skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
you are right about this, but my argument is that we can do this if we want to. Whenever humanity set its sights on a big project such as Apollo or Manhattan, we have accomplished "impossible" things.
It's not the people in general - many people, including every family member and friend of anyone who has ever been seriously ill while not being seriously wealthy, understands just how bad things are. However, when things are this bad, (and this is actually _the best things have ever been_ [1]), it's so easy to spread fear and anxiety that the situation could get worse, when you represent the people who profit from this situation. This effectively paralyzes public opinion. At this point, over half a million Americans work for health insurance companies _alone_, and health care spending overall is now over 17% of GDP [2]! Unfortunately, this rot is now structural.

[1] Before the Obama administration, your health insurance could be denied or cut off based on arbitrary reasons ("pre-existing conditions"), and if you did not have a job that provided health insurance, you had to pay this cost entirely yourself - unless you qualified for Medicaid through absolute destitution. The Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"), despite being a massive compromise from universal health care, allowed the sick and poor to get subsidized insurance, shielding tens of millions of people from the worst outcomes of the system.

[2] https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hpb20220506.381195/
We don't have that rule!

Whoever has power to disregard the opinions of others can disregard the opinions of others. But that's not a rule, it's basically a tautology.
El Salvador’s Historic Digital Asset Securities Law Passes
I remember a time in the mid 2000s where a 20 hour delay was the norm for the northbound Coast Starlight. I used to catch the previous day's train from Salem to Seattle...
No blame for the person driving unsafe equipment on a public highway?
I bet a “corrupt file” means somebody accidentally dropped a table
>A century ago, almost everyone thought that stepping on a divine body like the moon is absolutely impossible for humanity.

A century ago we DEFINITELY conceived of visiting a divine body. 121 years ago a science fiction movie about landing on the moon was released, based on a scifi book released _158_ years ago.

>if a ship constantly accelerates in space, it can reach another star system in a few decades

Try a few dozen thousand years, my dude...
https://www.universetoday.com/141407/how-big-would-a-generat...

Even Project Orion, which is literally strapping many successive nuclear bombs onto the bottom of your craft, would take 130 years to get to our closest star.... and that's not taking into account stopping time, so it'd take 130 years to do a flyby of Alpha Centauri at 3% of the speed of light.

Not to mention the fact that ALL spaceships bleed air even under optimum conditions. A generational ship would need to be HUGE and have even bigger reserve supplies of air and water than you'd ever think possible. 50,000 years worth of air and water for 100-500 people? That's a LOT of mass.

Beyond ion propulsion and Project Orion we start to get into wormholes, black-hole-gravity-assists, remote-quantum-entanglement, time travel. Stuff that's theoretically possible kinda sorta if you completely ignore some fairly fundamental laws... the tricky thing is EVEN IF you choose to ignore those fundamental laws, the amount of sheer energy you're talking about is like the many multiples of the energy output of our sun over its _entire lifetime_.
I disagree.

Look at your body. It's multicellular, not one living thing. Your very cells both compete and cooperate with one another for resources to survive (just as we humans do amongst ourselves). For the greater good of the organism (you), individual cells are programmed to die when they are in poor health or old age or in too much stress, to allow younger healthier cells to take their place for the greater good of the organism as a whole. When this process is averted, or goes awry, old/unhealthy cells remain and the organism suffers, as it has to support these old/unhealthy cells which don't contribute their fair share to the organism. It has to divert resources which could otherwise go to new younger healthier productive cells. Worse, is cancer, which is literally when cells rebel their original programming, and become selfishly greedy. Obviously, as we all know, these things can lead to the organism becoming dysfunctional and even dying.

This reality applies to cells, and to organizations like companies, governments, and even species.

So to answer: are lives worth preserving? Yes. But reality is, there can come times when the preserving the lives of the old, is directly at odds with the lives of the young, and choosing to preserve old lives over young lives, is harmful to lives as a whole.
That's super easy to learn.
You’re correct, bathrooms in UK are zoned and most houses aren’t big enough to meet the distance requirements from the “wet zones” to accommodate a regular socket/outlet.

