skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
1. I call that a multicopter. There are specialized names for multicopters: if it has 4 props, "quadcopter". 6 props: "hexacopter". Octocopter, etc. Some names give an indication on the configuration. Say you have something that looks like a quadcopter (so a square with one prop on each vertex), but each prop is doubled (so there are 8 in total: 2 "squares" on top of each other). Then I call that a "coax octocopter".

Same for VTOL (vertical takeoff and landing) vehicles. I usually use VTOL to mean "a fixed wing" (i.e. something that looks like a plane) that takes off and lands vertically, but there are different configurations. A "tiltrotor" will have the rotors facing up when taking off, and then the rotors will tilt to face forward during flight. A "tailsitter" will have fixed rotors, but the vehicle will takeoff like a rocket (so "sitting on its tail", I guess), and then transition to forward flight.
> I also find it suspect that equity or inclusion are "political,"

The way you say "suspect" seems like an attempt to sway opinion, which seems like a tacit admission that that the terms are political.

For instance, inclusion of who? What groups do you divide the world's people into such that you need one of every group for proper representation?

> Logistically speaking, it makes zero sense to hire an anti-diversity advocate for a DEI role.

I think most people can do jobs they don't agree with. An engineer can design a bridge that they didn't vote for, an administrator can follow rules they wouldn't have chosen, etc.

> Companies only have DEI teams because they want to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion;

How should you do that though? Is any diversity of thought allowed? For instance, is anyone allowed to think that affirmative action is ultimately harmful and focus on the diversity and inclusion over "equity", and/or argue for what they feel are more helpful methods?

Is DEI defined as a specific set of practices or a general goal of bettering society?
Do you mean disproven?
This looks something like transactions for devops, which would be great. It could make for safer deployments in the future.
"Price controls and the seizure of farms and factories by the government led to food shortages."

-NPR
The container + temp overlay approach is interesting but this could more simply use filesystem transactions, if we had them.
I vote for aeromobile.
in your view, is our view of the night sky ruined by commercial airline flights overhead?
Now that I think about it more, New York City made a pretty smart decision a long time ago to ban rooftop helipads.

There used to be a shuttle helicopter service from the roof of a tall office building near Grand Central station, to nearby airports, which was shut down after a helicopter tipped over on its side, throwing blades over the edge and killed five people.

https://gothamist.com/news/in-1977-five-were-killed-in-helic...
How does that work - are professional landscapers permitted them? I'm so jealous of this but I doubt it would ever work here, in a large, bay area city.
Care to elaborate with specifics?
It fits with everyday uses of the word "conscious".

Let's say someone is lying motionless on the ground. You then say they've "lost consciousness". Later, they wake up and object that they were not unconscious. "I could hear everything you said. I was paralysed, but conscious the whole time." Being able to relate their experience is what proves that they were conscious.

Someone will say that they "made a conscious decision". Same thing. They can relate the thought process behind the decision.

Someone will say: "I got lost on the way to the airport. I must have unconsciously wanted to stay home." In this case they tell you that they made a decision, but they cannot relate the thought process behind the decision, and they don't believe that at any point they could have. It is a decision not available to introspection, therefore "unconscious".

> the question under investigation

What investigation? Which observation is in need of explanation?
All I have is the introspective observation of myself thinking, and reports from others making similar introspective observations.

If you are going to say that "consciousness" needs explanation, then your question is ill-formed, because your question contains a word that has no definition and no agreed upon meaning.
> Is this not the first time that they've done this?

The US averages roughly 3-4 bank failures per year, so no, this is definitely not their first time (SVB was the largest, though). This is a core function of the FDIC.

> Can’t ADP do this on their back end?

I suppose they could, but if there was a market incentive to create a tool like this, then why doesn’t it exist already? I’m not sure, but granting a non-banking 3rd party access to all of your financials does seem like a risk.
This was the first thing that popped into my head too as I read Homo Deus a few months ago.

A very accessible book for all. I recommend it. It’s not perfect but it’s a good, easy read compared to other books touching on the same subjects.
Type guarding is definitely a pain point moving from JS to TS
I totally agree that it's not obvious that an ML model is a derivative work. the language of the Copyright Act uses "recast, transformed, or adapted" to describe derivative works, and a pile of model weights isn't clearly that, IMO. I think it's fair to say that inferences directly replicating the creative and expressive elements (because factual information isn't copyrightable!) of a copyrighted work infringe. but I don't think it's obvious that the model itself does.

> If one goes to their local library and scans all the books there to generate the models used to OCR text, does that make the OCR model and application derivative works of the books?

there is a court case [1] addressing an even more infringing use case: scanning and OCR'ing books to produce a searchable database. that case turned on fair use, however, and not whether the database was a derivative work.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors_Guild,_Inc._v._Google,....
Oh for sure, it's a bit wonky on the JVM due to the lack of tail calls, but that sort of thing can be done via full-stack bytecode transformation.

