skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think you underestimate the effects of bureaucracy and sclerosis at large companies like Google, and the upcoming crackdown like the EU's DMA and DSA. Just look at how OpenAI basically stole Google's lunch.
OpenZFS is already free and open source. Linux kernel developers should just stop punching themselves in face.

One way to solve the ZFS issue, Linus Torvalds could call a meeting of project leadership, and say, "Can we all agree that OpenZFS is not a derived work of Linux? It seems pretty obvious to anyone who understands the meaning of copyright term of art 'derived work' and the origin of ZFS ... Good. We shall add a commit which indicates such to the COPYING file [0], like we have for programs that interface at the syscall boundary to clear up any further confusion."

Can you imagine trying to bring a copyright infringement suit (with no damages!) in such an instance?

The ZFS hair shirt is a self imposed by semi-religious Linux wackadoos.

[0]: See, https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/LICENSES/excep...
But like... how could that be done, practically?
I know exactly what you mean. Younger people almost all actually believe the hype of each fad and don’t realize when they’re reinventing the wheel. If you’re surrounded exclusively with people like this, you’ll go insane. I have no solution, just empathy.
> current lives and suffering are morally superior to possible lives in the future

I think this is a dangerous ethos. That can be used to justify horrific acts.

The moral reason why we should often prioritize the present (and those close to us) is because we have a better understanding of how to help them, not because they are morally superior. However, when the harm to others far from us (in either space or time) is clear, we should not justify perpetuating that harm because those close to us are "morally superior".
youtube premium isn't a contract that punishes cancelling. If you don't like the service stop subscribing.
not OP. but he did say "nearly everyone".

long lists of side effects are common even for the most benign and common drugs. that's standard.

for example i could say that the common side effects of tylenol[0] tell a different story:

nausea, vomiting, anemia, rash, dyspnea, abnormal breath sounds, pulmonary edema, hypoxia, pleural effusion, stridor, wheezing, coughing, peripheral edema, hypertension, hypotension, tachycardia, chest pain, muscle spasms, insomnia

[0] https://www.drugs.com/sfx/tylenol-side-effects.html
How exactly did they obtain a monopoly on content? They don't name most content creators sign exclusivity agreements.
Florida is also a magnet for old people, and old people are a magnet for dying from COVID. I wonder how they did if we control for age?
Automating the capture of airplane pictures with Raspberry Pi, ADS-B, IoT (2019)
It doesn't sound like you really know what you are talking about, but are just here to try to flame war. Plenty of credible people in biomedical fields believe it is possible the virus was engineered and have published about why...it isnt really worth responding to that claim, you can just look it up. As for the other claim, yes the binding affinity to ACE2 is lower in original SARS and this probably limited it as well as other attributes of that virus:

"Although the structure of the SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV S proteins are similar, the binding affinity of the SARS-CoV-2 S protein to the ACE2 receptor is much higher as compared to SARS-CoV, which may account for its increased transmissibility."
Show HN: Web3 Blind
Not sure if anyone already made similar things like this made before because it's very simple to implement. I guess the hard part is finding people to actually using it, and that's why I'm posting here just to throw the idea out.

If we have Blind to shit posting/show appreciation about companies we've worked before, then given all those web3 communities and NFT dramas there should also be a Web3 Blind that allow people to publicly check the vibe of a token-gated group given a token address (either ERC20 or NFT token on ethreum).

You can only shit posting/show appreciation if you have at least one token of the community, but everyone is able to review the vibe board to see what's going on in the community no matter if they hold a token or not.

Right now it still requires a web2 login (ofc all login info salted and hashed) because I'm reusing the data structure of the web2 version.
Probably because of British home renovation shows.
It's not just in tech/open source though.

Generations of people who have come up with ideas for institutions have had them sold off to the highest bidder and not seen but a fraction of the value their idea has created.

It's the nature of having the money to start, run, develop a business. Having enough capital to make a very big risk less risky.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Drax
Filing a trademark is easier than finding customers.

Therefore it is a distraction.

It is pretend work to avoid hard work that is most likely fruitless.

Once the business is successful enough when "We need trademark" is all you need to say for a team of lawyers to make it happen, then it might make sense.

Good luck.
No complaints about the spread operator :-) But the plus in javascript produces this:

[1,2,3] + [1,2,3]
// '1,2,31,2,3'

(never tried this in js before; so was amused by the result)
There is a paradox.

First off IQ only has a slight correlation with individual success past a certain point (someone with below 60 IQ is obviously going to have a hard time succeeding). The data shows that for high IQ and average IQ there is only a slight correlation with success.

Second what you said is patently false. We do not know if there is a causal relationship because a casual experiment is nearly impossible to conduct. This is very different from saying there is "no causal relationship." A correlation points to a possibility of causative relationships. Literally. You make a statement as if it was true, tell me the exact causal experiment you used to determine your statement about "no causal relationship".