Shaver sockets are typically going to have ingress protection.

https://www.tapwarehouse.com/blog/how-to-guides/understandin...
Sorry this may seem a little snarky but - "They will think of something" - the universal band-aid for I want it to be true but I rationally don't know how.

When ever I hear that, the optimist in me wants it to be true. The pessimist thinks otherwise and nowadays the pessimist usually wins.

We will have hotels in orbit by the 1970's - they will think of something! That was a legitimate thing that the Hiltons proposed back in the 1960's.
This is highly informative. No seriously, it's probably the best thing I've read on NOTAMs.

https://deathtonotams.com/

from there you can get to

https://fixingnotams.org/

and pilots won't stop laughing and crying when they read

https://fixingnotams.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Field-Gu...
Absolutely.
I wonder if say, cheap energy, will be as readily available for non gov / army purposes in 50 years.

The comment your responding too sound like someone born in the 60´s or 50’s. ( meaning : tech is always progressing, no limit, forward and upward . It’s nice. But I don’t think it match 2023 )
All? Saudi Arabia had a good year.

I think it's more like authoritarians had a bad year, except the ones allied with the US.
There are so many practical problems with doing such a thing. The first is that it's incredibly economically expensive to do so. If the aliens aren't spending their resources, whose resources are they spending? Clearly it must be theirs.

Secondly, the thought of unleashing a civilization-destroying self-replicating AI into the galaxy is so dangerous that I doubt any civilization would do it. Imagine the dangers of that. All it takes is for the AI to misidentify you as "another" civilization and wipe you out, or for these AI to be taken over by another party and turned against you, or for the AI to actually just misidentify you and kill you. The dangers of that far outweigh the benefits in the miniscule chance that the Dark Forest is in fact real.
Replying to both comments at once: I understood “win” to mean “be a viable replacement for C / C++”. A viable replacement has to meet _everyone’s_ needs, not just the needs of those for whom performance isn’t critical. And to be more specific about the performance, it isn’t by a small margin (unfortunately I no longer have the links handy, but the general trend was that Rust, C and C++ were in the same performance group, then Java, then Go, then Swift, then JavaScript. It was something like 3 to 5x slower).

I should also perhaps mention that Swift is my favorite language to develop in. I’m not trying to be antagonistic, just realistic about its prospects against Rust.
There are stacks of subsystems that can be tested quickly, janky, yet safely. Safety is always paramount, but a relative term. Safe for an end user, and safe for a prototype engineering test need not be comparable. Similar safety, for sure, similar longevity, ease of use etc., potentially very different.
SICP cover: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/SICP_cov...
I would argue they're not failing in the same way though.

The US system is "failing" in the sense that health services are not available/affordable to all.

The NHS has issues with funding and staffing.

France has issues with supply chains.

Any system will have flaws, but just because no system is perfect it does not mean that all are imperfect in the same way.
How to Send Cold Email Campaigns
And the answer to the question, "How many?"

About 1.5 million per year.
The classic sorting algo videos with sound come to mind first: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPRA0W1kECg . Mergesort is my favorite video.

The main resource on learning Erlang, https://learnyousomeerlang.com, has a lot of funny ones, some of which are useful.
So cool to see Bill Mollison in there. I live on a farm and work remotely in part because of that book.
Its an API for the higher level parts of the OS, not the kernel, so that would be distribution dependent on Linux. You would build it on top of linux and make other programs program against it.

Windows has WinAPI which is basically the same thing.
Seems HN has ruled out aliens but have we given any consideration that 'Oumuamua may have been sent back in time by a future human civilization? That may explain the rather phallic shape.
Classic Go programmer. This is why I use rust B)

(joke)
The abbreviations way pre-date SMS - they were standardised back in the teletype days, 1940s-1950s, when printing speed was 30-100cps! Now NOTAMs (mostly) comply with global standards so, like VHF AM aviation radio, substantial changes are impractical.

