder, Noam Bardin, DOESN'T think he's building a Twitter alternative but rather, in the beta welcome page's words, "a civil place to debate ideas; learn from experts, journalists, individual creators, and each other; converse freely; and have some fun. Many of today's ad-based platforms rely on capturing attention at any cost — sowing chaos in our society, amplifying the extremes, and muting the moderates. Post is designed to give the voice back to the sidelined majority; there are enough platforms for extremists, and we cannot relinquish the town square to them."

Twitter has never been quite like that. If the founder's vision succeeds, I might like Post very well indeed. In all such things, the proof is in the user experience as experienced by each user, but I think the goals sound good for Post.
Tbh I think we look at older music with rose colored cglasses cause only the best of the best pop music survives. Pop music has always and will always be simple and shitty by and large.

However, in modern times, the barrier to entry of record an album is virtually 0. You can make a masterpiece in your bedroom if you want to. There is SO much interesting music happening right now I really resent this idea that music has somehow lost its way.

Examples : king gizzard and the lizard wizard, the dillinger escape plan, bjork, death grips, tim hecker, danny brown, etc etc the list is damn near infinite. Lots of incredible, boundary pushing music has happened in the last 15 or so years, and continues on a daily basis
> Mastodon isn't really a viable alternative for mainstream, despite what the techy crowd boasts.

That is demonstrably false. If you spend some time there, you will notice a lot of nontechnical people using it.
Nice visualisation, but the explanations contain a bunch of mistakes. The cosmic microwave background is not "the first flash of radiation" after the big bang (which would've been much earlier), it is the "wall" of last scattering before the universe became transparent enough. And its distance is also not limited by light travel distance within the age of the universe (13.7Gly) but by its rate of expansion, resulting in an actual distance closer to 40Gly.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33653656
I’ve been keeping an eye on this, but it’s all self reported right could just be people poking fun? Correlated with the news last night and people waking up this morning.
Why Elon Musk Is Blowing Up Twitter’s Business
The problem with frozen vegetables is that they very easily loose texture. If you fry them they will in practice boil instead of being fried. The only thing that works in my experience is to throw them in boiling water and then just let the water boil again and finished. Or use them directly in a stew or soup or something like that.
For some people, if they are invited to a discussion, they believe their job is to talk. If they don’t know the topic well or don’t have an opinion on it, they will instead talk about something they do know and care about.
Now we call them "social influencers" convincing their followers that the latest crypto is going to the moon. The Judas goats are among us, and we are but sheep.
For an example of a biased and probably state-backed Wikipedia editor, see the example of Philip Cross. I very casually edit Wikipedia, a few times a year, and I within an hour of certain changes ran into this "individual". Cross is almost certainly a team of people, and they didn't fully remove my edits, but it was very clear that certain topics are heavily monitored and shaped.

https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-44495696

> Political analyst and former UK British ambassador Craig Murray described the scale of Cross’s activities:

> Philip Cross” has not had one single day off from editing Wikipedia in almost five years. “He” has edited every single day from 29 August 2013 to 14 May 2018. Including five Christmas Days. That’s 1,721 consecutive days of editing. 133,612 edits to Wikipedia have been made in the name of “Philip Cross” over 14 years. That’s over 30 edits per day, seven days a week. And I do not use that figuratively: Wikipedia edits are timed, and if you plot them, the timecard for “Philip Cross’s” Wikipedia activity is astonishing if it is one individual.’

https://www.mintpressnews.com/phillip-cross-the-mystery-wiki...
That’s funny, but not a bad rule of thumb!
Break the big feature up into smaller changes. Vertical slices help with that: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33384275 Each change is merged to `master` after a relatively short amount of time. What some people call "trunk based development".

I've yet to build a big feature that wasn't worked on by 4 or 5 people at the same time. Since they're different vertical slices, they're different branches (and tickets). But even then you might have a frontend and backend person collaborating on the same branch for a small slice of functionality.

This is also not a problem as even with one branch for two people who work with it. In git there are constantly more actual branches around than you "realize". E.g. here there's 3 branches going around and you just merge/rebase them. One branch is the one in the shared repo. The other two branches are the local branches of the same name on each of the two developer's machines. They need merging or rebasing just like you merge/rebase with `master` itself.

Depending on what you changed, you'll have weird looking history and conflicts to solve (or commits to skip). Which needs some head wrapping around but git itself so far has never been confused by my "reckless force pushing" on a shared branch. It helps if you don't have two people actually changing the same parts of the code though. Then you're in a world of hurt for conflict resolution but it's not the force pushing part that creates the hurt. That's just always bad.

Before you bring this back into `master` you'll want to squash all this into one commit and thus all the weird history ceases to exist.

Also, communication is key. If someone force pushes, tell the other person and help them resolve any rebasing/merging conflicts w/ your knowledge of the changes you made. If two people sit in opposite corners, force pushing "their world view" without tell each other, you definitely will be loosing code.
Many people's critical thinking skills go out the window whenever they think there is easy money on the table. That is how scams like these thrive, and how casinos get so big.
How has that worked out for you, in terms of health? Obviously it is anecdotal, but I'm still curious. I've been plant based for 5 years. Trying to determine if it is a life long thing for me or not.
It's possible that it's something about my tastebuds bacause I really can't relate to people saying meat tastes good. For me salt tastes good, pepper tastes good, rosmary tastes good. Without them meat is as appealing as anything vultures dine on.

And even in well prepared meat the first bite is something I need to suffer through before I can start enjoying the meal.

To me it tastes exactly what it is. A piece of animal that died. And I have no moral qualms. It just tastes bad to me.
Al Gore’s new tool can zoom in on the biggest polluters in your town
In my experience there are two main reasons:

1) People don't receive formal training in logic and argument formation.