But these people are doing this in Clojure, which is quite removed from the JVM bytecode, and talking about how it solves so many distributed problems, which I just don't see happening.
Not a single time in my 35 years as a software engineer; in times I use state or other diagrams, but besides that I just explain the intention in prose comments where necessary. Pseudocode is just another "language" you have to learn, which is why I prefer algorithm or compiler books with examples in common programming languages.
Me too. Here is my write up about it...

https://codeberg.org/vanous/YubiKey_On_Linux
Seems like you probably are not explicitly stating this policy beforehand? It's not very surprising that explaining why you don't do as an applicant might expect afterwards is not going well. From the Github examples you've linked earlier, right at the end:

> When you’re ready, let us know and we’ll schedule it for review. We review submissions once a week. You’ll hear back from us no matter what by the end of the /following/ week, possibly sooner if you submit early in the week.

+ 1 sentence expressing "we will tell you if you passed or failed, we have a policy of not providing actionable feedback"

> Remember, we are not timing you and there is no deadline. Work at your own pace. Reach out if you're stuck or have any questions. We want you to succeed and are here to help!

+ 1 sentence "but make sure to not spend significantly more time than X hours"
Cuba trade with most countries in the world. North Korea is popped up by China. Iran should have no problems importing food with their huge oil revenue.

Russia is under the harshest sanction at the moment yet do you see any food shortage there? How about Belarus?

Perhaps their regime’s failure is the reason why some of those countries have food availability issue?
Lockheed, Rheinmetall pair up to build Europe-made rocket launcher
When I was a young nerd, I was a rabid fan of logic, objectivity, science. Anything which smacked of spirituality (or, worse, religion) was immediately dismissed as useless sentimental nonsense. I recognized that some people might _enjoy_ thinking about these fripperies, but I was convinced that any phenomenon which claimed an effect but did not explain the science-based interactions that mediated it (think astrology or religion) was hogwash.

One day I was deathly bored on a school trip, and the only entertainment available was a book on Feng Shui. During the introduction, it advised the practice of imagining a dragon entering a living space through a door, coiling their way through and around the space, and then exiting. The following sentence stated that this was often a good heuristic for helping the human mind judge a space for sight lines, common travel paths, and avoiding clutter.

My mind was blown. The dragon wasn't the point - the dragon was a way to hack the human brain (itself a messy, complex, poorly-understood mechanism) to a better outcome than it would get by a straightforward series of explicable evaluations. If the process demonstrably leads to better outcomes - if it is "useful" - then it can still provide value even if you can't explain _why_ it works[0]

All of which is a roundabout way of getting to my point, which is: no, I don't get nervous about architectural patterns which _appear_ to only exist to make unit testing easier, because overwhelmingly I have found that "is this architecture easy to test?" is a good heuristic for "does this architecture have well-divided areas and layers of responsibility?". No matter your opinion on the value of tests _themselves_ (and there are very cogent arguments that an over-reliance on unit testing alone can lead to brittleness and false confidence), ceteris paribus making your architecture "more testable" will usually be a good thing in itself, even before any tests are written.

[0] this attitude needs some nuance, of course, when it is actually important to explain how and why the process reaches conclusions. See: ML/LLMs/AGI/AI/whatever-the-current-initialism-is, and recourse in the face of disputed judgements or unforeseen effects.
Hybrid is the worst of both worlds. You still have to live close enough to the office to get there without an insane commute, so you don't get the "live where you want" benefits of fully remote, but you also have to have enough space in your house to work, so you lose the "home is home and work is work" benefits of working in an office. Plus, unless office and WFH days are rigorously coordinated (which destroys any "flexibility"), you're still going to spend a bunch of time in the office on zoom calls with people who are WFH. It's wild to me that this is being suggested as a compromise. Hybrid just guarantees a baseline level of misery for everyone.
It might just not work. I lived in a place where gas powered landscaping equipment was illegal and it was widely ignored.
One reason a
Lol. That post made me laugh. One of the main reasons I never up/down a comment is because the arrows are too easy to misfire.
If there's a mode to prompt on all system / file system access it would be a great tool for understanding what a command does to the system.
I wonder if this has a parachute? If not, I'd feel better in other drone designs that have wings that would let you glide, which would also be better for range.
> This is intensely defeatist.

It's realistic.

> Regulations and compliance

Which might be nice. "Do this, or you will be penalized like this." These are marketed as "incentives" which is "Buy something, anything, and here's some abstract additional cash."

> And they need to be looking at a checklist that they only want to complete to avoid fines

The problem here is, you do the checklist, and you get an incentive. I wonder how that's actually going to be implemented?
Commercial airline flights are packed with 100s of people and fly very high. Flying taxis are for n < 4 (likely n=1) people and fly low. That's like comparing bus networks with private cars.
Lemmy v0.18.0 Release – A Reddit alternative written in Rust
Same halgari, yes :D.

