skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm sorry this is happening to you. Thank you for fighting to improve SCC outcomes for yourself and others. Please keep us updated with your progress.
Regulators are, in general, too sheltered and disconnected from the impact of their actions.

Incentives matter. When you get to make decisions that impact others, but not feel any of the costs associated with that, you do not have the correct incentives. I hope the staff of FDA read this and can’t sleep tonight. We can hope they feel some emotional pain, even if it is only some small subset of the pain they have and continue to cause to others.

FDA delenda est.
You're treating sandboxing like it's all the same, but it's not. Multimedia decoders are one of the absolute easiest things to sandbox. Webassembly was designed for sandboxing and even that's very overcomplicated for what a decoder needs.

If we had standard headers, then reading metadata wouldn't be part of the decoder. The decoder would only need to take in bytes and output a bitmap, or take in bytes and output PCM audio. It doesn't need to be able to call any functions, or run any system calls, and the data it outputs can safely contain any bytes because nothing will interpret it.

It's like taking the very core of webassembly and then not attaching it to anything. The attack surface is astoundingly small.

You just need to give it a big array of memory and let it run arithmetic within that array, plus some control flow instructions. Easy to interpret, easy to safely JIT compile.
I think guaranteed death is much more different than potential death and potential cure.

It's a tough line to walk on, still.
? Author not editorial board: David Oshinsky directs the Division of Medical Humanities at NYU Langone Health. His books include “Bellevue: Three Centuries of Medicine and Mayhem at America’s Most Storied Hospital” and “Polio: An American Story,” which won the 2006 Pulitzer Prize for history. Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Oshinsky
>They are there to crack the whip and collect the spoils

This is historically correct

Here's a recent unambiguous proof from Tesla's own words:

"Tesla argued that stock options were used to ensure Director's incentives were aligned with investor goals." [1]

Said another way, "we massively over-paid directors in order to give them an incentive to prioritize investor goals over all other goals"

In the parlance of finance this is the only goal and the ultimate decision that cannot be questioned.

I have seen this made explicit in multiple organizations as a Director or Senior Manager. As a manager, if you are explicit in supporting employee benefits over increase in stock price or C-Suite direction (when given the choice) then you should expect no further growth or promotions (unless you can manipulate the org or have some damaging information on the company).

>Maybe another approach would be for the workers to share more equally in the spoils so that they would be naturally inclined to integrate business improvements and goals

The strong form of this is a worker-owned-cooperative but second to that are labor unions. So if you want to change it, then start/join a union and stop creating corporations with separate ownership rules for investors.

[1]https://www.engadget.com/tesla-directors-agree-to-return-735...
You can always check the impact factor of the journal you’re accessing, and their acceptance rate etc… it can give an indication of the credibility of article published, as well as the journal.
For those who are curious, the term was coined on this blog post[1]:

> The Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics says that you can have a particle spinning clockwise and counterclockwise at the same time – until you look at it, at which point it definitely becomes one or the other. The theory claims that observing reality fundamentally changes it.

> The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics says that when you observe or interact with a problem in any way, you can be blamed for it. At the very least, you are to blame for not doing more. Even if you don’t make the problem worse, even if you make it slightly better, the ethical burden of the problem falls on you as soon as you observe it. In particular, if you interact with a problem and benefit from it, you are a complete monster. I don’t subscribe to this school of thought, but it seems pretty popular.

The post provides real life examples of government programs, nonprofits, and individuals being criticized for helping in the “wrong” way.

1. https://web.archive.org/web/20210125231725/https://blog.jaib...
I guess we know that, but why doesn't the EU rubber stamp medicine that's approved in the US? In my opinion it's actually good for there to be independent bodies reviewing things.
> if the goal was to simplify things, then I'm not sure how successful they were at that.

Maybe if they have other goals that are tradeoffs vs. simplicity, then it's more understandable?

What if another goal is allowing enterprise customers to recreate a virtual enterprise network? Or a virtual data center network? Those are much more complex than a client TCP stack.

