skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
IMHO, quite often when you're tempted to handle an error, you're either wrong to do so, or in some kind of infrastructure glue code. A request handler, a task executor, a strategy chain, a retry loop, you name it. And this code needs to deal with both classes of errors anyway to be bugfree.
"The only solution to this problem are seasonal storage, which is a lot of lithium"

You are maybe not aware, that for stationary batteries, there are way more options than lithium based.
Natrium for example, is quite common, so you can make literal saltwater batteries.
I think that bar is too high and you can still call this mentorship. It would be exceedingly rare to find someone who is going to mentor someone for free across multiple companies. When I mentor vs. train, I care a bit more, follow up more, the scope is broader, more personal, etc., but I'm not adopting you for life.
Think you have a typo there https://mentorcruise.com
Even if they do that others usually change it back. Or at least that’s what I’ve observed on other threads.
I'm curious about resources to learning SQL well.

In our company I've done a series of teaching session (we're on about 10th hour now). It's working OK, but wish I knew of good material / blog posts to point at. I feel like there's no good community to learn from like for many backend languages.

E.g. after learning about "cross apply" (T-SQL; "lateral join" in postgres) everything got 10x easier to express in SQL. But: How is a developer who's just getting started in SQL going to know that?

And where is the community that can teach a backend developer getting started with SQL to ignore some of that advice from the DBA and Data Analytics communities? E.g. the advice to "not pin indexes" -- which I believe is 100% wrong advice for a typical backend application where reproducability across environments is key, and where any query not supported directly by an index is probably a bug anyway.
A similar voyage occurred in 1982
https://www.mnopedia.org/thing/hjemkomst-ship
Benefits would help - the quickest way to get royally screwed in the US is to need medical help without insurance.
Oh it's taught. I have a bone to pick with how. I'd rather have spent a lot of time on the practical application of SQL than the theoretical background of column and table operations.
> He was holding a presentation on nuclear power and mentioned safety, claiming that according to the best models there would be one large nuclear accident every million years.

This part reminds me of how NASA's calculations for crashes/failures were very low, like 1 in a million officially, but when casually asked most engineers estimated it at 1 in a few/one hundred (my memory is fuzzy) - which was about the actual rate of crashes.

Humans, even smart ones, have biases unfortunately. (I personally still think nuclear is the best, even if we end up with ~3 more medium accidents in the 21st century.)
no. actually engaging with someone who wants to learn is a huge reward in and of itself. and it makes you feel like the last 40 years wasn't necessarily just a waste of time treading water.
Yes there are a variety of implementations - perhaps you were searching "Mastodon" (the name of a single implementation) instead of "ActivityPub" (the name of the protocol)?

https://github.com/BasixKOR/awesome-activitypub#services

should get you started!
IME that antipattern is common in small companies. This is mainly so because it's often the most expedient way to get something "working". A related problem is creating a new RPC for every variation of a query that an external service may require.

One better approach is to ensure each service's db has the data it needs already at query time. For example, each service should ingest events from elsewhere in the system, and accumulate the relevant data for its responsibilities. Joins should always happen in the db.

Another approach is to keep all the data in the same RDBMS. You can slice up the data into different schemas as you see fit. I have had a lot of success with this approach, reuniting databases where people have gone a bit too microservice-wild for their actual circumstances. You can vertically scale an RDBMS to quite a large size before seeking other approaches.
Kind of, yeah. But there will also be a generous free tier.
I have read this twice and still have no idea what is being complained about or clarified.

Have we truly run out of real problems to solve? How is this an actual effort by someone at a prestigious university?
Financial reports and news of companies and stocks (mostly US, I think), focusing on values and fundamentals. I found other similar sites to be too much about short term trends and technical analysis.

https://marketinference.com
So your critique of nuclear energy (a position) is somebody who over-zealously evangelized the technology (their character)? This is about as ad hominem as stances come.
Find someone who is really good at what they do and work for them for cheap. Or help them out in any way you can.

Relationships are a trade. Mentorship is a trade of guidance for volunteership.
Insurance companies exist, so it's clearly possible for a corporation to take responsibility for liabilities arising from car crashes, and collect enough money from car owners to cover those liabilities.
Aha, technological solutions for social problems, who could think that would not work :)

Driving a car in public traffic is very much a social situation. A wink here, a small hand or head gesture there. Even looking away and avoiding communication alltogether is part of social behaviour and tells something. Even the same gesture in a different context says something else.

Parking a car, driving in congested traffic and just keeping a lane is all doable by technology. Beyond that it needs a different and social way of thinking.
You're saying "why should we allow people to remix?". I don't want to put words in your mouth, but this makes me think you're saying "We should forbid people from using works created by someone else, unless we have a good reason to allow it".

This isn't a perspective I argue from, because I disagree with it.

