skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are two types of simulations: 'cheating' simulations and 'complete' simulations. Complete simulations give out a set of rules, and an initial condition which is evolved per the rules without significant external interference. A cheating simulation tries to simplify things, say by editing the brains of anyone inside the simulation to never notice the simulation, emulating only parts they notice, etc.

I'll posit that a complete simulation of our universe is very likely equivalent to the universe. Quantum mechanics suggests it can't be emulated by anything less complicated, so a complete simulation is merely a different substrate. It's an interesting implementation detail, but how much does it matter?

It might be possible there's a significant simplification if the actual universe worked by different rules, but there's no known theory which could accomplish this.

Now we have a cheating simulation. Your example is a cheating simulation. It doesn't actually create a simulation of a universe, it emulates the perceptions you'd have, but I don't think it will or can bother calculating the correct cosmic gamma-ray radiation intensity (for example).

A cheating simulation can have very different rules than the base. For example, many of our current 'simulations' have some form of magic system. We (in reality N) could today write a game where the N+1 NPCs have the v100 Neuralink. By carefully 'editing' them and the world, they'll never notice. Or maybe we allow them to notice - and they presume we also have a Neuralink - but we in the N reality are not yet able to build a real Neuralink!

We could have presumed the N-1 reality could also do the complete simulations that the N level v100 Neuralink could do (since it must be able to calculate the Neuralink simulation), but v100 cheats, and cheating creates simplifications which mean we can't really tell much at all about N-1.

The statistical argument for simulation rests on aggregating 1..N...X? levels together and doing some universal logic, but cheating makes them inconmensurable (does the same logic even apply?) and uncountable, and I don't see how we can do any statistics on that.
Because of smoking?
> and the cost to get it into place...

Your comment reminded me of
"No Time on Our Side," a book about a submersible laying cable near the UK that sunk after a hatch failed during recovery operations. The author (who was a pilot in the submersible) details the incredible rescue effort to bring them back to the surface alive over a period of about 3 days.

A wonderful book and also one that made me appreciate how hard it is to lay cable (in some places).
> Because of their geochemical properties, rare-earth elements are typically dispersed and not often found concentrated in rare-earth minerals. Consequently, economically exploitable ore deposits are sparse (i.e. "rare")

https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2002/fs087-02/fs087-02.pdf

For all intents and purposes, they are in fact "rare"
It was a part of the YAML spec for a long time, so it has nothing to do with dynamic typing or parser extensions.
Why legacy? They're still current, and WebRTC is fairly recent. The SS7 mess behind PSTN networks is perhaps more legacy.
Yes, and if you use setenv(3) to change what the value of TZ is after that point, then the new value of TZ will be observed and the new file will be loaded at that point.

See 'tzset_internal' in time/tzset.c in glibc.
That is exactly the point. The person the T1000 would have noticed. But not the T1000.

EDIT: I just noticed that the ones who replied to me interpreted it the other way around.
I admit I fall into a mindset as described surrounding sales.

So maybe acting authentically in sales role is doing the best you can (authentic to yourself and the customer) to a point where there comes to exist a conflict of interest with your employer?

Though, it still feels like there are too many constraints on your own authenticity? At all the jobs I've worked at, there existed a gap between who I was and what the company saw as an "ideal" me in practice (how I acted versus how HR or company policy or how higher ups would like people to act or how I've seen in brand guidelines for tone and word choice for social media). I feel like the individuality/mindset I bring to the table is a large part of why I'm paid for what I do. But if I applied the employer's constraints wholly and sincerely to myself without individual thought, I would most likely be awful at my job in practice. I feel these constraints apply much more in sales, as an agent of the company, you must _act_ like the company.

Maybe I'm overthinking it, and only truly hellish employers would want this. But it still feels, averaged over all employers, the "employer ideal" salesperson could not authentically act as an individual while being an agent of their employer. Which usually inspires distrust, and empathy at their constraints.
Trump's Star Wars: The Space Development Agency
> I suppose activist investors who pushed for aggressive growth strategies because of the FOMO environment will be losing a lot of money, but that's little comfort to the people losing their jobs.

Right, and I see little in the news about investors taking responsibility for misreading the market and losing value, all the fault appears to rest with the CEO's for hiring aggressively and for employees not being productive enough.

In a certain sense, I think we need more journalists that cover tech, so that we can get deep dives and some real answers. What we currently have is "journalists" whose main source of news is going to events/parties, socializing with the elite and then parroting their perspectives. There is very little "hard" journalism happening here, its more "access" journalism.
Indeed. Now we just need to do the same for overeating.
We can actually already see that time period, in its present form. It's called the Cosmic Microwave Background. It is the (now extremely cold) energy which permeated the entire universe in that very early time period. The entire universe was opaque and extremely hot... then as it expanded, it began to cool enough for particles and then atoms to form. Only then were stars possible, and later galaxies.

