skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sorry I meant I'm writing blog posts about this.

The topics are

1. Capitalism takes away your ability to be bored, at least mostly. You'll spend the majority of your time at work. You can be bored there, but not in a very productive way. Your boredom is a function of the company's failure to extract maximum value from you every hour you're there. My gf got laid off with a severance, her boredom is a gift, she can sit and be bored and in that way think about what her purpose is, why she likes being alive and what she wants to do with it. In that way capitalism steals purpose: your purpose day to day is to drive profits for a company. It's not explicitly evil or bad feeling when that happens, because the system rewards you in a million ways when you do tie your purpose to a company's profits. In what ways can people escape this to explore what their purpose might actually be? This isn't necessarily a new thought, I just wanted to explore it.

2. That "retirement" exists as a concept is terrifying for so many reasons, as listed above. It also creates a kind of cultural expectation of sacrificing the bulk of your life to "earn the right" to leisure... but some people are born into that right. That sucks.

3. Capitalism may have weaponized and pillaged the desire to be a part of something greater. Similar to 1, there's probably a natural human desire to "be a part of something greater" (heard in countless interviews of people that do otherwise kinda strange things like join violent militaries or participate in cults or allow themselves to be hazed to join frats). When you join a company, that desire is cannibalized to feed the needs of the corporation. Your day to day energy to spend on being a part of your local community is instead directed to the needs of a company who is possibly transnational and who even could be directly harming your community, by for example dumping trainfuls of harmful chemicals in your backyard. Corporations and corporate culture have been very good at directing the desire to have a common goal and be working together on something, but did they invent these techniques or just pillage them? Is project management something unique to capitalism? What happens if you get a big group of people who aren't having these energies directed by a profit minded project manager, what will they do in their own communities to find meaning? What happens when you take a highly skilled project manager and put them in a situation where there's no profit to be made, what kind of projects and organization will they dream up? This because I do a lot of anarchistic direct action and communal work and am always thinking about managing goals, projects, tasks, needs, and etc in situations where there's no profit motive.

I'm also working on a blog post about how tf to get the 80 different web dev aligned emacs major modes to all respect a .editorconfig file and another one journaling my family's visit to Taiwan so realistically I'm spinning way too many plates....
Social Media Is Changing, and Paid Accounts Are the Response
I was stay at home and kid was easy part. Through social isolation, boredom, deadly routine, the forced passivity, lack of ability to do hobbies and be competitive, feeling useless and unused most of time were hard.
What do you think are the pros and cons of paid accounts on social media? How do you think this will affect the way people interact with each other on these platforms?
Colored People and People of Color are two different things. Colored People was the polite term for blacks 60+ years ago. People of Color means nonwhite. Also, side point, the founders of NAACP included both black, white, and at least one person (Mary Church Terrell) that we would in 2023 consider mixed race. And initially it was predominately led by white Americans.
Obviously I didn't make my point clearly, because your examples confirm what I'm thinking.

Electronic music has been around for ages - I was a great fan of Kraftwerk. Your kids have huge amounts of music, I had a bit - they are doing the same thing, just more of it.

You love VSCode - but you're using it to cut code at the same (or similar) level of complexity to what I was cutting 40 years ago. Maybe quicker, or easier, but essentially the same activity.

Comms is cheaper and easier (I remember when email became a thing - wow - we had a stable route from Oz to MIT - back in the uucp days!) but we're doing what we always did - talking and writing to each other.

Where are the new things? The things that didn't exist previously? What are we using this tech for, that we just couldn't do before?

The only answers that has been a little convincing is gaming and big data. It wasn't possible/practical to do large scale simulation before. But many of our games are largely the same old activities ... shoot-em-ups, DnD. The tiny "retro" games might be one of few things that just didn't exist before "micro" tech. And big data (eg. ChatGPT) just wasn't possible before enormous amounts of accessible data ... but it's looking like it's just a great Eliza :(
Depends on the CGI. With a combination of ray tracing and radiosity, it can be insanely good.
It sounds like you're looking for a way to have fun with coding and it seems like the Noodle Nest method is a great way to explore that.
Well, that's one way to avoid the traffic.
> How do you know this?

Not based on scientific evidence, but we can infer this from several facts:

- The massive user bases of social media platforms. If most people cared, or were even aware of what's going on, they would choose not to consent to give up their personal data in exchange of using the service. Yet clearly they value the service over their privacy.

- Blind acceptance of cookie consent forms. Even with all the publicity around cookies and tracking on the web, if you've ever shoulder surfed a non-technical person, you'd notice that they blindly dismiss any consent forms by accepting the terms. There's a reason why most websites use dark design patterns on these: they work.