I think we should allow anyone to copy anything they want, unless we have a good reason to prevent that. So if you're going to stop people from remixing, I think you should be able to build an argument for that that doesn't start with assuming all the rights are owned.

I don't even like using the word "rights" for copyrights, as I really don't feel like it's in the same category as free speech of fair trial. But if I use other words the whole argument gets very confused.

Should Nintendo have the exclusive rights to games they make for 5 years? I think that argument is easy to make. Personally I'm a fan of slightly longer, maybe 20 years.

Should Nintendo have the exclusive rights to games they make for 100 years? I think that's excessive, and instead of serving to encourage create it encourages rent-seeking (Also, at this time scale a lot of material gets lost before it can be meaningfully archived).

Should someone be allowed to distribute a complete copy of a Nintendo game (still under copyright) with (possibly minor) modifications? I don't think so, I think this makes it much harder for Nintendo to make a profit for the limited time they're given.

Doing so in 20 years? Yes, Nintendo's had plenty of time to profit.
I think the only thing I might add is a guardrail for strings that are too long, and might behave really badly with regexp.
The problem with this hollowing out of the regulations government used to have, is that people react by jumping for extreme, impractical things like "wealth tax". Nobody is going to go for the idea that the government comes around and explicitly collects a significant percentage of everything you own every year. (And they already do much of what they can get away with through inflation and real estate taxes).

Rather, to continue the spirit of the top level comment, what is also now missing is the estate tax, which is/was around 40% (it's graduated too, but it tops out quickly). IIUC, the federal threshold used to be around $1M a few decades ago, and is now $10M - this was the anti "death tax" political issue you might vaguely recall. Furthermore, due to wider use of trusts, it's been basically eliminated unless your family is extremely unlucky.

Fundamentally, I'd rather just tamp down the amount of money given away to the rich - stop the government giving trillions of dollars to the financial industry to prop up the fictitious asset bubble pyramid scheme, and either let natural technological deflation happen or at least spend the money deliberately ala MMT.

But either way, something is required - the system we have right now has the government continually giving away gobs of money to asset holders, while doing very little to collect it back. This is exactly why these personal wealth bubbles continue to grow.
> they're sitting there in Tokyo...

I wonder if that had been the case if the wind had blown in another direction at the time, towards Tokyo, instead of mostly the open sea.

I also think it's difficult to come to conclusions in seeing this in an isolated way. Everything was in chaos and much destroyed because of the tsunami, surely that delayed communications, and assessment of the 'real' situation?

Sometimes when I read about the history of all that, and all the talking about, I get the feeling like the commentariat views this like a clean room laboratory exercise. Like in a model, this happened, what to do now?

Chaotic reality doesn't work like that.
I took it during summer, and there were some masters and PhD students in there, but I took it as an undergrad course. It was very intense, 3 hours per day, 3 days per week, and 1.5 hours per day the other two.
I'm not surprised. People want to drive, the market for those who want to be driven around by an AI chauffeur is minimal.

Add the legal liabilities, and it's a fantasy project with hardly any takers like the metaverse.
Nowadays, guided missile cruisers replaced battleships in the surface role, aircraft carriers in force projection, area denial and long range combat. One could make a point about cheap shore bombardment with artillery so, but then again modern day artillery shells are far from cheap, so guided missile cruisers it is.

Another thing the article misses: submarines were rendered useless by ASW tactics and technology by end of '43. It took the first true submarines in late '44 and '45 to change that again.

And a design, battleships, that stayed between the very early 1900s until the 90s in various forms and shapes proved its usefulness.
Anything can be abused, but I don't know the history; I have heard of robber barons, but not in the context of housing and Google doesn't seem to give me more than just their own enormous mansions. It would depend on if it's abused or not, wouldn't it?
While it's true that wealth is relative, this is so disingenuous that I can only presume that this comment is not made in good faith.

FWIW, I think multinational corporations that engage in all manner of legal tax avoidance are probably more of a problem than individual billionaires.
Sure. I noticed this at a hardwood flooring warehouse, in another life. In fields governed by science and stricture, however, the safety increase is effectively permanent.
FTT was clearly a security because something like 25% of FTX revenue was used for FTT buybacks. Other crypto tokens don't entitle you to a share of some businesses money, so less clear if they're securities.
3500kg for the whole vehicle including interior + 100L of water + 100L of Diesel + 50 L of gray water + 2 Passengers + 1 shower + 1 bed + 1 kitchen + 2x11 l gas etc.

As I mentioned: A typical camper van is borderline at 3300 kg already so you have 200 kg for cloths, food, water to drink, bedding, etc. It even matters whether or not you gained 10kg during winter or lost 10kg.

16kg equates to about 2 lithium ion 100WH batteries
1-2 bikes for bike tours
1 grill + extra gas for a barbecue

etc.