How/why can we see the CMB? Well, it was everywhere. Literally every point in the universe was a nearly uniform sea of blazing energy. So if you look far enough in any direction, you will see the cold echoes of that time period.

edit: Beat to the punch! I hope among our many answers you've found something enlightening

edit 2: Important to note that the CMB is not synonymous with the beginning of spacetime. It is more like a wall, beyond which we can't see anything, and it came down very early in time.
Is it possible that the 'edge' of universe reflects light? Have scientists been able to conclusively rule that out somehow?

Does the universe even have an edge? What is our current understanding of what the boundaries of the universe might be like?
Screening is more widespread and so is general awareness for symptoms. This leads to earlier diagnosis which generally has a better outlook than later stages. Then there's also general progress in terms of surgical procedures as well as medication for treatment
Mathematicians have it easier than most, there are already ways to automate testing in their domain.

Kinda needed to be, given the rise of computer-generated proofs starting with the 4-colour theorem in 1976.
"Alternatively, iron oxide can be mixed with ammonium nitrate in a planetary ball mill; after a few days of milling at 600 rpm, the stainless steel balls decompose the ammonium nitrate into elemental nitrogen, which diffuses into the iron nanoparticles. The resulting α”-Fe16N2 is then separated by magnet and can be formed into solid shapes."

Literally just rust and fertilizer.
This is only a problem in localities with regressive gun control regulations.
Thanks for your civil engagement on what is often a contentious topic.

While not a perfect representation of purchases, I believe the EPA chart (Fig. ES-3) I referred to shows the average of all for-sale models for a given year, so this should capture the increasing preference for larger vehicles. Indeed, the horsepower and curb weight are shown as significant increases, even while fuel efficiency is improving (≥2005). It looks to me like the average fuel efficiency passed the 1985 peak (presumably driven by the 1970s oil crises) around 2007.

Clearly two decades of decreasing efficiency was not ideal, but I posit it may be the 1985-2005 period which you are mostly remembering. Going by the chart there was a fast shift to smaller and 'weaker' cars for highly increased efficiency 1970-1975, after which there was a slow continuous increase of power and weight - first occasioning a slow but relatively small decline in efficiency (compared to the 1970-1975 increase), but then changing to increasing efficiency as that became a more important factor for consumers.

Relatedly, while I am certainly not the target audience for the kind of advertisements that may encourage people to purchase more oil-based products, I cannot recall seeing any automotive advertising that wasn't clearly produced by a specific vehicle manufacturer. It sounds like you are suggesting 2nd and 3rd tier advertising by fuel companies for reversing the 1970-1975 reduction in consumption, but I'm not familiar with that space - I would appreciate it if you could direct me to any resources you have about that.
Maybe I'm missing something here? This line read like a joke / sarcasm to me. But RISC did change everything, didn't it?
I don't like Typescript. I just like it more than Javascript.
Curious, what sort of psychopathic red flags did your boss give off?
Observability is highly underrated for management. The best managers I’ve had have public calendars, so we can see what they’re spending their time. Priority is pretty clear when management is spending time on something
Saudi Arabia's wealth fund raises Nintendo stake to 6%
I guess you mean downloading a browser version that supports the new origin filesystem feature? Every user has a web browser installed.
Bummer. That feature made Signal a really compelling main messenger app.
My last project had a lot of overly brilliant and smart engineers. There was a lot of code consistency on that project, but the app ended up becoming so complex in nature and overengineered that I didn't know where to begin. We added so much tooling in our testing pipeline that tests became a constant failure in our devops pipeline when things would timeout. Something that would take only a day to push and build, took way several days to complete in the future

I'm all for keeping things DRY - but sometimes it can go too far. Too many abstractions leads to abstraction-hell.

On my current team, everyone likes to keep things a bit simple, which is a nice change in pace. I don't have to go through a chain of 7-8 files to build a basic CRUD feature. I don't have to wonder what some weirdly written but compact code does. I don't have to think as hard and can focus on what matters
They did fire her and move on.

Then she sued them for wrongful termination. The judgment wasn't in her favour.

The facts presented to the tribunal were brutal and painted her in a very bad light. She could have avoided the negative outcome by not having sued the employer in the first place.
Evidence does not support your claim, boyo.
As far as support goes. System76 would be your best bet. You can also checkout HP Dev One (which comes with System76's Pop!_OS).
For a scicomm publication I wrote the abstract of my explainer article leveragjng ChatGPT

https://www.theseedsofscience.org/2022-general-antiviral-pro...

(after I had written the rest of the article and long after writing the academic paper underlying it.