- Anecdata: if you've ever tried educating a social media user about privacy concerns, you'd be familiar with several dismissals: "I just log in occasionally for <minor use case>", the popular "I have nothing to hide", and flat out "I don't care". I've heard these both from non-technical and educated, smart and technically literate people. After many years of making an effort here, I've yet to convince a single person to change their habits, let alone abandon these services, and I'm still perceived as a radical technophobe.
Legislatures write rules, people enter contracts, sue for perceived breaches and courts rule on these disputes. People then adjust behaviors to get desired results without incurring legal liabilities. Results vary across jurisdiction. Such questions can't be answered in principle. California famously won't enforce non-compete clauses, and that apparently helps innovation. China caught up industrially with the West within one generation by flouting every IP rule we have here. On the other side of the debate, patent trolls...
A river flows in one way rather than another because the particles that form the river have momentum one way rather than another. The reason they have this momentum is because the surfaces of the river interact with the air, obstacles, and the rock bed underneath it, and then pass on momentum to internal river particles, which pass on that momentum to other particles, etc. In this way, is the river not processing information regarding things it can directly "observe" about its environment at its surface, as well as the things it has experienced in the past, then processing that information deeper and deeper, until it ultimately leads to a decision on which way the river flows?
You Don't Need Routes
I think it all starts from a good place. Would you rather people just using words "carelessly" without regard to how you might feel? It's questioning the assumption that the word used is fine throughout history.

I don't think there is anything nefarious about it, just that "people" always co-opt the motives in the end and make it muddled for their own benefit. Overthinking it I guess. I know it when I see it, but it's hard to articulate it to something that works for everyone.
Generally managers are hired to act us buffer between higher order management and employee. HOM don't want to micro manage employees, but they want responsibility, which lower rank employee (the one who do actual work) tend to carry the least. While most workforce would come defensive, that they work responsibily, but indeed most don't. So they higher this manager who do micro manage employee on HOM behalf. The minute most employee gets a good offers, they will fly like its none of there responsiblity, so HOM higher this buffer manager to manage this minute but important aspect for successful project delivery.
If what the article states is true, and they are pushing their own commercial product along side their crusade to rid the Internet of CSAM then that casts the whole endeavour in doubt.
My Jetta GLI can do this. ACC is good, if there’s a hard stop it will beep at me to brake, or brake itself hard later. The lane centering worked great in WA (with a tweak to the options to enable stronger centering) and works pretty good in CA (lane lines aren’t always as clear). Basically I only have to give a very light touch on the steering wheel, the car mostly just follows the road.

The system overall is not perfect but it’s great in stop and go and pretty good in regular traffic.

My single test drive with a Civic was similar but I didn’t test out the ADAS so much (and they wanted too much for it).
Maybe it's time to fight back, and write programs that flood the data collectors with data that looks legit, but is in fact bs.
Sooner or later their customers will notice that the data they buy doesn't help sales, and they'll stop paying for it.
I was kind of with you, birthing person does sound pretty obstruse. But then you threw in the (self-described!) theocratic fascist dogwhistle.

There are some uses radfems get super upset about that I find useful, though. Like "people with cervixes" if you are asking for cervical cancer screenings. Because increasingly, that affects people who do not feel spoken to if you use the word woman and this adds clarity to who the audience is.
That's what white semi-trailers on a bright day are for. They are to Tesla sensors (read: cameras) what bears atop upstream waterfalls are to migratory salmon.
I agree, and personally found it upsetting once when someone who was from a relatively well off family tried shaming me for using the term slave in my code. I'm of Ukrainian descent, and my grandfather was separated from his family at the age of 12 and sent to a forced labor camp, never to see them again. No human should ever have to experience that, and we must remember that even now there are still humans being treated like literal tools, as our computers are also nothing but tools. If seeing the word slave makes you uncomfortable, then good, it should make you uncomfortable that there are humans who have been treated no better than your computer, potentially even in the supply chain of making it.
>...because other managers are terrible...

It's interesting you should say this because this is one of the categories of Bullshit jobs as defined by David Graeber in his book. And incidentally only y'day I was listening to him on a podcast[1] speaking about BS jobs.

His favourite example is corporate lawyers. Companies are forced to hire them just because other companies have them and are in fear of getting sued. I hadn't thought of managers to fall in this category, which makes sense.

[1] https://podcasts.apple.com/in/podcast/srsly-wrong/id87229289...
I think you misinterpreted my words: it's fantastic that humans (both men and women) have more options, if they choose to have less kids that's noone's business but their own.

We did ok as a species with way less people that exist today, society will adapt, and there is no valid reason to impose "society's choice" on anyone.
> It directly contradicts itself here. The summary for Dues Ex is also wrong (terrorists attacked the statue of liberty before the game, and only the very first part of the game features the statue and it's not to "thwart a terrorist attack on the Statue of Liberty").