So you can decide between those or a conventional solar panel or you just pick panels that weight less then you can have both.
Solar are wind are also increasingly unreliable due to the same extreme weather events. It is truly mind boggling how easily all legitimate criticism of wind and solar are brushed aside by the belief that they are the future.

With changing weather patterns, wind turbines are exposed to more ice events - events during cold weather that cause the shutdown of hundreds of wind farms. And no, i am not referring to wind turbines being affected by the cold, this is specifically wind turbines being affected by temperatures around freezing where ice forms. And what of long periods where winds speeds are too low across half a continent - a la the UK and western europe very recently? Same with solar - the world’s largest power grids are mostly not tropical.

There will likely come a future where continents are powered by wind and solar, but that future is not tomorrow nor is it in ten years time. In the meantime, we continue to hurtle towards a climate disaster while quibbling about the problems of nuclear power - a technology that has the potential to get us to that sustainable future.
Agree. Even if you make a hobby out of researching purchases and pay top dollar, you still need a great deal of luck.

Our 5000 euro door, made by local craftsmen with high quality materials, had an installation mistake that ruins ergonomics and compromises the airtightness. I even went for a non-sliding door in the expectation that it would be more reliable. Maybe the sliding door would have been entirely non-functional by now.

My ~400 euro yamaha reface mini-synth has internal speakers that buzz. It's a known problem affecting every one ever made AFAIK.

I'd guess only maybe 1/3 of the top dollar expensive stuff I have bought has been free of glaring defects, despite researching before buying.
Simple and easy are not antonyms here -- something can be simple but difficult to accomplish depending on the time and place at the same time. For example, "respect women" is a simple enough phrase but getting the Taliban to follow it is anything but simple.
In the same report compiled by a WHO body, it is also said that there is no statistical evidence in the increase of cancers in the area. This is science and statistics, everything else is speculation based on nothing, fantasy stories.

I am an Italian living in Germany. The German approach to nuclear power is totally propagandistic and anti-scientific, a very un-German approach to the subject.

https://www.unscear.org/unscear/uploads/documents/unscear-re...
When I was at Rice a couple decades ago, the database class was a 400-level class in which we learned relational algebra and relational calculus before SQL. The professor must have been good at teaching because I loved learning the formal underpinnings even though my memory of them has faded, but I do recall that I went from zero SQL knowledge to being very excited by its power. So many of my CS classes were very theoretical, and even though we learned some theory in the database class, it was definitely one of the single most (the single most?) pragmatic & practical of all the CS classes I had.

I was so zealous about normal forms that I complained loudly at one job where they used an old D3 database with multivalue fields. It was so glaring to me because we actually used all hand-rolled SQL instead of an ORM in those days. Years later, after growing less tech-centric and more thoughtful of business needs, I realized that sparingly using multivalue fields was not a hill to die on. :)

Fast forward many years to my first startup in Boston. Google App Engine was new and I wasted precious time trying to figure out how to shoehorn a typical relational data model into the early NoSQL data store available for App Engine at the time. This was just after the financial crisis and I hadn't yet heard the mantra to pick boring technologies, and I learned through sheer pain that unless you really really really need to, don't waste effort by walking away from relational databases. And also, most apps can get by with whatever the ORM does and if there's a performance issue, optimize that one query instead of trying to optimize all your SQL from the beginning. There's a lot I still don't know about pushing heavily complex queries down to the db level, but for expensive problems I'd reach for expensive assistance, because it's worth it (after trying to play with the SQL myself).
Crypto Theses for 2023 [pdf]
Yeah, nowhere near as long as they should last, but better than it was.
> One advantage to software-driven decision making is, we can make a rule and they will all follow it. I.e. the law can decide no self-driving car should leave the road.

Rigid adherence to a law like that is a pretty major disadvantage to saving lives though...
How about geothermal energy? Japan has tons of that.
I agree with you. (I was a nuclear engineer for a few years.) The problem seems to be human institutions. There always seems to be corruption and stupidity.

Chernobyl was pretty stupid. Bad reactor design and rather bad operator decisions.

Part of the Fukushima problem was an insufficient sea wall. They did get unlucky with a 7.4 magnitude quake. It was stupid to put the back up generators in the basement where they were flooded. There is a summary of some of the human errors and corruption here

https://escholarship.org/uc/item/30x14946

Three mile island was largely operator error. There also appeared to be corruption during the clean up.

Private companies are always trying to cut costs. Government organizations are often subverted by the industry. America and Western Europe have a fairly decent nuclear safety record. I think it is just plain difficult to avoid corruption for any regulatory organization.

The potential for a serious nuclear incident involving 100,000+ deaths exists. Both Chernobyl and Three mile island could have been much worse. If things had been worse, there was a potential for hundreds of square miles to be contaminated for several decades.

