skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
People in art school also practice by studying existing art and images.
Interesting thought, I had a similar response to the sentence, and this phrasing seems to be in vogue with all journalists.

From a theology standpoint, evolution being a property of existence itself means one could read Evolution as ‘God’ and the two terms become interchangeable.
Strong agree.

Except it's not even really about productivity, it's about outcomes. The productivity is only important insofar as it achieves the outcomes. The ideal agile process would have the team on the golf course or in the spa but still changing the world (any suggestions on achieving this, gratefully accepted, as always).
AlpineJS is actually going to be bundled by with Livewire 3, when released.
Tesla is still an order of magnitude larger in the charging regards, which means they are in a class of their own.
I see there are many people commenting on the ethical value of that saying.

To understand it better it is worth noting that it is a bastardization of this misquote commonly attributed to Socrates: “By all means marry; if you get a good wife, you’ll become happy; if you get a bad one, you’ll become a philosopher.”

As detailed in this ( https://qr.ae/pvP31C ) answer on Quora, Socrates never said (or was never recorded to say it, he didn't write down his philosophy) this exact thing. But there is a recorded dialogue that is plausible as the source of the simplified quote.

While less clear from what kraig911 said or from the original dialogue, the commonly spread (meme) version of the quote, which I pasted above, makes the misogynism clear. I hope further explaining that is not necessary.

It is important to note that Ancient Grece was very gender unequal, so a misogynistic quote in that social context is not something surprising, even for one of the brightest minds. That is just how society was in those times, and those philosophers did not get the benefit of hindsight we have today.

Besides, as stated above, Socrates didn't actually say that misquote. He was commenting about the challenges of his relationship with his wife. From that dialogue, it is even implied it was a conscious decision he made.

The misquote is especially dreadful because it is a generalization over the entire feminine gender. I am now quite curious when exactly in history did the misquote take its commonly known form.

I am quite surprised that of all the people commenting, no one attempted to go to the source of that meme. Instead, everyone just espoused their viewpoint. I wish HN to be a place of knowledge seeking, not a place of culture war.

Edit: looking into this a little deeper, Spencer McDaniel, the one who wrote the Quora answer linked above, has an entire blog about ancient times and expands on the issue of misquotes: http://talesoftimesforgotten.com/2019/07/16/fake-and-misattr...
Interesting. So in a sense, would you say Mastadon federation is like collaborative filtering?

It would be nice to define "local overrides," though. Much like how we have /etc/ configs, then dotfile, env vars, and then options on the CLI.
If you go this route isn't your server spending a lot of CPU cycles generating pages that will never be accessed?
Hold up. The metro card side of the story doesn't make sense. Why would it relocate to Maspeth Queens, a place that is right in the middle of the transit desert not reachable by subway at all. It's the exact opposite of 370 Jay. Nothing goes there. Is it just cheap parking for armored vehicle lot? Does it have anything to do with the MTA owned non passenger tracks which do go through there? And why was it considered so much more cumbersome to collect fares off the metro card machine compared to the booth sales? So many unanswered questions.

I do wonder if armored trains might be part of special scenario plans related to high value visitors to the UN. Think of it as a modern track 61.
Random Ls throughout and Bs at the end of my messages in the last year or two have been driving me insane! Glad to know I'm not the only one.
Every language needs new features to continue to meet demand and to improve performance.

Swift is a young language compared to Objective C so it needs to continue to grow and mature.

Not sure why you’re so against this.

I’m a C# gal myself and I’m often updating my knowledge to pick up new features that come out - and thus improving my code in either readability or functionality.
oh yeah, no doubt that their revenues will be lower, with the departure of advertisers. What I meant was that the decline will not be as apparent due to them no longer being public.
Also grime artist Newham Generals were named after the hospital.
I suggest to all of you todisable and clear your YT viewing history, search history, and be mindful of what you like/add to lists like "watch later".

Then you will get significantly less addictive content suggestions.
If it’s basically zero then that’s a difference in kind, not degree.

The point I’m making is you can’t take a quote from Amy Winehouse about how boring life is without drugs and apply it to people who have just experienced anything intense.

Amy Winehouse was likely in PAWS with severely altered brain chemistry. It’s not just that other experiences were pale in comparison to what she’d been doing, it’s likely she was chemically incapable of feeling very much positive and responding normally.
I've done enough experiments like this to know two things:

1) There are a lot of modern "conveniences" and practices that are actually pretty superfluous and you can do without most of the time.