Although, the published abstract reads nothing like the abstracts that ChatGPT generated for me because of the subtle but important factual inaccuracies it generated. But I found it helpful to get around my curse-of-knowledge in producing a flowing structure.

My edited, manually fact-checked result flowed less fluidly but was accurate to the article body’s content. Still overall glad I did it that way. I would have otherwise fretted over format/structure for a lot longer.
Btw, the most important point from OP's is the last one. Life is fragile, treat people well. That's more important than all the three letter acronyms in the world.
When I read your postI can't help but read smart as "smart". You vacillate between holding their intelligence in esteem "but eventually I came to understand that he is so good at reading code..." and condescending "... I can only describe as being a little too smart for their own good"

Now the real question is do you believe you are right? Do you really(and I mean really deep down) think these people are smart. Do you think you have a better way? Do you wish they'd realize that what you are doing is best path forward?

I have seen this sort of conversation pattern in the past. In my case it was a younger programmer that wanted the team to take a different approach, but at the same time were struggling with the "what if I'm wrong?" dilemma. They didn't want to throw their weight behind a proposed change in direction because of insecurities and fear of rejection. What it came across as to the rest of the team was a person that didn't want to lead but at the same time was always finding fault. When confronted they would say things like "I'm not one of the smart ones ..."

If you really are not smart as they are then trust them and learn from them. If you think you have a better path and are committed then stand up and say "This is wrong and here is a better way". If you are right and they reject you then maybe its not the place. If they are able to demonstrate that you are wrong you should accept it and move on. If you are right and they agree then you are in the promised land.
Isn’t NOTAM run by a private company already? I don’t think the FAA runs the actual hardware.
Cool! I hope I didn't come across as hating the technology. In a perfect world I hope we'd be using geothermal district heating but while we're still installing units in individual homes I think heat pumps are currently the best way forward. The economics of retrofitting many standard homes simply don't really line up in many cases. Prior to the current energy crisis they were generally more costly than using gas and even after they only really make economic sense for the relatively small number of people stuck on electric heating[0].

Home renewables help but require even more capital investment, often taking 10 or more years to pay off. It doesn't help that where I am solar has extremely limited output in the winter. Domestic wind turbines are difficult to situate and get planning approval for. My cursory impression is that they're also less economical than many solar installs.

I've got some roof repairs coming up soon and I'm hoping the economics of replacing the existing roof with some nice looking solar slate tiles work out favourably!

[0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/426988/united-kingdom-uk...
> Is it possible that the 'edge' of universe reflects light? Have scientists been able to conclusively rule that out somehow?

It's not an edge the way you think. It's the edge of what we can see based on the known age of the universe and how much light has reached us. I.e no real boundaries as best as we can tell.

The best way you can look at this is that early galaxies are being found earlier than expected based on our model of how the universe formed. The further you look, functionally the further back in time you look (not just further away)

This is an oversimplification and an astrophysics expert can give you something better.
Octopus energy, on the agile octopus tariff: https://octopus.energy/agile/
> Others are predictable, but take a long time to start and stop - gas, coal(several hours), nuclear(1 day to start, fast to stop, but very expensive).

The start time is long but that does not say much about the overall operations.

> Modern nuclear plants with light water reactors are designed to have maneuvering capabilities in the 30-100% range with 5%/minute slope, up to 140 MW/minute

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load-following_power_plant

and https://thundersaidenergy.com/downloads/power-plants-cold-st...

> In France, with an average of 2 reactors out of 3 available for load variations, the overall power adjustment capacity of the nuclear fleet equates to 21,000 MW (i.e. equivalent to the output of 21 reactors) in less than 30 minutes.

https://www.powermag.com/flexible-operation-of-nuclear-power...
Can you say Reach CPA again? I'm not sure it's in there enough times.
Didn't watch the video, just wanted to tell something which I think of as anomaly since years, which can't be good.

Which is birds singing loudly in the night. Been out walking at about 2:00 AM last night. Loudest I've noticed so far, not localised in some spot, all along the way for several kilometers. No matter the cause/why, that has to stress them out in some way if this goes on.

Your thoughts?
Writing documents with S-exprs will get very tedious once you have to deal with stuff like whitespace and such that will inevitably show up when you're dealing with text documents. SGML is specifically optimized for those use cases, which is why it is so much more awkward to use when all you want is serializing some random structured data.
They're all basically the same. Different labeling groups have different requirements, it doesn't really matter. The fact of the matter is that the business is going to do whatever it takes to make as much money as possible, and that means less space and freedom for the animals. You can come up with as many requirements as you want, but the egg producers, like any business, will do as little as they possibly can do to meet them. It's just not possible to treat these animals with empathy when your job is to take from them as much as you can while giving them as little as you can.