I wouldn't call that a contradiction. I think it's fair to only count attacks that go through.
Think it wasn't chatbot proxies but endlessly duplicated full upload sentient copies of minds.
Funny you could argue that "disabled" is language that distances us from reality. Since describing someone not present as just "disabled" doesn't tell you anything whether that person in reality is able to do one specific thing, eg tedious react frontend development in a large organization. "differently abled" doesn't tell you anything more but clearly signals that "more information is needed".
I mean i really think you’re missing the point of the main story. It’s talking about a future where all construction and plumbing is automated by robots and is trying to explore the time period after that and what happens beyond.

You seem to disagree that it is at all possible and want to explore the time period before that time. Which is fine, I agree there are a lot of details to get right! But if you try a little, it really is easy to imagine todays robots getting to a point that they will diagnose and fix all plumbing issues.
>all of this, written by hand in C++, nothing off the shelf, very minimal dependencies (OpenSSL being the only one of note), everything running on Windows and completely bespoke

Great engineering but this is the time you could have spent building your core competency. re-inventing the wheel is a good recipe for failure
> You reference slow, natural evolution of norms. Those happen everywhere, not just in language, but they happen organically. People change and then they change what they tolerate, how they speak etc. It's not that someone decides "people now have to speak like this, so that they then change to become like me". That's the "creating a new man" approach that lead to endless suffering under the socialists/communists, though I guess now it would be "creating a new person".

That hasn't been true since the printing press and particularly the invention of the nation state.

> Everything is fine, because we've seen bad things happen before, so this isn't new, and only new things can be a problem"?

That's disingenuous. You know that if these authors were writing these articles in the spirit that these kinds of editorial limitations were a long standing problem that needed to be addressed, they wouldn't be on the front page and commented ad-nauseum. The entire selling point of this kind of article is that it is attacking some novel and dangerous schorge which menaces our very rights. They are broadly in the genre of panic-mongering.

What we consider "free speech" has existed since about the 70s. If you considered that paradigm to be free speech, in which there was virtually nothing you could say which would get you arrested but there were things you could say which could get your fired, then you must concede that what is happening now is a roughly equivalent level of free speech. If you find these new limits on your speech onerous but not the old ones, then your gripe is with the flavor of the speech which might get you fired not the fact that speech exists which might get you fired.

These articles are generally written by people who just happened to live lives and held values which were highly compatible with the rules of the institutions. So they are by and large, blissfully unaware of the previously extant limitation and how they biased the discourse.
Open chess.com or lichess.org with that checkbox ticked off. You won't be able to play.
I imagine the most annoying part of making these photos is making sure there is absolutely no dust to be seen anywhere...
Declare the variable closer to its definition point.

Also such kind of situations are usually a sign that code blocks should be moved into a separate function.
I think you’re right. But even if so, how do I GDPR delete my banned account?

I can’t get emails from their support. They have no phone number.

Is this a credit card dispute situation?
This rant starts of pretty badly, with "Windows bad, Unix good, Windows especially bad because it doesn't have Unix tools".

Reverse that statement. Is Unix bad because it doesn't Windows tools?

> but simultaneously there was nothing to lean back on: no shell, no Unix tools like sed/awk, no SSH. I

He joined in 2014, when Windows had a superior shell and remoting system that eliminates the requirement for low-level string parsing tools like sed/awk entirely!

PowerShell + WinRM + Desired State Configuration (DSC) was all pretty mature at the time, and I had used these technologies to manage huge fleets of servers solo without issues.

Then, almost none of this heroic database backup efforts would have been required if they had just a commercial database product, e.g.: one designed for Windows such as SQL Server.

In 2014 it supported AlwaysOn Availability groups that allowed multiple synchronous and asynchronous replicas! It also has had true online backups since before 1997.

His second mistake is that backups can be incremental, but a restore in a (true) disaster is a full restore by definition! Differential + Log backups are great to capture data regularly during the day, but the business requirement is usually that a full restore must complete in a reasonable time.

Typical commercial databases plus the product he mentioned could easily backup and restore tens of terabytes in setups I've seen directly to or from any proper database engine without having to through "NFS" on the way. Typically you'd use a native backup agent.

This whole article sounds like a self-important Unix engineer refusing to touch commercial products, lack of understanding of business requirements, and an allergy to Windows.
At some point we can start including AIs in the population count to counter it.
Huge cost? The board won't fire them for misspending a measly 5% of the their cash hoard. ("
Ford Motor cash on hand for the quarter ending December 31, 2022 was $44.070B, a 11.14% decline year-over-year.")

They wrote off 7.3B because of Rivian and still no one got fired.