Third. The correlation between economic success and IQ is much much stronger then the correlation between individual success and IQ.

Again there is a paradox. You are wrong.
You can do a lot of operations on the github web UI nowadays. Could have been that
It quite literally is.

A non-automated McDonalds extracts money from a certain population(the target market of the McDonald's) and funnels it to the owner, but the owner has to employ people(typically from the same area/market) to give some of that money back to.

Without those jobs, money is being extracted from the target market without any being given back.
> my longtermist leanings. I do value the species over the individual

Do you think the essay misrepresents "big L" Longtermist beliefs? My reading of it makes it seem that "value the species over the individual" maybe does not reflect their goals very accurately.

I tend to think in the long term myself. I like a lot of the same goals that Longtermists have: using technology to make ourselves better than we are, and expanding into other star systems being the most obvious ones.

On the other hand, I don't consider myself a Longtermist. I think it's completely futile to try to calculate "utility" for individuals, and abhorrent to develop a society that tries to forcibly maximize that imaginary "utility" number, instead of letting people choose for themselves, because I believe that trying to forcibly maximize a value that can't actually be measured accurately would inherently reduce the overall happiness of the entire species.

In other words, rather than "value the species over the individual", I would describe Longtermism (as portrayed in the article) as trying to forcibly scale up act-utilitarianism to apply to everyone, everywhere, all the time. At that scale, it can superficially seem like valuing the species, but IMO if one actually wants to think in the long term, rule-utilitarianism should be the guiding philosophy. Rule-utilitarianism makes it even more impossible to calculate results, of course, so it can only be a philosophy, not a rigid system of data and calculation.
Just so the relevance here is clear. He claims it is a deep fake.
Non-Technical Explanation of ChatGPT and Attention
iOS15+ "powered-off" iPhones can act as Airtags, https://9to5mac.com/2021/06/07/ios-15-find-my-network-can-fi...
And now we're to the next rung of "lab-leak hypothesis is utterly useless to talk about," which is when people start mixing in the deliberate lab-leak hypothesis.

Good god.
In my opinion, we need more streaming apps, not fewer. However, for that to actually work, we new legislation that the producer of content cannot be the distributor, and that the producer must license it out equally to any distributor.

The problem we are in right now, is every producer is also the distributor and is siloing their content.

I want to be able to select my preferred content platform, but should be able to access _all_ content on that platform.

Then distributors (apps) compete in different ways and at different price points. Some examples:

- 4k vs HD streaming

- Offline downloads

- Pay per hour vs unlimited

- Extra enhancements like Amazon's X-Ray

- Better curation

- Different recommendation algorithms

- live vs on-demand

Then _I_ have a choice in how I experience content. We got lucky and have this with the music industry. Very little content is siloed, so I still have a choice on Spotify, Apple Music, Pandora, Tidal, Bandcamp, or just à la carte purchases and curating my own collection.
1) the rabbit jumped: (not conspiracy, fact could be true or false)

2) jfk was assassinated by the CIA: (conspiracy, fact could be true or false)

What concept are you referring to when you say you don't understand it?
The problem with PHP is not that you can't write great maintainable codebases in it -- you certainly can.

The problem is how easy it makes it to write obscenely unmaintainable anti-architected code bases in it. The average PHP production code base is deeply offensive. I'm knee deep in one right now.

You can still have awful code bases in Rails or Django or Go, but the opinionated nature of those ecosystems makes the average much better than PHP.

If "PHP" were synonymous with "Laravel", that would be different. But it's not.
"Just pay your employee to drive 3 hours" is equally absurd. Or what if I decide to take a greyhound or amtrak even longer, please pay me to sleep! You also have the choice of not taking the job, or not moving away from your job so its hardly a fair comparison.
I always feel like I should be doing more with Pharo. I love smalltalks and there's something really fun and playful about working with it, even those with a more "professional" shine on them like Pharo. I've been experimenting with Godot recently and I feel like there's a lot of that spirit in modern gamedev, where the tool is written in itself and gives you all of the same parts to play and build with.

I guess I don't really know what my usecase for Pharo is, like what niche is it filling? Maybe I need to build my next web...thing with it and see how it works out?
> Is the whole thing prone to N+1 queries like Rails is (was? no clue about it nowadays)?

Rails has had the ‘include’ method which solves n+1 since version 3.0 around 2010. Before that it also had preload which worked similar.
We're just going to have to deal with the climate changes like we have since life first sprang upon the earth. Like it or not, most people are not willing to dramatically alter their way of life over this.
The difference being of course, on Apple's stranglehold on its customers. 30% either way, app developers know that Apple users are always willing to pay more and Apple knows this, too. That's why many apps only target iOS.