The defaults are simple for simple uses. And yes, for those complex cases, you'd need AWS specific product knowledge, but most of the underlying concepts are shared in common with other clouds and on prem networks. Like learning your Nth programming language.
> The friend got a job at Google, and as far as I can tell, is supporting their spouse's dedication to this job search.

Your friend is a saint. Those types of multi-postdoc job hunts usually end in divorce. I can't imagine that PLUS another PhD.
No, they're two very different things, because one involves an adaptation. Once adapted, the rules of the game for cross-species transmission events are completely different.

Or do you maintain that a combination cross-species transmission and adaptation to the new host is as common as cross-species transmission of already-adapted viruses?
They have really good tech blog posts. Also, they have https://fly.io/dist-sys/
For many people the experience of working from a laptop is poor. Mixing screen resolutions and density. Audio devices constantly changing as a plug into or out of my docking station. Yet another thing to fight for space on the desks they're always trying to densify. Etc. Etc.
I can tell by the way you are hyping up synthetic clothing that you've never stepped foot in a humid town/city where you are constantly sweating buckets. The way synthetic clothing sticks to your skin would probably make you want to walk around naked all day.
The only guarantee in life, is death.
> Who cares if Bun takes a couple hundred MBs extra (which is worth like $0.20)?

Users of a software whose author decided to use tool that only cares about server side.
Badges for Science
> if everyone were to act rightly

Yes, but that's not reality. Hoping for the best whilst not actually making a dent in carbon emissions is not helping the problem at all.
> What does Tony Robbins have to say on the subject

Substantially the same. You want to learn something, go ask those who can teach you something.

Or, you can work on your own, build up competence without insights, and collect those insights all out of your experience in the span of decades.

> as a source

It's good sense, not authority.
People are, perhaps understandably, very eager to advance at a faster pace, always a faster pace. Nowhere is that more evident than in the case of people facing death regardless, but in addition to the issues you raised (early failures can lead to even worse delays) there are other ethical concerns. Terminally ill people are often understandably desperate, and I would be too in their position, no doubt about it. Their families are desperate, often their doctors are desperate. That doesn't mean that their remaining life doesn't have value though, or that cutting it weeks, months or years short isn't a problem.

I think that's often lost on people, and in a more frightening way, people who are all-to-eager to use the terminally ill as ultimately disposable test subjects for unproven treatments. If it was JUST down to safety then I could see the point to an extent, but as you said efficacy is a big open question too. Of course if you're facing death then you may well want to roll the dice, but the question there too is how well you really understand the odds. The understandable implication in a lot of the discussions around this issue is that if only regulators were a bit faster, people like the author wouldn't die.

The reality is grim though, most of these experimental drugs and therapies are not effective, regardless of whether or not they're safe.
For a more humorous overview of this, take a look at Verity Stob’s account

https://www.theregister.com/2012/12/22/verity_stob_8086_and_...
There is no 100% correct answer here. As soon as you speed up the process, there are still going to be people that just miss out, and then we will have people saying 4 months is too long, it should take 2 months, or let AI approve it, etc. Desperation skews perspective.

The issue with having a standardized approach to people getting experimental drugs is it opens up its own kind of mini-market unless the implication is they would be required to be free by law. And desperation is not the right mindset to make law or rational decisions.

Not trying to sound heartless, its just not as easy as saying "go faster".
The plastic waste thing is a pretty big deal in my eyes.

I try to completely avoid any synthetics and wish they were taxed into oblivion to account for externalities like polluting entire ecosystems.

Mind you, high quality synthetics are probably fine if you plan on wearing them for 20+ years.

What bothers/worries me is that fast fashion is pretty much entirely synthetics based and sells enormous quantities.
Reviving a Forth Sci-Fi Game from 1982 [video]
5% acetic acid vinegar, a squirt of lemon dish soap and a few tablespoons of sugar mixed together in a bowl kills the fruit flies within a day of arrival. It will evaporate over time but adding water back to the original level reconstitutes the trap and it will work for months. This is just an interim solution until the lasers and machine vision are working.
> Rational numbers are numbers that we can have in our hand while irrational numbers are ones which we can never have. It is important to have a setup that respects that difference.

