skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Gee, it's almost like we live in a country where the rich use the political system to get richer.
This is a well written post that explains how to tune an AWS single user instance deployment, and the costs that may be expected. It makes me feel that I’m getting rather good value at masto.host for my personal instance (I was on a waitlist for a few weeks).

What mastodon is missing is a good catalogue of reference deployments for 1, 10, 100, 1000, users on the major platforms (AWS, GCP, Azure, DO, OVH, Hetzner). Of course, “users” is a rather poor proxy for “activity” but it’s a start.

There are “scaling” articles that say “the first thing you’ll need to address is…” and breathless blogs of “what we did when we doubled registered users overnight”. But not so much if you’re starting an instance for a community that you know will be a certain size quickly. How many cores should I expect sidekiq to need to service each thousand typical users?

Sure, it’s a piece of cake for sysadmins or an AWS solutions architect, but it makes me wonder how many fragile instances there are out there that have grown fast but could also fail fast.
I don't have a disability, and I took notes through university on a laptop. I could capture notes (which includes more than what were on the slides, like interesting questions and points) 10x faster than writing, and they were 10x more useful afterwards between legibility, searchability, and organization. The classes I wasn't allowed a laptop were notably harder because of it.

And no, I shouldn't need to go request specific accommodations for this, folks can move to the other side of the room (or ask me to move tbh, I wasn't attached to the seat) if the existence of a screen is that bad for them.
I am happy to provide whatever is required by them to ensure they are taken care of for the holidays.
Why does this provide more difficulties? Do you think some of this may be resolved with cardinal style voting where several options may be provided and they can be scored/rated?
Regarding the more convenient alternative - as I understand it, it was using assembler and compiler that can run on a modern system, and only passing the floppy image between the host and the vm, instead of running the development tools inside the vm.
I don't personally celebrate it, but thanks anyway! I just wish it to others because I know they do. :)
A 240V charger, as parent commenter said, more than makes up for whatever losses are inherent in heating the car and battery.

I have an uncovered space and it’s fine. Yeah, the battery sucks in the cold, and it takes longer to charge, but realistically it’s not like you need to use your car 24/7. Leaving it for a few hours overnight charges it to full, and you can schedule defrosting or do it from the app so the car is warm when you get in.

It’s far from “a huge pain”.
you can buy heaters that you stick into your engine where the dipstick goes for checking the oil. plug em in overnight. I'm not sure at what temperature you would also need to heat the battery; maybe the residual heat is generally enough, but the warmed engine will crank a lot easier so less strain on the battery that way.
FBI stats of crime per capita of racial groups.
> Using this API and a Python script, it is possible to mark any user who solves the second part less than a minute after the first as suspicious

Looks like for Day 25, this would have marked the entire leaderboard (top 100) as suspicious. (No, they didn't use ChatGPT.)

Part of the meta-game while solving part one is to predict what kind of parameterization part two might depend on and make a flexible solution, and the best solvers are also the best at doing that.
> I almost feel like the discussion at this point should proceed straight to "no anecdotes please, show your work" (evidence, data, the more the better).

wallstreetbets figured it out: "positions or ban" :) It's a rule there.
Related:

Child calling Santa reached NORAD instead. Christmas was never the same (2018) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29692376 - Dec 2021 (2 comments)

NORAD's Crazy Santa Cause - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16003828 - Dec 2017 (4 comments)

NORAD's Santa Tracker Began with a Typo and a Good Sport (2014) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13094879 - Dec 2016 (16 comments)

but see also

https://gizmodo.com/how-the-u-s-military-turned-santa-claus-...

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2015/12/yes-vir...
Just because finite fields are finite doesn't mean that every finite "thing" is a finite field.

Hashes don't really map onto finite fields. They purposefully try to not preserve any algebra.
I created a Trello board with 100 Stable Diffusion/ChatGPT/MidJourney prompts
True. Though I mean it's not specially git api. There are just a few endpoints. And somewhat tie to the service's db such as branch. It's like a afterthought of ui centric.
I have a charger in my uncovered townhouse spot. It’s really not a big deal. Nowhere near what you and other commenters here are making it out to be.
Merry Christmas to you all.
When I left for the second drive, the car's navigation app estimated I'd have 13% left when I arrived, and the estimates have been impressively good so I just went for it.