2) There are a lot of conveniences that actually make your life better, because going without them means you're devoting such a large percentage of your time to solving the problems they solved for you that you're basically just subsisting rather than living.

It's like minimalist living, which I'm actually a very big fan of in theory, but which fails for me because I'm a dude who makes things. I'm drawn to nomadism and having less stuff, but how the hell you gonna build your own table unless you got tools and materials?

The answer, I think, is that there are no answers that are one size fits all. If your job and your hobbies are all digital, you can get away with living out of a backpack and a messenger bag; if they aren't you probably can't.

But, having said that, the experiment is always valuable for anyone, to find out what the least amount of stuff/energy/money you need to live and be happy is. A lot of the crap we spend money and natural resources on is not stuff we need or even particularly want - it's just stuff that somebody wants to sell us, which is why modern life is so fraught with irritation - everybody is trying to get us to buy their crap 24/7 by any means necessary, and it's hard not to fall for it.

My rule is: never buy what you can make, never make what you can remake or upcycle, never remake what you can repair. Of course, I've spent many years learning how to do all kinds of useful things, from building electronics to tables to plumbing to gardening. That's what drives me. Most people lose their shit if their phone battery stops working, but they're tapped into stuff I have no idea about.

Intentionality is the key. Be like the Amish: don't reject technology or convenience or the grid, but make a conscious evaluation of what bits of it work for you and what bits you don't need or want. Maybe you're the kind of person who doesn't need to plug in your oven because you're rich enough or lazy enough to order every meal. It's not a direction I'd go in, personally, but if that's your thing, I guess, do it - just do it by conscious choice, accepting the responsibility of the consequences, rather than by default.
> We love roundabouts

Context for our American friends. This isn't specific to London. Everywhere I've lived in Europe is more roundabout-heavy than the USA. Because, you know, they're objectively superior ;-)
I used to be addicted to youtube, and the most effective method I found to limiting my consumption was using an extension called Unhook. It removes all recommendations and the shorts and trending tabs, so the only videos I can watch are those from channels I'm subscribed to, or videos that I search for.
If you would want to run a tournament for this you'll probably need a better client, potentially with built-in online play. I could be tempted to work on something web based, but it would take a while to finish.
That was it's specific intent.
I3status-Rust
Yeah, good point. I guess it'd be a pain to have to keep reauth'ing if your IP changed for legitimate reasons.

It would be possible to do some kind of check for "this session token was used in the US and Russia twenty minutes apart... something's fishy," but that adds in more complexity.
Not really it's just got various names. chronic fatigue syndrome, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, post viral fatigue...

Even straight up depression. When billions of people catch the same virus unintuitive things happen.

Maybe it's a strange virus (by what metric?) But it was definitely psychologically a very strange time.
As far as I have seen, installing UI apps via homebrew still occasionally pops up the usual scare dialogs if the app isn't properly signed and notarized.
I haven't noticed more hate speech.
Very interesting. From playing a single game you immediately notice that traditional chess theory doesn't apply to this game at all. After some testing I found a few things in particular that change the way the game plays out drastically:

When having two pawns adjacent one of them can still defend the other by having it only slightly behind. They can also alternate defending each other with a single move. Pawns can also attack/defend things directly in front of them by pushing up against them. These things combined mean that it's almost impossible to have any pawn weaknesses, other than having a singled out pawn with no neighbors. In general pawns are the most improved piece with this ruleset.

The ability to move directly forward makes knights significantly stronger. Knights ability to move through other pieces is also particularly strong versus pawns which can now block most pieces from moving around quite easily.

Since pawns generally mainly move along one axis, it is easier to control the distance between pieces in the forward-backward axis than in the left-right axis. This makes it harder to utilise Rooks to capture two adjacent pieces. Bishops on the other hand have an easier time capturing two adjacent pieces, if positioned correctly. I'm not sure this compensates for the fact that bishops now have a much harder time penetrating positions, they are the most easily blocked of all the pieces.

Overall it is very interesting as a chess variant, it plays so very different from chess. It's hard to even figure out reasonable openers.
Does it matter? Even if he only gets half the price back, that leaves 1500 left of the debt he has to pay out of pocket. If he's paying monthly for the camera, he suddenly has a $4000 bill on top of whatever of the $5000 debt remains unpaid. I think I'd rather be in the former situation.
I know, that is my point. Parenting is a juggling of risks.

