skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think the author needs an updated understanding of what is missing. Being interested in a particular property value would absolutely lead to more interest in dense dynamic cities. A city block in tokyo is probably worth more than a city block in most American cities. A capitalist with an interest in seeing their land values go way up would absolutely champion a more dense, desirable city.

I think the problem is actually that people with aggregate political power in cities in America don’t really care about property values in the monetary sense. They treat their homes, community, and city on more political/ideological/ethical terms and preferences than on economic terms. The dense Tokyo-style city is absolutely foreign to most Americans and they disdain actions that would lead toward alternate city structures. This is as opposed to the property owning class, which should be more than happy to see their value go up by making more dense cities, especially when it is funded by taxpayers.

This seems like a case of just assuming capitalists/landowners are to blame and then coming up with an argument.
I’m a functional fan and I don’t disagree with your points.

Like anything, real life functional programming is not a panacea and most languages that append functional constructs as an afterthought often come with a price (debugging, performance) and just as you pointed out, mixing functional code with imperative code indiscriminately can yield wonderfully nuanced bugs.

With that, I find languages like OCaml and F# provide a great ergonomic experience for writing both functional and imperative style code. (There’s nothing wrong with imperative code confined to the scope of a function or a well defined object)

Even with great tools, I still think there’s quite a bit that can be done to improve the hidden costs incurred from a functional-first approach.
'External symmetry is an adaption to environment' seems to be a promising starting point. You can see this at the micro level too: cell externals and internals.
> "talk about race less" (as a way to treat people more equally, and reduce discrimination) seems like a reasonable hypothesis to test.

This was the status quo for a very long time. Mentioning people's race was like mentioning people's weight. It didn't work.

> I'm also not convinced that what we're doing now is working better than what was done in the 90s and 00s.

The 2005 study "Are Greg and Emily More Employable Than Jamal and Lakisha" applied to jobs 5000 times with a stack of carefully crafted fake resumes that were randomly assigned names that were either stereotypically white (e.g. Greg, Emily) or black (e.g. Jamal, Lakisha.) The same resumes with white sounding names received 50% more callbacks. Over 5000 job applications. What we were doing in the 90s/2000s was not working and the fact that many white people find the polite approach more comfortable is not a good reason to stick to it. This isn't a social problem-- we're talking about people's basic chance of success in life. This idea that we can have equal opportunity by deliberately avoiding intervention is a proven fallacy. Pushing through the discomfort to find what actually works is a worthwhile undertaking. If another race with a far larger population was 50% more likely to get job callbacks than you were, I guarantee you'd agree.

The increase in political tension our culture has seen in the past decade plus is vastly more complex than the most visible catalyst of any given moment. Blaming social progress for the increasing resistance to social progress doesn't make sense. You could just as easily blame fascism or any other activist end of a political blob. As flawed and overly bandwagoned as it may be, "wokeness" is addressing real problems that oppress people in measurable ways every day. "Anti-Wokeness" is just another value signalling position to have that highlights political fault lines far older than any living American.
Most of those things are backed up with guns though. Which for me, makes them as real as they need to be.
Is Antarctica self-sustaining?
I love that blog! I think that door post is a perfect example of why we won't learn anything useful on Antarctica:

> Most (but not all!) doors open inward. There is a huge amount of snowdrift during the winter, and if the doors opened outward, they would be impossible to open without a lot of digging. This could be a life safety issue if the building is occupied.

On a Mars there is no "inward" like there is in McMurdo because swinging doors only work between sections with equalized pressure. Going outside requires an airlock that slowly normalizes the pressure to avoid shooting the colonist out the door with a blast of air. Going between sections requires doors that can slam shut in either direction to seal away damaged sections in case of emergency, like the sliding doors in almost every scifi movie/series/book - which we still haven't tested in the real world because there's nowhere to test that kind of pressure differential on Earth and our space station technology is still based on Cold War submarine hatches.
Speech will have this problem but text based NLP can be translated and we have pretty good translators
So how does your imaginary version of a transport-layer guarantee a message can't be tampered with if it trusts keys which are revoked?
Corollary...if you're experiencing >5% nastiness, you're in the wrong room or its you, not them
Mongolian black metal sounded pretty powerful. (But Mongolian has some pretty characteristic features which are easy to distinguish even then.)
Trusting someone else: Well we do this every day with money in the bank, with all the risks that come with it
I had a ton of difficulty with social skills, especially professionally.

I was very, very interested in being right, and proving how smart I was.

Two things changed my life and attitude:

1) I started going to regional burns (burning man). It introduced me to a whole different way of thinking and mindfulness.