What huge cost?
While I appreciate what Eleuther have done - why are they highlighting "research" consisting of removing a bit of whitespace from some source code... is it April 1st already?

Heres my addition! Or subtraction, i guess... (-4 chars by changing call to AdaptiveAvgPool2d):

from torch.nn import*
def c(h,d,k,p,n):S,C,A=Sequential,Conv2d,lambda x:S(x,GELU(),BatchNorm2d(h));R=type('',(S,),{'forward':lambda s,x:s0+x});return S(A(C(3,h,p,p)),*[S(R(A(C(h,h,k,1,k//2,1,h))),A(C(h,h,1)))for _ in[0]*d],AdaptiveAvgPool2d(1),Flatten(),Linear(h,n))
I'm getting an error saying rate limited, please try again in 1 hour. Any fix on this soon?
Not to say challenges don’t remain, but it’s undeniable the technology has come a long way in the last few years. https://m.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=318&v=aj8TRtr64xQ
My e-book reader shows <em> text with teal color and I like it, it's better visible than italic and the font remains upright and readable, I doubt it will be comfortable to read lots of text in italic. I didn't notice any discrepancy with <i>. But for some reason <strong> doesn't override <em> and they multiply, though I saw it used once when an exclamation was repeated several times with increasing emphasis for extra dramatism.
I had the impression it very much depends on the OS, on stock Android it definitely feels broken, with clicking ten times to update an app that just gets stuck, on Lineageos with MicroG and privileged F-Droid extensions its super smooth with autoupdates and everything.
PDF: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.11.18.517004v2....
> [0]: https://www.welivesecurity.com/2023/03/01/blacklotus-uefi-bo...

So how do you remove it?
Against Ice Age Civilizations
How do you deal with it? The trans people I know tend to grit their teeth at risk of making an already awkward social interaction worse. But that surely must result in a lot of bottled up resentment.
ING Bank \o/
Ooo use it for the mode!
Isn't this how IP addresses work?

No 8.8.8.8 here, try over there ...
Why do you need freedom of speech? Just be nice!

This might be the most British comment ive ever replied to
This has already been merged into iced, which is now a default UI framework for PopOS: https://github.com/iced-rs/iced/pull/1697
I'm sorry if it sounded like that, it was not what I intended at all.

I mentioned women only in a sub-sentence in a single line, I did not expect it to become the focus of the message: everyone has more options these days, the betterment of women's position in society is more glaring, but changes in the same direction applied to everyone.

I have no doubt humankind will be just fine with less people, and without any drastic drops in our quality of life.

There may be some economical issues in the medium term, but I'm sure we'll manage without baby factories.
Paywalls are still common. But mostly with legacy publishers that are increasingly marginalized by newer ones. When it comes to scientific publications there are a few holdouts. But by and large, scientists and universities are increasingly reluctant to spend significantly on paywalls.

It used to be more or less automatic that universities would allocate huge chunks of public funding to maintaining all sorts of subscriptions. Tens of thousands of our EU project budgets were actually earmarked for this in the nineties. There was no debate about any of that at the time. These days there is a bit more scrutiny and quite a few universities are refusing to do this at this point.

I actually had to go to a library in the nineties to get my hands on some articles when I was doing my PhD. But even then, this was rare for me. So rare in fact that I remember these handful of separate occasions where I had to do this. Even before Google launched, you could find a lot of .ps and .pdf files online. And in the rare case I couldn't, I often opted to ignore the work. I was skimming through papers by the dozens every week. Google made this stuff a lot easier when it launched. Computer scientists were early adopters of paywall evasion of course.

Something I figured out early was that as a scientist, making life easier for other scientists to access my work is not optional. The whole point of publishing your work is getting other people to read it. The best way of ensuring that never happens is paywalls. So, I put my articles on my website in the hope that people would actually read them.

The reason scientists continue to publish to pay-walled publications is that they are financially incentivized by impact metrics. You publish in something like nature, it looks great and your metrics improve and your boss loves you. Of course, most scientists don't actually get published there and instead have to deal with some severe yawn inducing second or third rate journals by the likes of Elsevier, Springer, and others. Been there done that.

And since it's all about impact, getting published is only half of the success. The other half involves getting people to reference your work. Which requires them to be able to access it. Which pretty much requires you to enable that by putting the pdf somewhere for people to download. Either you do that or nobody reads your papers.

Hence the practice of these articles in paywalled publications getting published online elsewhere. Paywalls have never been good at preventing that or putting a stop to that practice. Scientists actively depend on enabling paywall evasion to get their metrics up.
> They also has been at the company for 2 years

> How can someone less experienced that you

This argument seems to conflate two different things, how long someone has been at a particular company and their (overall) level of experience.