Yeah he took it from Bagwell, and adapted it, but in general there was a whole discussion way back in the day (~2012) questioning how creating this much garbage by boxing and throw away collections could ever be fast. Datomic is another example: making an immutable DB is a dumb idea right? Well what if storage was super cheap, and almost free? Well then maybe it's not such a bad idea.

So a lot of the Clojure community is based on this idea of taking ideas from way back in the 70's and saying "Well everything has changed, what works now that didn't then"
2. I wonder, too. In terms of energy, I think the helicopter is the most efficient (it has to do with the surface covered by the prop, where one big rotor covers a bigger surface than many small ones).

Then in the startup world, I think it is more sexy to VCs, because that's new. Who would be interested in an autonomous helicopter? That's has-been, right?
I won't say you're wrong, but the answer might depend heavily on the application.
>FTC: What about Diablo? Can you promise it will ship on all future versions of PlayStation?

>Spencer: Can I promise? I am able to promise, yes.

The kind of obnoxious reply I'd expect from somebody on Xbox live, not their chief.
Before calling someone's genuine thoughts "absurd", I'd suggest exploring https://readmake.com book, which goes into much more detail on these thoughts. It was written by one such highly successful indie dev, and I think it's worth giving these ideas a shot. The author also describes many of them on his personal blog: https://levels.io/contact/

Another good resource is "It Doesn’t Have to Be Crazy at Work", where the authors describe how they've built a highly profitable bootstrapped business, and their philosophy around that, which shares many of these thoughts.
TP-Link works with web UI & App. Allows rtsp too.
Its much faster now and a share function has been added for pre-loaded examples
I think you've slightly missed the mark on this one. Lots of things are tropes (there are tropes in your comment too, such as 'borderline call'), and saying that Putin has basically lost the war (whether true or false) isn't anywhere close to being 'grandiose rhetoric'. I don't think anyone expects you to get things right 100% of the time. It seems to me that calling this one particular comment flamebait was just a mistake. While it's not a very interesting comment, it's at least free of the wild speculation that you can find in many of the unmoderated comments in this thread.
Don't worry, they're sending Haiti 53M in aid [to hire more cops].

https://www.usaid.gov/news-information/press-releases/jun-08...
There's another versin of what happened. Here's a post in telegram theorizing and referring to anonymous sources in the governmnet, suggesting it's a big fight between president administration management and FSB against MoD Shoigu+Gerasimov and Rostech corporation over the assets and state contracts of the latter. (post: https://t.me/volyamedia/703)

Apart from that it's entirely built on anonymous sources, this gives some plausible explanation, because if we consider just 2 sides (Prigozhin/Wagner vs Government), a genuine stand-down seems impossible. Leaving Prigozhin go away undermines the authority of Putin among those in top power.

But with 3 or 4 sides (Wagner, MoD & Rostech, PA & FSB, Putin & closest people) this explains their moves much better.

Although, if PA & FSB really did this, it's very reckless, putting the entire campaign at risk -- like quick frontline collapse.

So I admit the case with inner fight possible, though prorably the fake stand-down is more probable.
Near I can tell all I can find is wikipedia paraphrasing him paraphrasing someone else. "the feeling of what it is like to be something" sounds like to me a lot of words to just say "self awareness". Now I'm ignorant of all of this fair warning, but that seems pretty dang well explained isn't it? went and looked for brain science and awareness things, but it seems like there's lots of explanations for lots of parts of it. Same way we got lots of explanations for lots of stuff in science near as I know, so how the hell does that mean "neuroscience loses"? Like if we don't got a perfect explanation of everything science don't count?

Anyhow I went and read the article but it didn't even explain what isn't explained like you said where there just wasn't a meaning that was laid out. Got the feelin "it isn't perfect so I win" which is a really cheap trick and a really dumb bet. But I don't really know this stuff so all I can say is "to someone who doesn't know this stuff this article didn't help a dang bit". Maybe someone can explain the dang thing to me better
You understand that before Hugo Chávez was in power, Venezuela was (1) middle-income and (2) relatively safe?

Maybe the gangs were a problem in 2022 but that was a consequence of economic collapse and the government relying on armed thugs for security, not the cause.
Your web browser is broken. Well, they all are. Browsers on small screens should be built to browse web pages on small screens. There are seemingly obvious things to do like increasing font sizes[0] and margins -- the browser decides what to do with the content, after all. But such things aren't true solutions when the page is designed for a different device / resolution / form factor[1].
Your problem is with input though -- making elements bigger is a hacky solution at best.

Browsers on touch screens should be built to browse web pages on touch screens.
Touch input events are a particularly poor representation of the operator's intent -- compared to keys, pointing device with cursor, etc. -- yet a lot of software built for touch seems to assume the opposite.
The software decides that the user definitely wants to click on something and it just needs to find which thing.