2) I treated my weakness as a technical issue, and hit Google to research a solution. "How To Win Friends and Influence People" by Dale Carnegie came back as the technical manual for dealing with people.

I memorized all the rules, and kept them on my computer screen all day as a reminder. I applied them to every conversation.

That, more than anything, I think, is what launched my career to the next level.

It also had a profound improvement in my personal relationships.

I wish I'd learned it much younger.
I suspect it might be translated
And if you entrust it to a safe deposit box, then... ?

And if you trust it to a safe in your bedroom, and your house burns down, then... ?

Which is more likely?
So glad that of all the various C64s and even more various power supplies I had in the 1980s, none were Bricks of Death. Ignorance is bliss.

Great project and write-up!
I honestly still think this is the real plot of the Matrix. They weren't batteries - they were cheap computing resources working in concert to literally create the Matrix.
I don't care to be in rooms I am not welcomed in. Blurting things out when I have something to say is part of my character. If other people have so much of an issue with me having this characteristic, then they are perfectly free to ask me to leave.

Until then, I feel perfectly free to speak my mind, and I do not accept strangers socially policing me. Why should I? They're the ones who have an issue, not me.

Both styles are acceptable, but don't let others tell you what the room reads. You are an adult, and perfectly capable of choosing for yourself what is appropriate communication. Whether you're someone who is naturally withdrawn or not makes no difference, you should always be able to feel comfortable being yourself. If you can't, your number one goal should be to permanently remove yourself from whichever situations restricts you from that, whatever way you can while maintaining your integrity.

Don't let others scare you into thinking you'll never make it work, cause you absolutely will. Where there's a will there's a way, and I don't know a single person who moved out of home, for example, then regretted it but ended up homeless because they cut ties. I'm sure you can find me an example or two, but in the vast majority of cases, the people who are the worst off in society are those who relied on someone who was toxic for them, not those who cut ties and failed to adequately provide for themselves.

Your body is capable of more than you know, and will even naturally prioritise things for you in the way they should be. Modern society allows you to be an individual at the cost of the community we used to have. That sucks, but as a hacker, you should accept things as they are, and take advantage of what you can in the broken systems that surround us. Even in your own life. Things are what they are, and you can feel about them however you want to. The only way to make them different is to use what's in front of you.
Apologies if I'm reading this wrong, but between this question, and casually comparing a possible origin of life on Earth to a venereal disease, it just all strikes me as very misanthropic.

My answer would be -- it's important if we deem it important, whether that's rational or not. If we start from the premise that life is good, that humans in particular are the most interesting thing out there as far as we can see, then it isn't totally bizarre that we should wish for the show to continue, extend it as far as we can. In that view, being bound to the fate of our home planet seems like an arbitrary restriction.
Has anyone come out and said "we should deliberately avoid sticking a colony in Antarctica or the Sahara or on the moon, and going to Mars with no trial runs is a great idea"?

Hazarding a guess at what other people think, colonising Mars is a decades- to centuries-long guiding star that will necessarily involve putting self-contained colonies in a lot of different places. In fact, Maciej points out that reaching Mars will require a moon base, which for some reason he thinks is a negative.

The argument from the article about the relative cost-efficiency of putting people on Mars versus doing pretty much anything else is a good one, but the argument that a Mars base is in itself bad is nothing but a couple of paragraphs of ad hominem attacks about "subsistence-farming incels". I'm not convinced that there's a good reason to abandon our dreams of space colonisation, just because NASA is doing some unrealistic and wasteful things.
I found this book to be quite beautiful. It even says how they did some of the shots at the end.
https://nostarch.com/open-circuits
Joshua Clifton's Guide to Homemade Juggling Beanbags
this seems likely to be ignorant of all the small steps needed in everything everywhere, to romanticize people that marketed themselves well.
How can you bring humans to Mars without also bringing human nature, i.e., human flaws? We'll wreck Mars quicker than Earth, because Mars is already a wreck.
> "But there is, and I explained what that reason was."

If your reason is "security" (whatever that means, you won't define that either), then I too, explained how that is guaranteed by application-layer protocols already today - so it's unclear why changing the transport layer is needed. Again, you're not saying anything concrete and keep handwaving - I don't think you really want to (or can) have a conversation, really.
The example given isn't really functional programming is it? Or am I missing something? In those examples you start with an object, call a method on the object returning a new object, then call a method on that and so on. I like this kind of chaining in OOP.

Languages like JavaScript and Rust (and Go?) have blurred the lines between purely functional and purely imperative. I think I prefer that compromise position myself.
Let's try unpacking the case you must be imagining to arrive at that expectation. If the kid had any friends, they wouldn't be isolated when school was closed, so we must be imagining a kid with no friends. If we're imagining a kid with no friends, they must not be getting on very well at school. Well, so much for the expectation, eh?
I've always wondered about this, actually.