"based on the information available"

And the information avaiable is confusing and partly contradictory.

I know that many researchers advised against child vaccination, because of the unknowns and the low risk for the children from the disease in the first place.

"Making them work at all takes a huge level of understanding."

It does, but it would be news to me, that the immune system is completely understood. Even less the immune system and long term effects of a immune system that is developing.

It was cutting edge research and to my understanding it was more of: this might work.

And it did and unlike the anti vaxx crowd told us, apparently we did not die from it, nor were there mass severe long term damages to be found. But there was damage, some likely did in fact die from the vaccines and so it is not a 100% clear obvious decision. It might have been for you, that is allright and it was allright for me, but for my infant children I did not feel like making that experiment.
I think what’s clear is that this is an unprecedented type of use. I’m really interested in seeing how the courts rule on this one as it has wide implications for the AI era.
Apple produces iPhones, Goldman Sachs does financial engineering - its Asset Management division, in addition to $1.5T of their own assets, also manages $2.5T of customer's money. If necessary they can use those assets to further their agenda (by investing them in specific industries or companies). That gives them a lot more influence than Apple, which has to use their own cash for everything. That's why they had audacity to say they are doing "God's work" :)
I remember that I used to have a Windows Mobile build of Blender but on 320x240 it was pretty unusable
> You're paying about half of what I am for gas and electricity, almost 1/3 of the unsubsidised price

Ah, maybe that explains it.

And that matches my assumptions about US vs UK and EU -- US makes energy really cheap for consumers.

That could explain the OP, the cost-benefit might make more sense with US energy prices? Or is that right, should it be the opposite? The OP seemed to know what they were talking about, do you think they were wrong? I'm figuring they were right for US prices but maybe not UK.

> It's interesting that you have additional consumption based supply charges.

So it's complicated, and has to do also with the fact that my state in the USA, Maryland, has a complicated "market choice" thing where you can choose your "energy supplier" from a number of different companies with different complicated rate structures (most of which float in some way, and change month to month). But of course you still get the gas and electricity through the same pipes and wires. So you still pay the traditional legacy companies for "distribution" to pay for the infrastructure, while (if you choose) paying different companies for "supply". then there are various other fees and taxes (some based on usage) on my bill that I have no idea what they are.

My impression is that the "supply choice" thing is all a neoliberal scam. The price structures are super confusing, and a LOT of people, especially poorer people who can't afford it, get really taken for a ride. Often there's a cheap "teaser" rate, then the rates balloon to something hypothetically "market-based" but who really knows where the numbers on your bill come from. I have stuck with the traditional/legacy supplier myself.

At least once a week people knock on my door (in a not very wealthy neighborhood), salespeople trying to get me to switch my energy supply. Except they don't say that, they usually are very misleading about what they are selling, trying to imply (or outright lying and saying) that they are from the government or the traditional utility company, or are here to "check that you've done things right on your energy bill" -- they never have written materials to leave with you or a brochure, just a patter. Which only reinforces my belief that it's just a giant market for scamming people. (I think the salespeople themselves often don't really know what's going on, they're young people desperate for work recruited for commission-based door-to-door and being scammed themselves!)

So USA -- cheap subsidized energy prices, but a system still set up to screw poor people and enrich scammy corporations (and screw the environment).
I've found that I only watch less Youtube over the years as their suggestions got worse for me. Now I feel like I only ever see a handful of the same suggested videos and they are all from years ago.
Oh got it, thanks!
Well, their API has been broken for days, and they haven't acknowledged it yet.

So I would say their current staffing levels are probably not sufficient.
I'd like to hear how the author is doing now. Family? Good job? Mentally balanced?
> After all, maybe you are just not a power user and don't have the same frame of reference that power users have.

Maybe. Or maybe your ideal of an editor has nothing to do with what everyone else wants from it, including power users.

> Text might be the king until then, yes, but so is C++ and the children running with AKs in Africa. Doesn't mean it's right or acceptable.

I will ignore the "but the children" polemics, because it is true for C++ and that is what Rust shows. The important part is "shows" - rants do not. In the end, talking is cheap - show me a better editor than emacs first, because a promise cannot edit text.

> Yes, I can see how strange it is to not see what's claimed to be a very powerful language overtake the world. I agree on that, it's a bit mysterious.

