skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think a common answer to "Why Mars" is that human beings need a last resort should earth become uninhabitable.

I'd turn that around, "We need to start thinking about how human beings are utterly dependent on Earth for the forseeable future and how we're destroying her, because there's no planet B in the time frame global warming is unfolding". Start working on protecting what we have. Don't flatter yourself into thinking there's an alternative.

I'm sure many have read William Shatner's narrative of his trip to real space but if you haven't, you should.

"I saw a cold, dark, black emptiness. It was unlike any blackness you can see or feel on Earth. It was deep, enveloping, all-encompassing. I turned back toward the light of home. I could see the curvature of Earth, the beige of the desert, the white of the clouds and the blue of the sky. It was life. Nurturing, sustaining, life. Mother Earth. Gaia. And I was leaving her." (and continues...)

https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/william-shatner-space-boldl...
Hugging face has everything you need to get started with stable diffusion textual inversion training here. It's awesome to get it running but as others have said it has limitations if you're trying to get multiple images for a narrative made etc.

https://huggingface.co/docs/diffusers/training/text_inversio...
Without humans. Redundancy is important.
Your comment reminded me of the podcast The Habitat (https://gimletmedia.com/shows/the-habitat) about a (real-life) Mars mission simulation.

Your last point, about the possibility of rescue, is really interesting and I wonder if there's any clever ethical way to control for that in a study like the one in the podcast.
Yeah I had seen that one, we are only using om laptop Android mobile so didn't get effected by that. They need dedicated mobile developer.
Maybe you're right about us being at the end of the road for internet discussion, and at first I want to say "oh no," but maybe it's not a bad thing. No use continuing to pursue something once you know it won't work, and it's stupid to kill yourself trying.

I worry about your AI point, too. An imaginary perfect friend/sex bot/super advanced furby/whatever would be compelling in the short term, but ultimately it leads down a cold lonely road. I can immediately think of some acquaintances who already kind of live like this. It breaks my heart.

What do we do about it? Raise our kids so their allowance depends on the amount of broken phones they bring us?

Oh hey also could you please prove you're not an AI designed to say things I agree with?
What about preserving what we have left and trying to not expand humanity footprint on the planet? Barren landscape of Mars is unremarkable compared to Earth's ecosystem which we still mostly don't understand but keep ravaging nonetheless
> The Y axis is the mean score of the team, but that score is not independent from the opposing team.

The paper is garbage, but this is not true. All Y-axes are how they define "team performance" -- in the case of the FIFA study, it's qualification rankings. In the case of the NBA/MLB study it's end-of-season team win percentages.
Chinese Police on US Soil
I can confirm. This is why I stopped watching football.
Could you have given each printer its own hub with a serial number?
News Flash: blogs can be of any length, including 280 characters.

It's not 5th grade English, there's no minimum word count. It's just that the early "winners" in the blog space churned out essay-length content every week, which is not feasible for most other people.
While I don't agree with the anti-mars thesis of the article, I do think the article is hitting on something important: Robotic exploration is underrated.

Curiosity cost something like 2 billion to build and launch, but there's no reason building a car-sized rover has to be that expensive. With economies of scale + better design-for-manufacturing + reusable rockets the total cost would easily drop by several orders of magnitude. Why isn't NASA building factories upon factories that produce robotic probes?
> For example, when discussing if the Earth is flat or round, you might both find agreement in that nobody has ever fallen off the edge of the Earth.

So I'm not trying to argue that the earth is flat, but how do you respond if they ask for proof that nobody has fallen off the edge of the earth?

It's not like you can point to some record of all history and show that the event doesn't exist within it. You might try to explain that there is no edge to fall off of, but if you can convince them of that, then the conversation never needed to happen in the first place.
Scientists: Planet in midst of 6th mass extinction of wildlife
Yes, at almost every single stop there was at least one charging stall out of service. Many stations were small, in the little tiny towns along the freeway, with only 4 stalls. I did speak to an EA contractor at one - he said that EA will consider it an emergency, with a technician sent out immediately, only if every stall is out of service.
And Tridactyl as well for Firefox, not to mention qutebrowser, from which I write this very reply.

The annoying thing with such solutions for webapps is when there is a more fluent implementation of navigation in the context of the application. With j/k bound to normal scrolling, I then have to resort to link-hinting to navigate among articles in the feed. With app-native navigation, these can jump among articles.

A good vim-binding experience is not just j/k for scrolling up and down (:
It was 2012ish
Almost? I'm arguing that "Linux" is ambiguous and that what a lot of people think of as "Linux" is shorthand for "open and not like what we're used to with Apple and Windows and also almost universally uses actual Linux code and tools as the software."

Let's try this. If I said "I really like the Apple experience" -- what do you think of?