With almost all sports males have a dramatic physical advantage[1] so it's not really fair to have males compete with females.

With chess there is no physical advantage, so why keep separate tournaments for males and females? What is the reasoning for preventing males and females competing in chess?

[1] In the 90s, ISTR reading about a tennis match between a #3-rank female player against a #5000-something-ranked male, and the male player simply dominated. I wish I could find that article now, but it was a print mag and I don't remember which one it was.
I heard about the concerns about the Stanford Prison Experiment, but what are the concerns about the Milgram experiments?
hey! it's you! the Scorpion to my Sub Zero
Whoa. Which position do you think I'm advocating for here?

My first paragraph is in support of the free speech of the drivers. I think that they should have it and should not have to limit their opinions in a public space.

My second paragraph highlights the potentially fragile structure of building a 100 person enterprise (an F1 team) around a key individual (the driver). If the F1 driver does something that provokes a negative public response then it can have a negative effect on the livelihoods of the team that support them.

All I'm doing is thinking out loud here. I get the impression that you have a different impression of my core message or my intent. It feels like you think I'm advocating against the free speech of the drivers. I stand for the free speech of the drivers.

On reflection, I could have been more clear about that point. My writing voice probably comes off as amoral. It's not about judgement one way or the other. It's about highlighting the precarious position of power that the driver occupies at the fulcrum of their team. If they mishandle their power it can have unwanted second-order effects. If they anger the sponsors with their political messaging, then the team stands to potentially lose funding and the team cannot continue.

I happen to think both things are true: That the drivers should retain their freedom of speech, but that they simultaneously carry a large weight in the form of the team in which they are the key figure. Their actions WILL have large consequences for the team... as long as my conception of how F1 teams operate isn't somehow flawed. I'm still waiting for someone who knows the domain better to correct that assumption for me. It's possible that I'm totally wrong on this point and that the team is more robust than I'm suggesting.
That’s just yet another exercise in prompt engineering. I expected something more interesting.
It's more up to Elon as the man in the arena, rather than Maciej Cegłowski who would be the timid soul in this case.
I have nothing against you personally, but you have proved your own ignorance. I stand by my original comment.

It has never been acceptable in psychology or any other scientific discipline not to include a control condition in an experiment. You may not know that many statistical tests were developed by psychologists, and nearly all early development of statistical testing was done by by social scientists of all kinds. Same tests still used by data scientists today.

You seriously think that because Feynman happened to advise a psychology student with a poor adviser in 1935, that an indictment of the science 70-90 years later, that was then thoroughly embraced and prioritized by the entire discipline, even though the crisis was mostly applicable to a sub-field (social psychology), still discredits that entire area of science?

You're certain of that, even though you aren't in that discipline and have no professional responsibility to maintain that expertise?

Either way, rethink your standard for certainty. This whole jack-of-all-trades but also an expert-at-all-trades nonsense has to stop.
Who would design and build experiments for those probes to run when they land on Mars? Are we sure economy of scale would apply to those?
See also "The Cutting Room Floor", which collects unused artifacts in games. Looks like they are aware of this leak but haven't merged in all the findings yet.

https://tcrf.net/Mortal_Kombat_II_(Arcade)
Alongside bullying there are a lot of other pressure factors that can intensify feelings of depression. This can be things like peer pressure, or simply being around others but not necessarily feeling like one fits in. Its important to separate school into the learning aspect and the social aspect, and the very negative part of the social piece is likely what drives the suicide rates. From my experience in school, kids are often absolutely brutal to each other, I never really understood where that all comes from...
It means that it runs without an underlying operating system (so it doesn't require Linux etc.), so the Smalltalk VM (or, to be precise, the circle runtime) acts as the OS.
Napoleon wasn't roman. Do you mean a caesar?
> analog watches would kill for that sort of accuracy

Seiko 5 automatics have been reported to lose 30 seconds a month, even as little as 12 seconds a month.
It almost made it into C++20 and was dropped at the last minute, I doubt it ever does again unless everyone agrees, even then, it is at least a decade away.
I don't disagree that it could be possible in the long term future, I just disagree with the framing that its a worthwhile consideration with respect to the survival of the human race in any practical sense.
> The bottom line is that Mars is an awful backup for life.

In the near term, absolutely. But the long term goal is to colonize multiple planets/moons. Eventually, Mars will be one of many worlds on which life finds a foothold, which is perhaps the best backup for life that humanity can currently deliver. But we still need to take that first step.
the example of marshmellow was modified by original researcher. reversely, this is a example of good research.
I can't see how this would remind you of 2008. What's the similarity?
Consider how many people kill themselves from feeling lonely and how many kill themselves from having to go to a place where they are physically and mentally tortured 5 days a week, 8+ hours a day.