As all good web browsers know, the extremely precise touch event position corresponds exactly to the (region of the) element that the user wants to click on. This is a certainty[2]. So what if the user tapped precisely on a background element for no reason at all? So what if there are multiple clickable things nearby? The user would have sent different coordinates if they wanted to click somewhere else.

[0] you generally do get some control over this, in lieu of a solution to the problem

[1] and the browser must, as much as possible, style the content in the way (not-) specified, even at the cost of the user experience / accessibility

[2] It is, by definition, without doubt. A fact. A universal truth. A ---
In democracy, just create fights between groups on issues of no-substance, and have two political parties. You get a system, which appears to be democratic, but controlled by the elite (uber wealthy, CEO-class, elite schools, think tanks, elite class of politicians, elite intellectuals specialized in propaganda). Politicians/leaders/parties change every x years, based on the election schedule, but this is a better system for the elite.
Yoda had no nuance.

And btw Yoda, the elves of Rivendell lived way past 900 and looked better than you, so nyeh
It's my view that all the threads here about remote work feature lots of people with some of the highest salaries and job mobility suddenly acting like it's unethical for them to be asked to leave their house. As if our society hasn't always functioned that way until recently without this level of complaining.
So pretend to understand after visiting for a long weekend?
Fly-by-wire systems have proven very safe. Most Airbus passenger jets are, for instance. But radio links for remote piloting are less reliable, because interference can be impossible to predict.
What's new is full CTAP2 support in FIDO2. Passwordless with PIN code. This never worked at all.

2FA (FIDO1) has worked for a while yes. But it still requires a username and password and the token is only used for 2FA. But this is not what webauthn is. It's only a small subset that existed under the FIDO name before webauthn was designed and was basically grandfathered in. But it's not really what webauthn is about.

In full passwordless mode you insert the token, enter its pincode and touch it to login. No username nor password needed. It's a bit like a bank card.

Not many sites support this method, for example Paypal only supports normal old FIDO1 2FA (and only one token which is ridiculous). But this support is also needed to finally enable full passkeys in the future. This support is also needed to finally enable full passkeys in the future (I believe 1 or 2 things for that are still coming in a near-future version).
Yeah but - it’s nice to be able to do that. Like what you’re describing -

> . I cringe when I see people say stuff like "Typescript forces you to think about types!", in practice it's the complete opposite … make changes without actually reading any of the code first. Zero idea what variable is defined where or what it holds, nah fuck that, just jump to line 148 and hover over a couple of things to try and pick up the thread from there, she'll be right.

Why should you need to do anything else than that? If TS enables better hinting, and you can just make a change without having to sit down and digest and entire codebase first, then why not enjoy taking advantage of that? How is that not desirable? Why make things more complicated for yourself than they need to be, when you can let your tools do that work for you?
Ongoing discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36460937
I would love to see this level of scrutiny applied somewhere it actually matters.

Mobile.

The real tax on innovation is the device + platform + payments + services duopoly where the gatekeepers get to pick winners (typically their own), tax everything, force tech choices and update regimes, and keep the customer relationships.

It's maddening that general purpose computing and financial transactions became this. Owned by a handful of giants.
Not quite sure why this deserves a downvote, it’s pertinent since it’s also an open-source flashcard system and there are lots of other comments about it, but okay!
Indeed. A cardinal sin in software (in general, not just CLIs) is skipping or half-assing documentation of side effects. Combined with multi-step operations, partially committed operations can be nasty to debug, and even reason about.

This tool can bring a level of control that is typically only available in databases and VCSs, and make it a commodity.
But if you turn it off, you don't get the start menu indexed anymore. I don't need my files indexed, I just want my start menu shortcuts indexed. There's a few other small things that no longer work without indexing, though I forget what they are now. Everything is great, but there's actually other services that depend on search being enabled, as it tells you when you try to stop the service that is shutting down dependent service first.
> Instance admins can add different images as emojis which can be referenced by users when posting.

How does this work with federation? Users just see :shrug: instead of the proper emoji?
To your credit, at least you got data to begin investigating your claim. I'm usually to lazy to do that...
Lest we think Orwell was incredibly imaginative, his "two minutes hate" had many antecedents, including https://greatwar.nl/kleur/hymnofhate.html
Skip the conversation entirely?

I don't really have this problem, but my co-workers often put several-hour meetings on their calendar with the meeting name and participants hidden. Seems to work to prevent others from inviting them to meetings during that time.
The problem wasn't the connection method. It was the type of authentication.

With CTAP you can insert the stick, enter its pincode, touch it and you're logged in. It replaces even the username.. This never worked.

What did work was using the token as a 2FA token only (FIDO1 method). But that doesn't replace passwords.