It is very difficult to design a nuclear reactor the can survive operator error and government corruption. There is also the potential for terrorist attacks on reactors.

On the other hand, we do seem to have a very big CO2 problem and maybe we need to take the nuclear risk. As far as I can tell, we cannot rely on solar and wind for more than 70 or 80 percent of our energy needs. Maybe geothermal or wave power combined with solar and wind could be used to eliminate the need for fission nuclear power.
Plenty of people use VR Chat. Once it gets mainstream it'll be common place.

At the moment it's int he same place as IRC was back in the 90s before social media took off
Take the fourier transform of a clipped signal - it will have high frequency components.

In general, the more pointy edges you introduce to a waveform, the more high frequency artifacts you get.

This aspect of pontryagin duality (narrow in one domain means wide in the other) is also what underlies the heisenberg uncertainty principle. If you "hard clip" a photon's position (with a slit) you get a lot of frequency domain (momentum) noise, leading to a spread-out beam.
I can assure you, people driving for Uber Eats are not making $100/hour.
I would say that male exclusion from early child education is strategic as many boys get the message that "school is a girl thing" from a young age.
For context, the pre-existing larger mechanical calculators such as the 1936 Facit:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRGu1OBFPrc

I saw one of these still in use before the takeover by electronic calculators in the 1970s. I think it was replaced by a TI-58, which was programmable and was supplied by a manufacturer with several magnetic program cards for the specific field of use (industrial lab).

P.S. text and photos of the Facit: https://mechanicalcalculators.wordpress.com/about/facit-calc...
> For a traditional sea anchor (including the ones that look like parachutes), the force of the waves is pushing the anchor away from the vessel.

It's actually the opposite of this.

A sea anchor acts like a parachute in that it slows the vessel by increasing drag (although obviously with water as the medium). As with a parachute, where the parachutist will always be below (excepting acrobatics) the canopy as both are falling in the same direction through the air, a sea anchor behaves the same way in the water.

So both the vessel and sea anchor are being pushed by waves, like the parachutist and canopy are being pulled by gravity, but the submerged sea anchor (down in calmer waters below the largest influence of the waves) has greater drag than the vessel in the water and slows the vessel.

In heavy seas, a vessel without a sail will have the current and sea state as the most significant influence rather than the wind (although this can vary). When deployed from the bow/front of the vessel, a sea anchor works to both slow the vessel's overall speed over ground (which can be useful to avoid excessive drift into hazards or losing progress) and it also acts to keep the bow into the weather. This is important as vessels generally are prone to damage/capsize if taking heavy seas/big waves abeam/onto their sides.
My recollection from the original iPhone keynotes is that there never was an article.

Jobs presented "iPhone" and article-less was dominant in all company messaging for the product.
> A lot of people are not comfortable learning languages beyond the ALGOL-like paradigm. SQL's building blocks are incredibly odd if you're used to the idea that work gets done via variables, conditionals, and loops.

Yes, although somewhat amusingly I've found that non-programmers who have never learnt an imperative programming paradigm tend to find SQL a lot more intuitive than ALGOL-style programming languages.
Have you tried selvedge denim jeans? Try a pair of Uniqlo brand ones for an entry level good value before getting into the more rarefied brands that are even more durable but more expensive.
So you've got a heavy and complex motor-generator in the drivetrain, a heavy and complex motor-generator in the flywheel, and a lot of heavy and complicated power electronics to join the two?
That's because you lack imagination, you lack knowledge about how we've gotten to where we are, and you lack understanding about the value of keeping software portable.

There are many, many reasons for maintaining support for alternate architectures. How many problems would be baked in if we always had this attitude?

Back in the day when "all the world is an i386", people complained when told about how their code has bugs when compiled on 64 bit processors. Imagine if we had baked in all of those 32-bit-centric bugs that broke compiling on 64 bit.

People do the same thing now when told their code doesn't compile cleanly on 32 bit, on PowerPC, on ARM, on big endian, et cetera. Imagine if we now acted like "all the world is an amd64", and lots of code was simply broken on aarch64?

If you were alive and paid attention through other transitions, you'd understand how every example of programmers being "forced" to care about the correctness and portability of their code has paid dividends years later.
Precaution seems appropriate but aren’t we doing things we don’t understand anyway? That seems like the default. Surely we can’t roll back all of humanity, but maybe we can stand athwart history and yell “stop!” if only in hopes to slow down the stupid.
Cool interactions on mobile.

But the poor vs rich game ended up with the poor person going up to $1000 and the rich person going down below $100.

I recognize it's just chance... but it's funny that the results directly conflicted the author's point.
Basically all of it. 1+ billion from the interest rate on his own loan, and 2+ billion from lost ad revenue, which sure: the upcoming recession affects ad revenue. But his antics made it probably at least 10x worse, immediately.
Even in Silicon Valley there are more churches than libraries.