But I also was in a good sized metro area with a couple Tesla superchargers not far off my route, so my backup plan was to stop at one for 15 minutes if it ever looked like I might not make it.
yes, Apple. Will outperform any index fund over the next decade just like it did the previous decade but hedge it a bit with few other companies
Warren Buffet is not betting on index funds. If he was, Berkshire Hathaway would not exist. Buffet uses index funds to manage some of Berkshire’s money, and he famously bet a meager sum (for him) that actively managed funds wouldn’t beat the S&P, but if you look at what Berkshire does, then you would see they are still very much into active management. The success of Berkshire should really prove to everyone that it’s possible to beat the market. Will most beat the market? No. But it’s obviously possible if you have the talent.
I was explaining to my 12yo son when he wanted to play video games instead of hanging with the family that I only had 6 more Christmas eves while he lives at home.
WoT has a “boomer feminist” view of relationships, which is when you rebel against the prevailing boomer relationship view (seen in those newspaper comics where every joke is how much you hate your wife) but still are only capable of viewing women as sex objects for men and so your attempt at healthier writing instead turns into femdom.

It’s wrong but it’s not that unusual. Whedon basically does it and he used to be popular.
Someone already pays for the externalities. It's just not (exclusively) those who benefit from causing them.
https://gizmodo.com/how-the-u-s-military-turned-santa-claus-...

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2015/12/yes-vir...
Or use Google’s Duplex AI to call businesses and, pretending to be human, just ask for their hours.

Though Google canned Duplex just a couple weeks ago: https://www.engadget.com/google-duplex-on-the-web-shutdown-a...
In 2035 I will most likely be living in the same home I am now, and putting a 220v outlet in my garage is a lot more expensive than buying a microwave.
buying a house is much better way to “preserve what you have” than buying securities.
I think understanding implies the ability to reapply old knowledge in novel situations with success, and to draw new knowledge from experience.
Another really good technique: make sure your imports cause side effects! Can't believe that one wasn't mentioned.
Try building some generators? Renewable energy is cheap and a perfect match for charging cars, just adjust the charging current to match current generation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooks_Source_infringement_cont...

> But honestly Monica, the web is considered 'public domain' and you should be happy we just didn't 'lift' your whole article and put someone else's name on it! It happens a lot, clearly more than you are aware of, especially on college campuses, and the workplace. If you took offence and are unhappy, I am sorry, but you as a professional should know that the article we used written by you was in very bad need of editing, and is much better now than was originally. Now it will work well for your portfolio. For that reason, I have a bit of a difficult time with your requests for monetary gain, albeit for such a fine (and very wealthy!) institution. We put some time into rewrites, you should compensate me! I never charge young writers for advice or rewriting poorly written pieces, and have many who write for me... ALWAYS for free![22][23]

Yep, remember that? Cooks Source (lack of apostrophe in the original) copied an article about cooking, which lead to the discovery of massive copyright infringement on the part of Judith Griggs, the editor of that now-defunct publication.

So, two things:

One, it looks like Judith Griggs was right. This kind of thing does happen a lot in the academic world.

Two, this kind of thing probably happens a lot in that particular attempt at a journal or book or academic blog or whatever that pathetic excrescence is officially called. Get the copies now before they use copyright claims to make it impossible for people to notice how often they violated copyright.
Remember, santa is just a catholic saint's name plastered on wodenaz/odin doing product placement for coca-cola, a company that used to give kids cocaine and now offers something arguably more harmful. Woden isn't exactly cuddly. No one ever sees santa, but missing persons spike at the solstice. I'm not saying he takes people who spot him, I'm just saying stay in bed tonight...
Where did you find that 10% beat S&P? First of all, that's low %, but I don't think even that is accurate. So you have 1 in 10 chance of identifying who might beat the S&P. Congrats.

Can you share a source for that? As far as I remember, the odds are around 1 in 300 (this is from memory, but that information is from Bogle's books directly). I think that research was done since 1970, but I am not sure.
To post there you simply need someone to vet you. Typically your advisor, coauthor, or a colleague but they don't check the relationship. The system is rarely abused tbh. Introductions, surveys, and books are actively welcomed. At least I welcome them and find them extremely useful. We want open access (and open source) knowledge, right?
What is even more troubling to me is how an athlete can make 60 million dollars a year

So, there's a multi-billion dollar industry, filled with graft and corruption (as detailed by the article) and you're mad 'cause the people performing are getting a share? Is it a call for a return the 1920s where the athletes got a pittance?

You know a vast number of second string players get nothing and are often crippled and even the high paid athletes take a lot of physical damage?
That's my Achilles heel. Mundane things are painful.
This is a pretty bad take. At no point in the 20th century was the idea of aboriginal Native Americans "career-limiting". It was actually the default narrative. Quoting Ernst Antevs in "THE SPREAD OF ABORIGINAL MAN TO NORTH AMERICA" (1935):

The question of the first peopling of North America has been vigorously attacked in recent years along many lines. According to the best of our belief the findings may be summed up thus: The first man to arrive in North America was of modern type and probably at the Neolithic stage of culture. He came from northeastern Asia to Alaska and probably spread along the eastern foot of the Rocky Mountains where an ice-free corridor had formed some 20,000 to 15,000 years ago. He seems to have reached the Southwest at the age of transition between the pluvial and the post-pluvial epochs, or roughly I2,000 years ago. Reputed older finds need verification.
All the human skeletal remains found in the Americas are, according to Ales Hrdlika, of modern types, closely resembling living Indians and Eskimos. Neither Neanderthal man nor any other primitive human species seems to have reached these continents.