Besides the income from services within Apple's apps: they could take 30% of an app's purchase price (which is still not justified tbh, the app store can't be _that_ expensive to run), but how do they justify trying to take a percentage of a subscription (like Spotify, Netflix etc) when they have nothing to do with it?

That would be like Apple being able to take a portion of banking fees from me because I have my bank's app installed on my phone (and the bank takes fees), which Apple doesn't do of course because as big as they are, you do not fuck with banks.
> The talk of long-term vs short-term harm does seem like what you say, but Elon wanting to colonized Mars is an example that isn't like that at all and his effort seems to have positive side effects.

"Nothing beside remains.

Round the decay of that colossal wreck,

Boundless and bare

The lone and level sands stretch far away.”
Thanks for actually going and looking! I would say that this supports the idea of float_equals(x, 0.0) or even float_equals_zero(x) :)

It wouldn't be too surprising to me if 90% of float equalities in real code are comparisons to 0.0 or 1.0 or -1.0 (that's what I meant in my original post, there was a typo)

The point about x >= 0 and x <= 0 is interesting. I suppose to be consistent, you would also remove those operators on floats, although for something awk-like, I don't think it matters either way.

---

The other point is that it looks like the Fortran code isn't actually using == or x.eq.zero polymorphically!

So the first point is that I would want to understand conceptually where float equality would be equal. You mentioned fixed points, although there I also suspect that abs(x - y) < eps is a better test in most situations, though certainly there could be counterexamples.

The second point is -- would any of those situations be polymorphic with int and float, or string and float? It depends on the language, but it seems vanishingly unlikely in most languages, and in particular in say in C++

I would probably go look at the equivalent Eigen code if it mattered with respect to Oil, but it probably doesn't
Other languages don't have that? CPython has almost 7k issues open atm. GHC has 5k. Again, FUD.
The "gotcha" isn't aimed at the people doing the study or advocating for change, it's aimed at the apologists who were running around with "everyone is winning" rhetoric. There were plenty of them around here. They were very wrong about something that should have been obvious.

This is all going to play out again with AI, but moreso, so it's important to keep score.
I doubt that guests in restaurants will start flipping their own burgers, or folks will stop ordering home deliveries, so I don't think the demand is a problem here. Real problem is on the other side, the vast supply of that segment of the workforce. These are easily replacable employees, so employer has unfair "if you don't like it, leave it" leverage over them - plus most of them can't really afford to be picky about jobs as they need that money badly. And employers exploit it.
Just another day doing DevOps for a Ruby on Rails product.
My first time seeing Pharo. First impressions are that it reminds me strongly of Smalltalk with the single-source IDE and runtime.

Not a bad thing, just an observation.
> How would it work though?

Like it works for any other work: you get a roster of when you're expected to work and get paid for that time, and perform tasks during this time. This problem has been solved decades if not centuries ago, e.g. factory shifts or supermarket employees.
We sort of agree? I suggest taxing automation heavily and distributing the resulting gains broadly because the marginal costs are so low, versus human labor, which should be scarce and highly valued.

You have to tax differently because different productivity mechanisms have different societal value (not economic, importantly). There is a short story or proposal I recall consuming a long time ago about different types of money, one for things with no or low marginal cost, and one for things produced by humans. The former money would be printed and distributed somewhat freely, the latter not. Similar idea. If someone recalls a link to this idea, please comment!
It's not like this is a new debate. The US introduced a federal minimum wage in 1933 after a long push to end non-living wages in sweatshops. From the Wikipedia article [1]:

"Minimum wage legislation emerged at the end of the nineteenth century from the desire to end sweated labor which had developed in the wake of industrialization. Sweatshops employed large numbers of women and young workers, paying them what were considered nonliving wages that did not allow workers to afford the necessaries of life. Besides substandard wages, sweating was also associated with long work hours and unsanitary and unsafe work conditions."

Some other countries have universally binding collective agreements [2] that have the same outcome of establishing a salary floor.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_Sta...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_agreement
Ok, sure. But NAND loses data FAST compared to hard drives.
Yeah try 40-50% instead
I rowed in high school, and one of the things the coaches always wanted to see is for you to slide forward slowly in your seat as you move the oar between strokes.

The reasoning being that as you slide “forward” in your seat, you’re actually pushing the boat backwards with your momentum, since you face backwards in the boat.

It always struck me as strange advice though, because in a race you’re trying to get high stroke rates (35+ strokes per minute) and there’s not a lot of time between strokes to move your seat. And if you have to move your seat from A to B, there’s no real free lunch: Work equals force times distance, so you’re going to impart the same amount of momentum into the boat whether you move the slide slowly or quickly… it’s just a matter of how much time that work is spread out over, and that really shouldn’t make a difference to the boat.

Watching rowing in the Olympics it doesn’t seem like they’re worried about this at all. They just move from the back to the front of their seat quickly and it’s not some obvious effort to be gradual about it.