I was bullied and retrospectively know no other word than torture for what happened to me. And I wasn‘t the worst off victim, we made three classmates leave the school.
It should be noted though that bytecode from that era would often be represented as text rather than binary in storage. If I remember correctly, UCSD p-code was literally just numbers spelled out in text with spaces between them - something that could be conveniently read by just about any language and system around, usually via a primitive like Pascal's own Read function, or BASIC's INPUT.

It makes it that much easier to move from platform to platform when there's no agreement on things that we take for granted these days, like number of bits in a byte etc. But that also makes it harder to recognize what you see when you're used to binary bytecode like JVM or CIL.
Sponsorship maybe?

Have Tony the Tiger explaining the food pyramid or something.
Please don't cross into unsubstantive comments or flamebait.

"Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
We got called into school by our son's English teacher. During the poetry module, my son had gotten a bit frustrated and said, "Who the heck is ever going to use fucking poetry in real life?"

"While I felt he had raised an excellent question", his English teacher said, "I didn't agree with the way the point was expressed. I'm sure you see my difficulty."

We did. And we appreciated his good humor.

We had a carefully considered discussion with our son about respect, and appropriate language.

Expulsion is a very blunt tool.
Irony is heavy there, unintentional double entendre of sorts. Mexicans barely recognize or care about the 5th of May. That’s an American Chicano celebration for the most part. Mexicans kind of laugh about its importance in the US.

I say this from Mexico, sitting next to my Mexican wife and her mother.
Why has the Stanford Prison Experiment been written about uncritically in psychology textbooks for decades?

I am not an expert in astrology either, but I am certain it is bunk.
A lot of people talk about bullying, which is definitely a possible factor, but I don't think adults remember what it was like to be in school. Unless you don't care about it and ignore your future plans, school invades every part of your senses and monopolizes all of your time. Any new information you intake is sized up for difficulty and likelihood that you'll recall it on a rest. If you fall behind one or two weeks on homework and screw up an exam you can end up an entire grade lower. Then there's the constant attention of people who don't really care about you that you're exposed to all day, whose apathy can be just as damaging as their interest.

Online school just wasn't real. Everyone I've talked to said they put in a fraction of the effort required to pass classes online that they did in person, and many people said they had grades practically forgiven.

I didn't have too hard of a time in school but I still remember it as immensely stressful, and for little reason. It is easy for someone with a real problem (drugs, bad relationship, abuse, trauma) to spend a few weeks marinating in cortisol as a result of the panopticon of in-person school to become convinced that suicide is the only way out of their negative feelings.
No, but there's also little we gain from trying to make it so. We know how to operate all sorts of things in Antarctica, and anything else we bring there just... needs to be operated pretty much the same way.
> The reason why is because you will learn a lot more by doing that stuff

But wouldn't 95% of that "stuff" be the same as doing it on the moon.

Which is closer, cheaper etc.
Just to be pedantic, Mars is absolutely covered in oxygen. It's the most abundant element in the atmosphere and second most abundant in the crust. It's part of the reason they planet is red.
Maybe I am behind in the times but it was a little surprising to me to see MSVC have full C++20 support while GCC and Clang are still trying to get there.
Keep in mind that zoning has almost nothing to do with road placement - those decisions are made by different levels of government, especially for major roads and highways.

And as another commenter mentioned, only Houston has "no zoning", and they have most of the regulations that are normally in zoning code in other cities anyway.
I also describe it as torture. The conditions many children and young adults experience at school at the hands of their peers would be cause for firing in a corporate environment and even legal action in the adult world.
> generating images of a specific person or pet (not just a generic concept)

There's no difference between those things. It's a specific label that directs the diffusion model. It doesn't matter if your label is 'dog' or 'betty' (ie. my personal dog). Anyway...

> it's highly likely that we'll get them within a few months.

Yep! It's not a technical limitation of the technology for sure; but the OP asked:

> Is there a way to have current AI tools ...

...and right now you can't do it with the current AI tools that are publicly available.
Arguments against human colonization of the solar system (moon/Mars/etc) sound just like trying ot argue against the westward expansion from the 13 colonies.

We will have a Donner Party-like memorial on Mars. And there will be a McDonald’s next to it.

You’re not going to win this argument because it is an argument against the basic nature of humanity, the basic urge of a species to expand over all available domain.
Building a Simple DB in Rust – Part 1
Ok, we'll change to that from https://www.eventhubs.com/news/2022/dec/27/mortal-kombat-2-s..., which points to it. Thanks!