There is significant debate concerning the number (too many) and size (too long) of NOTAMs, but I can assure you that when you get an unexpected rerouting on a dark, bumpy, busy night, you do not want to be reading pages on plain-text prose! All experienced pilots are comfortable with the cryptic NOTAMs, and are used to scanning the abbreviations for important items :)
Various comments above expand upon it, but pg12 only changed CTEs which are referenced once to default to NOT MATERIALIZED. Multi-referenced CTEs remain materialized by default.

Also not-mat CTEs can perform a lot worse: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/64016236/postgres-12-mat...

But so can MAT CTEs: https://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/257014/are-there-sid...

So the limitations are that it’s very much ymmv.
I expressed this same desire to a friend, who warned me of the VR goggle marks left on your head when you take them off after a long session.

I want the VR monitors, but I'm wary of having a permanent mark on my head from wearing them for 8 hours a day for days on end...
Yep and if you ship WAL transaction logs to standby databases/replicas, corrupt blocks or lost writes in the primary database won't be propagated to the standbys (unlike with OS filesystem or storage-level replication).

Edit: Should add "won't be silently propagated"
Working with critical infrastructure and lack of true in depth oversight it wouldn’t surprise me DR plans were not ever executed or exercised in a meaningful manner.
ImageMagick Security Policy Evaluator
Make yourself vulnerable to assailants?
First of all thanks for Zig. I like your work.
As I said, I don't know Zig. I read the OP's article and saw these:
std.debug.print("{s}\n", .{arg});
vs
std.debug.print("{s}\n", arg); // This is intuitive coming from other langs.
and
std.debug.print("I just want some output\n", .{}); // Not at all expected .{}

There might be good reasons why they are designed like that, but we outsiders find that syntax idiosyncratic.
Tell HN: Notam Systems Info
Resources I've rounded up from the web. Appears there are two systems: the older US NOTAM System (USNS) and the newer FNS. [1] (2019)

An overview from 2011 of the to-be-implemented FNS. [2]

Official site for AIXM, the interchange model used by FNS. It has a Github account (!) with resources including XLST templates. [4]

ICAO (International Civil Aviation Org.) 2017 "Information Paper" about FAA's migration from USNS to FNS. [5] Kind of fluffy, but a few interesting details. As of 2017, FNS was handling 80% of NOTAMS generated.

Wait, there's a new new thing. [6] (2022) System Wide Information Management (SWIM) "is the Digital Data-Sharing backbone of NextGen" [7], and NOTAMS are now available through it.

Finally, a recent National Airspace "Enterprise Architecture Infrastructure Roadmap" [8] has link to a ppt document which has an annoying number of external links that 404 (I just keep telling LibreOffice "OK" and it eventually loaded). edit: Slide 28 just says "FNS Sustainment" for 2021-2024, and USNS is a dotted line petering off in 2025.

[1] https://www.aviationtoday.com/2019/11/18/faa-looks-finish-consolidating-notams-one-system/

[2] https://www.aixm.aero/sites/aixm.aero/files/imce/library/ATIEC_2011_08/13_day1_notam_news_and_demo.pdf

[3] https://www.aixm.aero/

[4] https://github.com/aixm

[5] https://www.icao.int/NACC/Documents/Meetings/2017/AIMFPL/AIM-FPL-AIDC-IP02.pdf

[6] https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/notam

[7] https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/swim/overview/

[8] https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/nas-enterprise-architecture-infrastructure-roadmaps
The problem is the risk-reward balance is deeply baked into the culture, at least the current generation.
Or maybe we're the friendliest they've ever encountered.
People like to present humans like some godawful species. It's more likely that we're in the middle of the spectrum.
It doesn’t take much to refute this claim. If iOS browser is so much worse than Android’s, why don’t companies just make an iOS app and tell Android users to use the web app?