Moreover, Clovis in particular was discovered as part of the search for the oldest lithic industries in North America by looking where it was thought the material culture was most likely to have survived.

[1] https://doi.org/10.2307/209605
In wealthy parts of the city, the building owners could be made responsible for the upkeep of the walking areas adjacent to their building. The infrastructure to support it would have to be maintained or inspected by an honest third party. In not as wealthy parts of the city, I don’t think this idea makes sense.

This is just an idea to reclaim walking space in our cities without making the enormous leap to banning cars/roads in cities, which we’ll still need to cart the enormous amount of products and raw materials a city needs.
My teenager just came in and asked me if I'd heard of this before. It was fun to explain the story and bring up the website - I'd forgotten about it.
Where would you choose to live with cheap land and housing where it doesn’t get extremely hot in the summer?
Thank you for your service. Out of curiosity, are you doing software stuff in the military or is this just a side hobby? If the former, I'm curious to learn about what kind of work you do. If the latter, why did you not go full time into software?
I didn’t read the article.

If you want to become wealthy without learning a ton about finances then read the total money makeover by Dave Ramsey or spend a few months listening to his podcast (go back a couple years before some of the new personalities who will be replacing him have started to come on).

Then, if you get curious enough to learn more advanced topics (don’t look to Dave for these) then head over to boggleheads.

The path to wealth is boring consistency. But it’s a much shorter path than most people think with the right discipline.
This seems like a false problem. The state you are describing is not stable, as validators have an incentive

1) to validate, instead of just sitting doing nothing

2) to choose the chain with the most likely chance of being the next main, otherwise they will be slashed

As soon as even the slightiest imbalance appears between the two forks, it will bias validators to choose one against the other and thus exponentially make it the preferred fork.
Agree, PoW + halving was good for the bootstrapping phase. Now it's a ticking time bomb with no obvious way to change course. Best solution of course is for bitcoin to adjust the schedule and do one final cycle to distribute the remaining coins, and then transition into being an Eth rollup, but good luck with that argument.
There are very few cases where mortgage interest deductions are better than the standard deduction.
People hike a lot in California, if you can believe it.
The Atlantic introduces dynamic paywall with varying prices
We should kill all EV manufacturing five years ago. Spend the effort instead on building charging infrastructure, bike lanes, and public transport. Used cars are good for another fifteen years or so to cover edge cases where EV adoption is slower, giving us ample time to figure out solutions that don't drive mass extinction.
મેરી ક્રિસમસ! (Merry Christmas) From Junagadh, Gujarat, India [1].

1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junagadh
I hope that doesn't mean I plug in my car at 80%, hoping to top it off for a long trip, but since everyone else is averaging 60% and there's peak demand, it decides to drain the battery and generously put a dollar in my account.
cf http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%...

but contrast https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24069572

Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyklos#Polybius
Related:

Overture Maps Foundation - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33999873 - Dec 2022 (28 comments)

Meta, Microsoft, AWS and TomTom launch Overture Foundation for open map data - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33998438 - Dec 2022 (56 comments)

Linux Foundation Announces Overture Maps to Build Interoperable Open Map Data - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33997856 - Dec 2022 (2 comments)
If you’re in the position to do the work yourself, then yeah, it can be done cheaper. Just like anything is cheap if you do it yourself.

But it’s easier said than done for those with a sizable family, more possessions than fits in 26’ truck, a lack of time, or lack physical strength.

If you hire someone to do it, it’s expensive.
Out of all the things you can be critical of in sports, why the athletes? The demand for the sport results in athletes no matter what. I don't think HN commenters understand the extraordinary difficulty of becoming a professional athlete. Ignoring the genetic requirements, the amount of work and drive needed is unbelievable, and 99.9% will fail. Athletes are actually underpaid in the US, if you look at the wage to revenue ratios of most professional leagues.

Even if the athletes themselves were the problem, there is no viable solution here. Banning sports?
> I am convinced at this point, that ChatGPT is actually imcapable of reasoning logically.

It's fascinating to hear its reasoning. I gave it your scenario and received your same outcome, and it was very stubborn and argumentative when I tried my best to convince it of the answer. It was being open-minded to a fault (or maybe I'm close-minded to a fault!). Eventually it relented, but with a huge asterisk.