2) People don't properly calibrate their own emotion or take into account the listener's emotions when deciding how to make their argument.
Is there any research to back up that treating cattle better improves the nutrition of beef?
> I'd say many of these terms are way too vaguely defined and used. What exactly counts as "packaged" food? What's "processed" food?

Do you think this is some sort of a smart or incisive observation?

I am sorry if I come off as rude, but I have grown weary of people making such asinine comments, quibbling about terms and their definitions, when they clearly know what the parent comment is talking about.
>I loved how I could scroll down and see posts on a large variety of topics, get news updates, see the weather, etc.

I don't mean to sound overly dismissive, but maybe instead of putting the onus on a social media website to provide that experience, wouldn't it be more sensible to get that from a news aggregate site? I.e. Google News, Fark, Reddit, etc.?

Part of the issue with how modern social media platforms is the intent to keep users on their platform for many hours at a time.

Instead, limit content on social sites to the subject of the platform, and allow users to find that other content outside of the site would be a "better" way to manage their experience on the platform. For example, a platform devoted to Formula 1 would not be a good place to inject articles about COVID information or political events. It wouldn't be a good place to do so, not just because it would be severely off topic, but also because it would be managed by people who would otherwise be focused on curating the topic they are (presumably) knowledgeable on.

Basically, I'm saying it's not a good idea to get news updates from Twitter for the same reason why it's not a good idea to get a sushi from a gas station bathroom.
This might be a case of low context vs high context culture :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-context_and_low-context_c...

The rambling could be a way to communicate some context, emotions, while you are expecting a yes/no answer, typically from a low context culture.
Not entirely sure I agree with a cluttered mind for every person. I'm very organized but just get nervous communicating and tend to ramble.
> the kind of person that would have a child to reduce their prison sentence.

What it does bring to relief, quite plainly, is that there are indeed a special group of human beings with which the law
- and society itself - has no idea how to handle.
Even better, you can read the cited study, and look at the footnotes, and read the relevant citation:

> "These percentages do not include illnesses and deaths caused by seafood. See John A. Painter et al., Attribution of Foodborne Illnesses, Hospitalizations, and Deaths to Food Commodities by Using Outbreak Data, United States, 1998-2008"

http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/19/3/11-1866_article

Hospitalizations:

> "An estimated 26,000 (46%) annual hospitalizations were attributed to land animal commodities, 24,000 (41%) to plant commodities, and 3,000 (6%) to aquatic animal commodities (Table 2). Produce commodities accounted for 38% of hospitalizations and meat-poultry commodities for 22%. Dairy accounted for the most hospitalizations (16%), followed by leafy vegetables (14%), poultry (12%), and vine-stalk vegetables (10%) (Figure 2, panel B). Among the estimated 57,000 hospitalizations, 8% were not attributed to a pathogen, mainly because the dataset did not include data for Toxoplasma spp.

Deaths:

> An estimated 629 (43%) deaths each year were attributed to land animal, 363 (25%) to plant, and 94 (6%) to aquatic commodities (Table 3). Meat-poultry commodities accounted for 29% of deaths and produce 23%. Among the 17 commodities, poultry accounted for the most deaths (19%), followed by dairy (10%), vine-stalk vegetables (7%), fruits-nuts (6%), and leafy vegetables (6%) (Figure 2, panel C). Of the 278 deaths attributed to poultry, most were attributed to Listeria monocytogenes (63%) or Salmonella spp. (26%). Among the 1,451 estimated deaths, 25% were not attributed to a pathogen, mainly because the dataset did not include data for Toxoplasma spp."

The real conclusion here is that the food supply chain in the USA is poorly regulated and presents large health risks to consumers, and as the producers do not have to bear the costs of externalities (air and water pollution, increased disease, etc.) they are under no pressure to improve the situation.

Again, meat, like vegetables, fruits, grains, leafy produce, etc. - when produced under high standards (i.e. no pesticide/herbicide contamination, no hormones and antibiotics, no violations of food safety standards) is quite healthy to consume.
I wonder - does the UK get its own category now or does it fall into the Argentina box?
I don't know what you do here. It's being omitted because the alternative is pouring fire on the campaigns by anti-lgbt groups who are trying to use the outbreak as an opportunity to spread the "gay men are pedophile groomers" narrative whenever a child catches monkeypox which when people believe this garbage manifests in real life harm.

Could you explain this whole controversy in the Wikipedia article? Yes, but doing that is also divisive so you just ignore it since it's not that important in the grand scheme of things.
Until Mastodon finds a way to let the average user sign up without any friction, it will never be more than a small niche service.
I watched it recently and at no point in the movie is it clear that's what's happening (is it?). They specifically show abstract scenes when she leads them to a house. As far as I could tell it was on purpose so there's no specific explanation of what's going on.
No. They're talking about real numbers; even decimal numbers (rationals) are isomorphic to integers. The reals are different.
I've applied to >100 conferences and spoken at about a third of them. Prospective or first-time speakers often ask me for advice - so, finally, here's a walkthrough for how I apply to conferences along with FAQs. I hope you find this helpful! :)
Not even "NI" (natural intelligence) is able to do that reliably.

People and AI seem to prefer assuming things.

Most of the time wrong things…
> The cleanup CEO is mad.

I think he is also laying the groundwork for "This is going to never be fully accurate or clear what happened."
The original pointed to the NY Post.
Not really, because if we were doing it for subsistence we wouldn't be doing it like this at all. It's incredibly inefficient even aside from the ethical considerations. The only thing that overcomes that thermodynamic inefficiency is preference, and that has nothing to do with subsistence.
In general don't think they do unless they're directly or indirectly associated with someone's identity, but my question was more of one curious to the poster's outrage - they're upset about not possibly not having their comments removed, well... did they try to ask?