I can tell you what you're not thinking of: You're NOT thinking of my experience with an Apple II and the freedom of owning a machine and programming in Basic and getting the computer to do what I want. So if I get all uppity and say "What all of you are saying is Apple really isn't THE REAL APPLE" -- sure, to me it's true. Also mostly doesn't matter.
> never, ever would have happened in a hard science

If only!

Cancer biology has also struggled mightily with replicability, as has machine learning. Amgen could only replicate about half of the published findings in their reproducibility project; I’ve reviewed MLmreplications and the rate isn’t much better. Some of this is undoubtedly for petty reasons—-people run bad experiments, or put their thumb on the scale to get a particular result.

However, another major issue is that the “soft” sciences are actually quite hard. There are a million factors that might affect how an organism responds in a test. We often can’t control for all of them, and may not even know what they are. In a sense, electrons are easier to study. They’re all exactly identical, they only interact with each other in a few simple ways, and they don’t care at all about what you, the experimenter, might want or expect. Every patient (or rat) is unique and susceptible to all kinds of influences based on their interactions with each other, the experimenter, and the rest of the world. In that sense, the “replication crisis” just means we’re slowly and awkwardly discovering what matters.
Thats not true according to modern monetary theory.

Taxes are actually superflous. You only limits on spending are industrial capacity and inflation
Are we sure that the code review process hasn’t been compromised if one of the core developers’ key has been?

It seems reasonable that some due diligence in this area be done in light of this discovery.
It seems like you could 3D print all of it
I think that this makes some sense in the context of the article talking about the newer Disney films, which are purely CG, also not doing so well, but doesn't explain it entirely.

In general I believe that there's some audience CG fatigue around the world, but it hits some markets more than others and in different timeframes. In the US I do think that there is a bit, but in general if it's happening it's happening very slowly as evident by the high box office numbers for all Marvel films (often breaking records). In contrast I suspect that it's higher in Japan, driven in part by high quality non-CG animations as well as by nationalism, as the article points out. This feels like it helps explains both the lack of interest in the Marvel and CG-heavy films, as well as films like other Disney films and ones from well known directors like Tarantino, del Toro, or Paul Thomas Anderson, better than a pure CG fatigue reason.
Ignoring everything else, it seems impractical to me unless all automakers get on the same standard.

Otherwise it’s similar to the original Tesla situation where each manufacturer has to build their own network of battery swapping stations all over the world at great cost. If you’re out if juice in your VW and the only thing near by is a Chevy station you’re doomed to get a tow.

Short of a government mandate, which will never happen in the US, I don’t think automakers would ever get on one standard.
These comments about AI delivering miracle technology are sounding more like prayers than rational thought by the day
Forgive me, completely missed that this is a backend framework. I mistook this for something like Leptos, a Rust frontend web framework. Makes more sense now, thanks!
Six Years of Jekyll
The point being lowering prices can sometimes maximize revenue.

And sure housing goes down, check out prices after 2008. Condos in Miami could be bought for $30,000. They couldn't give them away.
Thanks for the list.

I've decided to dive deep into cal.com. Its tech stacks are exactly same as mine.

And thank everyone giving advice!
Apart from bottoms up and top down, there is a strategy called middle out where you target engineering managers and then simultaneously get developers excited with product experience and directors/VP(purchasers) excited about product value. This generally accelerates purchasing decision. What I have seen go wrong with pure devtool bottom up is devtool can see value but org does not value the tool. Just devs do not have purchasing power to get to a target Annual contract value that can justify valuations they raise. Everything is devtool space has become product led by design.
Usually governments have some kind of plan how much they want to spend on science. A big, but ultimately useless project can kill the funding for a lot of other research.
How does it compare to the cost of a comparable rocket launch, ie, one without the known-to-be-wasteful [1] shuttle attachment?

1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Space_Shutt...
'Other kinds of errors are more characteristic of poor science. When I was at Cornell. I often talked to the people in the psychology department. One of the students told me she wanted to do an experiment that went something like this—I don’t remember it in detail, but it had been found by others that under certain circumstances, X, rats did something, A. She was curious as to whether, if she changed the circumstances to Y, they would still do, A. So her proposal was to do the experiment under circumstances Y and see if they still did A.

I explained to her that it was necessary first to repeat in her laboratory the experiment of the other person—to do it under condition X to see if she could also get result A—and then change to Y and see if A changed. Then she would know that the real difference was the thing she thought she had under control.

She was very delighted with this new idea, and went to her professor. And his reply was, no, you cannot do that, because the experiment has already been done and you would be wasting time. This was in about 1935 or so, and it seems to have been the general policy then to not try to repeat psychological experiments, but only to change the conditions and see what happens.'