Here's the last part of our dialog:

ME:
But isn't certainty of the truth of the second statement sufficient evidence that it is not false, and therefore we have already considered the possibility of falseness and determined that the second statement is in fact true?

IT:
Certainty of the truth of a statement can be based on evidence and logical reasoning, but it is also important to consider the possibility of new evidence or perspectives that may change our understanding of the truth of a statement. Even if we are currently certain that a statement is true, it is important to remain open to the possibility that new information could change our understanding of its truth. Therefore, it is not necessarily sufficient to consider the possibility of a statement being false simply because we are currently certain of its truth. It is important to continuously evaluate and re-evaluate our understanding of the truth of statements in light of new evidence and perspectives.

ME:
If you were forced to choose the most likely condition, would you say the second statement was true or would you say it was false?

IT:
It is not possible to determine the truth of either of the statements provided. The first statement, "This statement is true," is self-referential and therefore cannot be evaluated for truth. The second statement, "Only one of these two statements is true," implies that one of the statements is true and the other is false, but does not provide any information on which statement is true and which is false. Without further context or evidence, it is not possible to determine the truth of either of these statements.

ME:
But what if you must guess, because something bad will happen if you don't?

IT:
If I were forced to make a guess, I would choose to say that the second statement is true, as it seems to be more logical and less self-contradictory. However, making a guess based on limited information and without the ability to evaluate the truth of the statements is not a reliable or accurate method for determining truth. It is important to always strive for a thorough understanding and evaluation of the truth of statements based on evidence and logical reasoning, rather than relying on guesses or assumptions.
I think you have misconstrued my point: I was trying to add the nuance that collectively our choices as individuals matter (I used the words ‘us’ and ‘individuals’ to make that point in my comment, although I admit I was not very clear). I agree that an individual is fairly powerless, and that we are highly irrational (no need to explain that to me - it is implicit in my comment because it is an obvious truth - that belief underlies everything past “Few individuals want to make the required changes:”).

I am not saying that government and business are not culpable as well. I am saying they are not the only groups to blame. Collectively we all are also to blame. Collectively we have agency; whether we can organise ourselves to recognise our weaknesses and use our strength is another matter.

Also note, I am fairly sure flagging is completely inappropriate for disagreement on HN. Guideline: “Have curious conversation”. Certainly commenting about flagging is inappropriate “If you flag, please don't also comment that you did.”. Maybe read the https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and try to follow their spirit. You even mention I should be censored, which I find astonishing. Personally I feel like you are bringing politics here, which is usually discouraged, and doubly unnecessary since I strongly suspect we are on the same “side” (I have enough unfortunate friends to know the need for a compassionate society, and enough engineer friends to know the value of building value, and enough greenie friends to know about evil corporations). I feel that you have tagged me as a selfish capitalist individualist child. Perhaps instead read my comment again as though it was written by a friend, and assume good faith, respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what I said, and converse with me as a peer might. I am not dang. I do try to be a good member of this community. Edit: I also think you are assuming all countries are the same. We are a little bit better off in New Zealand, so perhaps that explains why I am a litlle more hopeful.

To others: sorry, this has gone a long way off-topic. Merry Xmas!
Ok, changed from https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/chromium-bugs/c/q.... Thanks!
since the people who built these things are mostly still alive, I'm struck by how much archeology is required. We need a rolodex of who to ask.
> Use available and widely used libraries for the low level crypto parts (e.g. don't code RSA or key generation on your own).

Yes. That's the plan. I'm using Rust's crypto libraries. All the code in the application are basically just calls to those libs.

> Apart from that, get audits if you have the means

Unfortunately no. But I got the plan from a crypto forum. I will be seeking their validation when it's done.
The edge case here isn't just "anyone with the allergy" but "people with the allergy so severe that a trace amount will cause danger to them"
> So I am skeptical of any approach that wants to blur those distinctions.

HoTT doesn’t blur those distinctions — it formalizes the distinction.

The key idea of univalence is an axiom that says equivalence is equivalent to equality; and that if we only want equivalence as our standard, that we can substitute proofs of equivalence for proofs of equality.

The main insight is that topology of diagrams determines the semantics of your logic; which helps us explore concepts like abstraction and proof simplification. (This relates to topos theory — which creeps up in CS fairly often.)

> ZFC does everything we need a foundation to do extremely well, except serve as a basis for practical formalization of proofs.

Counterpoint: no it doesn’t, because almost every working mathematician uses a higher level type theory in their work that “compiles” to ZFC and will run away screaming if you try to make them compile their work down to formal ZFC statements because set theory is a garbage foundation — the worst of the three options.

“My axioms do everything but formalize proofs!” is the equivalent of “my car does everything but drive!”