As bare as these requirements are, they only exist because without them there is literally no reason to try. And even with them, there is only the incentive to legally meet the requirements, nothing else. The labels are for us, not the chickens.
I like using the Touch Bar but don't like touchscreen computers though.
I’m pretty sure a similar subset within the younger generations will end up doing the same.
Not materializing lets Postgres push extra where clauses and join conditions into the CTE so this makes sense!

Now you know why I spam all the “CTEs are amazing” threads about materialization (there have been 5 or so in the last few months)
This is a logical fallacy though. Looking at the current makeup of a group doesn't prove systemic discrimination. Look at the NBA for instance, would we assume there are rules favoring black players which would explain their over-representation?

It's a common fallacy where people assume equal inputs, so if the output doesn't match something must be amiss. But the assumption was incorrect to begin with. Not everybody is equal, and different demographic cohorts may in fact over/under perform others for any number of reasons.
of course, what I mean is that it's now an AI vs AI battle
I think there’s pretty common and clear data on why unlimited immigration is harmful to the receiving country [0] (tl;dr; lowers wages and increases costs for non-immigrants).

The question is whether it’s worth it for the obvious benefit to immigrants. So it may be a net benefit when factoring the improvements to people who immigrate in.

The US benefited greatly from open immigration 100+ years ago because they weren’t that great and there wasn’t much to lose. So it’s apples to oranges of open immigration then to open immigration now. Back then there were no government services and land was literally given out for free.

[0] https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0809/3-ways-immi...
The threat model that's addressed by deletion of message is the seizing of one's device by a hostile party (eg dictatorship). One cannot be incriminated by messages that have been deleted.

As you pointed out this will not help if your correspondent cannot be trusted.
what's wrong with toys?

Toys are way better than startups and growth and monetization and disruption and onlyfans to pay the bills.
The more stickers you have, the more Agile you are. Everyone knows that.
I agree, I would say higher resolution screens always pay dividends in coding (crispness, and real estate). I've been downgrading a 144hz monitor to 100hz in gaming and haven't noticed too much difference. I think I'd have to jump to 244hz for my own perceptibility to notice the difference in games.
I am going to be incredibly rude now. This comment is so out of touch with reality I wonder if I'm falling for a troll. I am probably in the same boat as you. I've negotiated my contract with biggest monopolies in my industry. That was done despite the existence of a thankfully good union. Unions only negotiated for basic stuff, pay, hours, healthcare etc. Perks were negotiated by me. But if you think for a second we are in the same boat as a Starbucks barista or Amazon warehouse worker, I'm sorry but you need to sit down with some of these people and hear their stories. If money is your language, then think of it like this, it takes close to hundred thousand euros to replace me while it takes orders or magnitude less to replace labor in a warehouse. Or maybe think about how if a store closes down it doesn't put that much of a dent in Starbucks' 7billion dollar bottom line, but workers can lose homes and sometimes healthcare. In what universe is this an equal position to start from? They are arguing over most basic things like pee breaks man, do you really think management is arguing in good faith if this is a talking point? I know I'm not going to change your mind on an internet forum, but you probably have this issue (also just like me) where it's hard to imagine other people's life situations. That's why I talk with people before judging their movement. Posting a marketing link to show what Starbucks advertises as perks (doesn't even address the low pay) is at best a bad argument and at worst deliberately insulting to a lot of people.
No, actually, they don't. They work with Clevo to make them, and Clevo can sell the hardware, but the firmware is very different, and possibly some of the hardware as well.

see e.g. cassidyjames at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17039414

There were a couple of great threads on Twitter, but it looks like Jeremy Soller isn't on anymore. (https://twitter.com/c4software/status/1322954098711400449 is one guy realizing too late that they're not the same, that likely precipitated https://mobile.twitter.com/jeremy_soller/status/132295496454... still in Google cache saying "A reminder that you shouldn't buy Clevo's and expect them to work like System76's"
There's always a relevant xkcd for every science question, and in this case it's one of the first ones:

https://xkcd.com/54/
I made the mistake of learning Neo4j with Cypher before learning SQL, and every interaction with SQL since feels like I'm using some outdated monster
What is the edge of the universe? How would you define that? In most models, the universe doesn't have anything that could be called an edge. Unless you are referring to the boundary of the local universe, which is defined as the sphere around us at which objects are too far away for their light to ever reach us. It's not a physical structure that could reflect light, it's more like the opposite of that.
Without getting into lots of detail, this is basically correct. It's why we talk about the observable universe. There's lots of stuff we can't see because the light from it won't reach us.
It's not like other formats don't face similar questions. E.g. if you have a list of key-value pairs to serialize to JSON, do you translate those keys to JSON properties in an object, or do you translate each pair as an object in an array?