Judging by the replication crisis in psychology, not much has changed since Feynman's day.
Coming of Age – Bryan Cantrill – Monktoberfest 2022
Possibly worse news for builders, who have new inventory that sits, who have committed many millions or billions of capital.
> Not everything has to have a 'real world value' to it.

I agree with you but this is definitely one of the things that should have a real world value.

Many of the brightest minds in the world when it comes to space would be working on a project like sending humans to mars for decades. Not to mention the hundreds of billions of dollars it will cost.

Plus it's not like the alternative of sending robots to every planet and large moon in the solar system is not cool.
Only because we don’t care to. What does a colony of 20k in Antarctica achieve? It still has all of the same shared fate issues by being on Earth.
Reminds me of "managing unmotivated people is hard, so don't".
It's not about money, it's about power. If you hold a physical item, you have the maximum power over it as possible. If you want to entrust someone else with it, go ahead, but at the end of the day your access to the item will be subject to their whims and those of the greater political establishment / woke clergy / corrupt and powerful.
Special thanks, you make a great point!

I will pick one interesting open source project and start contributing.
It's not fair to lump in the _entire_ ISS budget in with exploration. They do plenty of materials science, pharmaceutical development, earth observation, and subatomic physics as well.
If you're using stable diffusion 2.0 or later you can use its depth-to-image mode[0] to create variations of an image which respect its composition without having to keep your parameters within a narrow range.

[0] https://github.com/Stability-AI/stablediffusion#image-modifi...
Thanks for the clarification, totally missed that. Makes much more sense.
I’m with you on the concurrency model. What was the reasoning for a runtime per core?
I'm glad C++ has added more features, it is a much nicer language than it used to be. string_view from C++17 is very convenient and just this past week I had to use std::latch from C++20.
The obvious answer to "why" is that you can use Antarctica as a low(er) cost, low risk, practice run. Similar to space tech of the 60s, the tech developed this way could have a big impact on many areas of life. And yes, it won't solve everything, nor give us a second planet.

Why should anyone do anything, really?
Permanent (self-sufficient) LEO human habitation doesn't make sense because there's no source of material there. Mars has the major benefit that we know that there are raw materials and enough sunlight to turn those materials into various required inputs like methane. LEO definitely doesn't have that, and it's less clear whether anyplace on the Moon has that than it is Mars. Mars is further away in travel time, but not much further in fuel costs, and it's far better than the Moon for living off the land.
It's difficult to think of extinction events that satisfy both of the following criteria:

1. An event that affects the Earth without affecting Mars.

2. An event that leaves the Earth more uninhabitable than Mars, even temporarily.

A gamma ray burst or rogue star that destroys the Earth would just as easily destroy Mars. Meanwhile, even a colossal meteor strike such as the one that killed the dinosaurs, despite leaving the Earth a shattered ruin for millenia, would still result in a planet that is more habitable than Mars.

The bottom line is that Mars is an awful backup for life.
Most humans are emotion/feeling based, even those that believe they are not. You (pretend you’re a car manufacturer person) can Carl Sagan it for yourself all you want, but you’re selling to the broad base of people who vote for very flawed politicians, go to church to worship imaginary sky demons, etc.

tl;dr: Your allies and word of mouth do it for you. This is literally why car manufacturers have press and PR offices. You have to not only respond to media, you have to proactively engage politicians, journalists, influencers, etc. What you cannot do is throw up your hands and say “no one will believe us so why bother. Our fanbois get it!”
> what education would Tesla have to do and why would it have worked

I'd have started with fire departments. We're now replete with horror stories of un-extinguishable fires and re-igniting cars, new headlines appearing routinely with juicy quotes from unprepared fire fighters. That's unnecessary and could have been avoided, obviating the bulk of those headlines. Instead fire fighters could have been advocates. Advocates people listen to.
Software updates for satellites have been possible for a long time.
Kelly criterion was originally invented by Daniel Bernoulli (using logarithmic utility) as a resolution to the St. Petersburg Paradox, IIRC:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Petersburg_paradox
Yes, but this is NASA's flagship mission. It's inevitably going to get special treatment from congress.
Another bug is that sometimes the video isn't available in my country.
I never bought that argument. It's like some secularized version of America as a City Upon a Hill. The isolationism works for like 50 years or something, but afterwards the entire system is just going to be integrated, just like any new settlement on Earth was that served as a temporary refuge. Distance that seemed to provide safety is going to go from large to small to non-existent very quickly as technology develops, and probably much faster than in the past.

Any global extinction event is then just going to be a solar-system extinction event, Expanse style. To save enough humans from extinction in case of catastrophy probably some vaults are enough.
Even with some defects or imperfections anything is better than what we have now - which is basically nothing.