There were other dubious bits of advice too, like pushing with your legs first, then torso, then arms, but if you try to actually do that in reality it feels extremely awkward. And watching the pros do it on TV it doesn’t seem like they’re doing anything like this.
This whole topic seems to be unnecessary and stupid.

Gig workers should all be sole Proprietors of their own businesses. The only reason they aren't is because governments make it difficult to run your own business.

This would solve basically all of the legal and moral problems.

Gig workers would be responsible for all of their own benefits, but be able to deduct all of their business costs. They would be responsible for if their own business turns a profit or loss and if they want to continue it.
Monoliths to Microservices Using the Strangler Pattern
It isn’t random, and it also isn’t a fractal (as is explained in the very short article).

In other news, the golden ratio doesn’t really occur in nature as much as people would like to believe. [0]

[0] https://www.maa.org/external_archive/devlin/devlin_05_07.htm...
I think the arrogance of thinking its possible to do this research safely with any containment procedures is ridiculous. Yes, you can make the chances of a leak extremely minimal, but you can't rule it out when humans are involved and the consequences are so extraordinary that there just isn't an acceptable trade-off.
Another File system I am interested in is GEFS - good enough fs (rather - "great experimental file shredder" until stable ;-). It's based on B-epsilon trees, a data structure which wasn't around when ZFS was designed. The idea is to build a ZFS like fs without the size and complexity of zfs. So far its plan 9 only and not production ready though there is a chance it could be ported to OpenBSD and a talk was given at NYC*BUG: https://www.nycbug.org/index?action=view&id=10688

Code: http://shithub.us/ori/gefs/HEAD/info.html
I get what you're saying, I just think this is more of a Google thing than a TR thing. Their peer reviewed papers have the same issue as their preprints, TRs, and whitepapers, generally speaking--Google researchers feel no incentive to actually share how they did things, perform accurate or up-to-date comparisons to comparable frameworks, or even bother outlining their key contributions, because they know the paper will be published, widely read, widely cited, and influential even if they don't do any of those things. It's to the point that I think it might actually be house policy to neuter their papers of specific details as much as possible, presumably to retain what they perceive as Google's competitive advantage, because it makes no sense otherwise that wildly different papers with different authorship groups coming from so many different areas of CS could all have these same problems.

This is (IMO) quite different from, e.g., the cases of academics publishing misleading benchmarks, which is more often just being wedded to a bad idea because you spent years of work on it and your position is at risk if you didn't end up outperforming existing approaches. Often I can still get a lot out of papers with misleading benchmarks, even if what I get is "don't try this technique, it doesn't work." Whereas I frequently get nothing at all out of Google publications. If I had to describe the way Google seems to view academic publishing in one word, it would be "marketing"--it's advertising for people to either come work at Google or use their products, not something written with the intent of advancing the wider state of the art, or even the less noble goal justifying the time and money they put into whatever they're writing about.
I find it fascinating that the top two comments (at the moment) are essentially saying "this marketing video is great" and "this marketing video is terrible". Would it be this polarizing if it wasn't Google?
There have been multiple times where I've forgotten to change the dollar amount on a Doordash tip (I try to tip generously) for something purchased locally... usually it ends up being a $25 order with a $3-4 tip. I don't know if drivers get any part of any of the fees, but I know that I've always gotten the thing I ordered. It's crazy, but people still do it.
So its a combo of them wrapping their identity into this one thing (running here), eventually not being able to keep doing it, but also there is an aspect that I am purely assuming which is they could have done more variety of stuff with their life. This last point being super biased as its based in my own desires, and who knows, maybe they LOVE this one thing and that's all they want for fulfillment.

But to your point, i also love hearing stories of old people defying our expectations of what an old person should be able to do.
Congrats on the launch, this looks really interesting!
Fractals don't even need to be self-similar. They just need to have fractal dimension (if you double the size of every feature - the exponent near the scaling factor must be non-integer). Self-similarity is the easiest way to make a fractal, but not the only one.

In fact the idea of fractal was invented for real-life non-self-similar objects. The simple self-similar ones are just examples that are easiest to understand.
I said an effective monopoly. Most people who create a video will automatically upload it to YouTube without even thinking about alternatives.
I'm sorry, Plato wasn't thinking about the effects of the written word on social issues over time and space?!

The whole point of his writing all it down, the very literal foundations of ~2500 years of philosophy and the bedrock of Western (and others) civilization, was so that he could have an effect on social issues over time. That was the whole point! He is super clear about this in his writings and throughout his life and travels.
lol indeed, i can't even tell which position you're arguing for or against.
What? Buying an Android tablet only to gain the ability to block ads?
I think I've held on to my intellect (mid-40s), just have gotten wiser. And my tolerance for the inane, useless, and just plain stupid has dropped dramatically. I blame/credit that on having small kids too.