Yeah, indeed, if you have a wrong premise about a language being "very powerful" per se and refuse to re-evaluate it, then it is "strange". Or you accept that the powerful parts of lisp do not matter in the end, the disadvantages are real and that it comes from an era with little collaboration and small-scale software in general. Then you shrug and move to, you know, actually delivering something.

> Is it amazing? Haven't played it, don't know. Maybe? But what exactly is all that software you are expecting to begin with?

Ah, the inevitable CL debate :) You can find a bunch of libraries, half-written and abandoned decades ago, but the fact is also - I have software written in rust on my mac right now, and be it the inevitable RipGrep, but I cannot remember ever using or having something installed in CL. And it will be true for most people. It is a pretty much dead language which is, on the other side, made undead by claims about some perceived PL-superiority which does not result in any significant number of useful software being written. When you stop drinking the lisp-superiority-coolaid, not much remains to see, such is my perception after some diving into CL and Clojure.
How do they collect cash from all the MetroCard vending machines now?
Plex. Great for internet outages or finding old gems.
Yeah great point. I brought up with them that part of the issue is they do not understand my code, and making assumptions about it is insulting. They have said it should be easy, but we don't even have the tooling set up to deploy these new environments in an automated way as I ship them. We don't have a automated way to do a bunch of deployments when we change a core library.

They brought up that is how a lot of companies work, but it seems change for the sake of change. The CTO says he's looking 10y out which in tech I think is ridiculous.
I agree with your solution. However, changing such an ingrained habit isn't trivial at the society scale.
No, it would just need a title filter list. I’d like that.
Darn Tough socks. They are well-knit wool socks that last for years. Eventually, when a pair is worn out, you can replace it free of charge with the company.

Wigwam, smart wool, and other brands of socks may at one time have been durable but now the heel wears out after a single season of wear. Horrible quality!
It's not that I can't afford $100/year. I simply don't like Apple's security model where they consider themselves an unquestionably trusted party. I also don't want these kinds of dependencies. It's more like an act of protest.

I'm targeting macOS because that's the OS I use. I use it because the two alternatives suck a lot more. Modern Mac hardware is also really nice and a joy to use. The integration of software and hardware is unmatched by any competition.
So does the antecedent of the pronoun, though. It's McPhee. He knew exactly what he was doing.
"We’ve very quickly gotten used to real-time collaborative software on the Web. We can write together in Google Docs, make interface mockups in Figma, edit computational notebooks in Observable, and we can share our documents simply by copying a URL. We’ve also gotten used to applications working across our devices. Spotify seamlessly lets you control music playing on your laptop computer from your phone, and Apple’s handoff lets you continue work when moving between devices.

However, building software that allows for collaboration, sharing of content, and distribution across devices requires the use of sophisticated frameworks and the ability to create mappings between an abstract data model and the concrete HTML of a page.

In our research lab at Aarhus University we have created Webstrates. We use Webstrates to explore what it would mean if these capabilities were an integral part of the Web, and could be leveraged using basic skills in Web development. Webstrates makes the Document Object Model (DOM) of a webpage collaboratively editable. What does that mean? It means that any changes made to the document of a webpage will be synchronized to other clients of the same page, and made persistent across reloads. We call such a webpage a webstrate (short for web substrate)."
The footprint diagram on the linked page says Google lists Tiny LISP as the smallest Lisp. Perhaps that is because it implements integers and sectorlisp does not?
If you're open to trying one thing that you're not "supposed to" then I think it's pretty unlikely that that's the only alt-thing you're into.
DevOps merges Dev and Ops. It is not an extra team.
What does encryption at rest protect against with a Cloud provider?

I assume the read credentials must ipso facto decrypt the object. So encryption at rest protects you against an inside job at AWS (smash and grab drives) or government confiscation. Am I thinking about this correctly?
This is spot on. An average person will, consciously or not, perform a risk/benefit assessment for important decisions such as vaccination. But they may not have necessary resources to engage in deep research, and therefore must employ the traditional shortcut - trust. Trust is the most valuable asset an authority can have, but it was squandered with lightning speed by governments and corporations through mixed messaging, censorship of competent voices, and corruption.
The only thing I have to add is that your MDMA might have been cut with something. Never take anything that you haven't tested, or where you trust the person you got it from to have tested it.

Testing is cheap and easy and could save your life. Always know what you're taking.
If not done extremely carefully, it also has wide implications for human artists