Also, it came out in the Epic Trial that 80% of App Store revenue comes from pay to win games.

Outside of games, the most popular apps either front services that don’t have in app purchases at all like Spotify, Netflix, Facebook etc.
> It was famous for good concurrency

That’s because people confuse “easy” and “good”.

Go has easy concurrency, but it’s not good. The opposite really. It’s at best the similar problematic model you get in other, older, procedural / oo langages. At worst it’s a lot worse given how difficult it is (and even more so was before generics) to build abstractions and concurrent data structures.
It was United or Alaska and was a few years back and fortunately it wasn't me on the plane, it was my wife - a big east coast storm and airport closures diverted her flight (along with a bunch of other flights).
If the massive debt is at 1 or 2% interest they could essentially bank a fairly small portion of it to service that interest. When instead debt is at 7+% it's a whole other story. You better be building something that will shake loose enough profit to service the debt.
An advanced civilization that can send out a probe like that also likely has tools to cloak its existence to us. You could very well have a situation where the mothership docks outside of a solar system, cloaks itself, and sends out a probe, and the probe eventually makes it back to the mothership.

I really think we are limited by our imagination and anthropomorphism. A civilization a million years ahead of us in development is likely capable of things we can’t even imagine.

I always like to remind myself that our own civilization is at most only 10k years old. If we survive, I can’t imagine what we would be like in 10x more time.
The other classical example being the large number of Prussian soldiers killed by horse kicks in the late 19th century.
PRs should be small units of change. PRs should be the edit history. If your process involves one PR per feature this makes them large and unwieldy, hard to review, hard to test, and more likely hard to rollback.
There's no physics required if you want the ball to move at a constant velocity.
I would love to see what this looks like in practice if you can point me to a link.

(I’m now curious if the unowned keyword would have similar performance characteristics)
I very much agree and the only thing that I'm missing is tools that generate a somewhat stable output. What I want is tools that take their last output into consideration and generate new diagrams that are both correct and as similar as possible to the last output they produced. They should do what a human does out of necessity when updating a diagram manually - make it represent the current state correctly with minimal effort.

Of course that means the diagrams will not be optimal in any case. For example, there could be better arrangements of boxes or less crossings of lines. I sill think stable diagrams are important for our limited brain and one important reason why people shy away from automatic diagram generation is the mental chaos a complete rearrangement of elements brings with it.

One example of a software that got this right is Taskjuggler, the obvious counterexample is Graphviz.
Are you writing about Androiddev, submit your content in Google Dev Library?
In my experience if I'm on excellent terms with management because I'm a productive and valuable employee, there's never any problem getting time off in either of these paradigms.

But with the metered PTO benefit, I generally receive more income in the fullness of time.
Numerous android apps were found to be doing dodgy things after the fact. Probably ios ones too. It's not foolproof.
> They should be testing their databases before backing them up blindly.

Oh you mean they should be testing/validating the generated backup db file before replicating it to long-term archive ...
You say that, but then I counter with the complete reliability and brilliance of Rosetta 2.
They still are sometimes. Whenever you have a CTE which is referenced more than once, to be specific.
> You can’t program your way out of the problem with Level 2; in fact, the better the Level 2 system seems to be, the worse the problem gets. That problem is that human beings are simply no good at monitoring systems that do most of the work of a task and remaining ready to take over that task with minimal to no warning.

This is incredibly true and obvious.

It's likely people monitoring their car aren't doing anything at all: sleeping, reading a book, whatever.

But if anything, actual monitoring is harder than doing: it means actively watching what the machine does, understanding it, thinking about what one would have done, doing a diff and analyzing it, all in real time, all the time. It's exhausting.

That a situation like this is even legal is amazing.
Are you telling me the laptop that I have isn't what it is? Really? That's what you want to do?