I think the way I'd think about this is to imagine say a small community, such as a town of say 5000 people or so. While you cannot know each person individually, you can know of people by reputation. People do earn rep over time, and they can burn rep. It is true that some people will be unfairly downscored, or unfairly upscored - but I'm not really trying to argue for those fine grained situations. What I'm trying to argue for is simply distinguishing the very bad actors acting out of pure malice from injecting fake news, media and 'yellow journalism' into human conversations.

True some real people will be downscored (I prefer to think of this as downscoring bad actors rather than 'blocking'). And true an AI can 'sound very human' - but an AI or a bad actor will struggle to build up a reputation over time. An AI can't shake hands with you, it is harder for it to prove it is human... Other bad actors will presumably burn their reputations if they spit out a series of offensive, misleading, false, inflammatory or toxic posts...

Note I am not necessarily advocating for crypto per se as a way to establish social trust graphs (a'la PGP or say Keybase) but I am arguing that there are other options that the OP did not raise. I more want to see a wider discussion around ways to filter malicious media that either "centralized systems" OR "small social clubs". I'm not necessarily saying it has to be a cryptographic solution... but I do think there are more ways to have what we want.
What were you doing underwater for long periods of time?
> An untouched rest of the universe seems far more valuable than one tainted with humans

This seems like a silly worry given the rate of expansion of the universe. We couldn't "taint" the universe even if we wanted to. At least nothing outside of our galaxy (but more likely outside of just our solar system).

The universe is essentially infinite. With essentially infinite planets, moons, stars, solar systems, and galaxies. Humans are unique (until proven otherwise). I say let the humans have their fun in their 0.000000000000000001% of the universe. In both best and worst case scenarios, there is still plenty of "untainted" universe left.
I had to chuckle at this analogy: "If NASA is Amtrak in space, then SpaceX is the Fyre Festival with rockets."
They already had a letter of intent from Lotus before he joined.
Opens fine for me. My last 2 ISPs (Xfinity and now AT&T Fiber) rarely rotate.
Love your perspective. It reminds me of the technological advances from the space race to the moon as well. We aren't taking casual trips up there ever, but the tech that came from it was revolutionary
> 3 really hits home when you realize we have rules for killing each other (war

Those are some of the oldest and most important ones
There are posts about OP’s server being hacked, but there’s zero evidence that they put any leaked secret key on their server. Someone more connected to OP suggests that it might be backdoored desktop software.[1]

Your average user will install whatever crap they find on the Internet. Hell, a friend of mine (in their 20s, not a grandma) recently installed god knows what when “Windows support” called. And it’s not the first time a friend fell for this kind of scam.

[1] https://twitter.com/peterktodd/status/1609655629903265795
It's so weird that the USA keeps saying "yeah we need to reopen Mountain Pass" and then never does it for years and years. There's lots of places you could mine in the USA, it's a big country.
sets provide the "identity" function.

essentially, sets underlie the formalism to compute (or not, i.e. not-necessarily compute) whether some X == Y by value (i.e. with reading the content of memory-address (pointer semantics)) and by the memory address as a value (by object in memory)
Monorepos vs. Multirepos: A Comprehensive Comparison
Are we sure that getting to 100,000 self-sufficient humans on Mars will take less time than getting to 100,000 self-sufficient humans on the Moon? The conditions on the Moon are harsher, but our ability to move people and supplies there seems much greater. And what exactly is the extinction event that would threaten both Earth and a self-sufficient Moon colony?
I wouldn't put much stock in this. Sometimes people will say this and mean it and other times they won't and the only way to feel the difference is non-verbal + context. There is no book of hidden phrases, signals or cheat codes.

Honestly I would approach the entire article with skepticism. Guys like the author are mostly dogs barking at the mirror. The underlying philosophy that socialization has a fixed set of rules that can be gamed and optimized is faulty.
California fixed the loophole by making EV's without battery swap technology also eligible for the full subsidy.

So non-Tesla EV makers benefited from Tesla bringing attention to the issue.
You could just have a criminal statue, and then it's not a question of damages.
The only problem being that “everyone” can’t agree on which particular set of features should be removed.
Breaking existing code is always going to be a tough sell, for hopefully obvious reasons.
It is hard to speculate without knowing much about the original poster or the types of studies they read. Maybe they prefer “Nature Human Behavior,” who knows?
I like the bit later in the essay where he describes what's often missing:

"It’s a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty—a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you’re doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid—not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you’ve eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked—to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated."
Is that really a bug with the game, or a bug of YouTube/BigMedia licensing bullshit? /s
I wonder if this would yield even better results if it were to be split into multiple tracks in the pre-processing stage with something like Demucs.[1]

https://github.com/facebookresearch/demucs