It was repaired twice by Apple, but the third time it happened, they wanted me to pay for it which was going to be a good chunk of the cost of a new MBP.
Other than fashion, what possibly positive function could such a device afford?

I find it much more likely that they will use external facing screens that recreate the appearance of the wearers face to onlookers and so reduce the perceived anti-social nature of opaque goggles.
I started replacing the batteries in all of them as soon as the first one starts beeping.

I figure the batteries won't last much longer in the others and I don't need to go hunting.
more like generic tweaks rather than large swathes of stuff
Do not mistake technical viability with economic viability.
The 1st Breeder reactor went into service in 1962, there have been many after and they have all meet the same fate.

Yes, they can breed their own fuel but the total cost of doing it is wildly prohibitive.

You can get gold/uranium/lithium from Ocean water, try and do it at a price people will actually pay for it. You can get minerals from space, so long as the market rate of $10 million a ton is viable... etc.

As always, if I get proven wrong - that will be a great day!
Hi, and welcome to Hacker News. For good reason, comments like this don't do well here. Please read the site guidelines, and use them to make comments that encourage curious discussion. :)

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Labor is way too powerful in this country. Businesses are really taking a hit from all the power that labor has.
Does it pay writers?
I heard an interesting philosophical discussion many years back, where it was stated that we are morally obligated to outlaw non-self-driving cars as soon as it is proven that self-driving cars kill fewer people. It is not so easy to argue against that, because if you do, you rate your own right to choose higher than another persons right to live.
Let's not forget that PhD students (or better named "student researchers") exist.
To get large FoV for the AR overlay one needs large optics and large-ish displays.

There is only so much magic one can squeeze out from optical trickery.
Especially at a price point like this.
I don’t know about the cheese but I disagree with you about the wine. For example Californian wine is excellent, and you get a much higher quality for the money than with French wine for anything below $150. French wine is in much higher demand so all the lowest quality is sold too, instead of being made vinegar or discarded, becoming the entry level. French wine is subjected to strict rules that don’t allow them correct them like the Californian do, like adding a bit of water here or there… etc. In places where you have to import both the quality difference for the money is evident, within the us is abysmal
> MUTCD is great if you're in a car on a grade separated highway. But it's staggeringly awful for when you're outside of a car.

>

>It could even be argued that the MUTCD is awful for driving in an urban area. MUTCD designs streets similarly to rural highways, and this can create conditions where people speed when they need to be driving slowly, because the design of the street doesn't reflect the speed the sign says you need to be driving.

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding about what the MUTCD is for. It's mainly about traffic signs and pavement markings. Road design is covered in the AASHTO publication "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets"
In all seriousness, it's messed up how strongly Amazon can fight this, and not have to put up until they've wasted more money than it would've cost them to just accept it in the first place.
Just ignore the name Tesla and think for a minute how would you feel if this were any Japanese or Korean automaker's car. would NHTSA be still as forgiving? we should feel exactly the same as in that case.
> A century ago we DEFINITELY conceived of visiting a divine body. 121 years ago a science fiction movie about landing on the moon was released, based on a scifi book released _158_ years ago.

I said "almost everyone". If you go to 1920s and ask a million people if humanity will be able to walk on the moon within their lifetimes, not a single one would say yes. And yet, we were able to do it. Similarly, we have been conceiving of interstellar travel for decades.

> Try a few dozen thousand years, my dude

With constant acceleration, ship time is very different. With constant acceleration using controlled nuclear fusion, we can do it in less than a century. Project Orion is not constant acceleration. Now before you point out issues in constant acceleration, remember that if you were in 1920s, you (and I) would also point out issues in moon landing. How can humanity ever leave Earth's gravity, go accurately to the moon, decelerate, LAND without crashing, walk, LAUNCH from moon again, go accurately to the earth, handle extreme atmospheric temps, and LAND without crashing.

Well, we did all of that. So surely, given a century, we can figure out interstellar travel.