Do you mean physically? Basic shapes like circles, squares and triangles allow us to hold irrational numbers in our hands as distances. Children playing with blocks can sense that root 2 does not conform nicely with other (rational) distances.
I gave this talk a while back but was prompted to re-post after seeing the recent wave of interest in Forth history on HN.
If all you need is a browser, you can use SSH as a SOCKS proxy for your browser.
The difference is in how painful and how long that death will be
But that’s the problem. No regulatory body has perfect judgement, so they’ll all approve some harmful things and ban some helpful things. If you’re so strict that you don’t allow thalidomide, you’ll also ban stuff like beta blockers for an extra decade, causing 80,000 deaths. The argument in favor of loosening restrictions is that it would reduce overall death and suffering.
I appreciate that you've softened your tone from your earlier hostile remarks.

But getting upset at a previous discussion and then looking up threads of mine to pretend to scold me isn't neutral, it's unhealthy.

This will be my last reply; I'd appreciate it if you don't stalk my comments to try and carry on a grudge. If you would like to get the last word, and try to carefully craft a response to make it appear that isn't what you were doing, you are more than welcome.
Something like this?

https://github.com/k0rventen/apple-health-grafana
Highly relevant: research on ways to accelerate the medical-trial process. Here is one example from JASA: https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000001790.
Sidecars perhaps. Don't bogart the memory.
Another topic for discussion related to this (and I hope we can be detached enough to discuss the intellectual side of this impersonally):

Even if the drug/treatment method were approved, how much would this cost, would the author even be able to pay for / have the insurance company pay for the treatment?

And by the way, what limits are there on the price of a drug that an insurance company or the government will cough up the money to pay, for one person's extension to life for a couple years?

If someone has a very rare or just very advanced cancer, how much should the rest of us (as individuals paying taxes/premiums/etc) be on the hook for paying for last ditch efforts to prolong that person's life?

These are genuine questions I think are legitimate to ask, if not in polite conversation, then at least at the level of policymaking bodies in govt or insurance companies. I'm sure that people in the UK are quite familiar with this concept or debate.

You cannot just say you'll pay whatever it takes to save someone's life no matter what the circumstances.
I'd guess that's the two letter domain doing that.
Redmine might look clunky from a distance, and its installation is convoluted. However, once it works, it works forever.

It's a "zero unplanned maintenance" tool which works without any problems, and can be extended with tons of features due to its extensible nature.

Maybe it's about being an oldish folk who used "classical UI"s more, yet I still find their information density much better than modern "fluffy and animated" UIs. No JS animations to waste power, no browser version requirement, just a brutalist structure built around function.

Paired with a powerful VM, it loads instantly, works perfectly.
No, you're right...that can be an issue. I had to configure my server to disallow large rooms and enforce some file size limits.
Or use Alire which wraps it up and manages multiple installations for you. This is my preferred way to install it, and it makes it easy to select compilers for cross-compilation (like for embedded targets) or to select particular compiler versions.

https://alire.ada.dev/
It's very interesting you mentioned this because I noticed this behaviour on another unrelated VPN service. It appeared to be a SSL stripping attack. Is that what happened to you, waselighis?
> Honestly that feels like what apps are.

Almost every single app on my phone forgets who I am even after minor updates.

Apps I use infrequently? It's like they never knew me to begin with.
So, a private netvibes / pageflakes / my.yahoo startpage kind of thing to sort data - perhaps from a private wordpress install as keiferski mentioned above might work.
Blaming the FDA is popular but the problem is not the FDA itself. Drug manufacturers are part of the problem.

1. When the FDA has fast-tracked drugs, drug makers have taken advantage of this to hide data, lie, and refuse to comply with timelines for proving those drugs work. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/07/22/1110830...

2. When these accelerated drugs are found to not work or cause harm, the manufacturers continue to push for them and the FDA has tremendous trouble trying to their approval revoked. https://apnews.com/article/science-health-medication-busines...

3. Accelerated drug approval gets mired in advertising. The general public has no idea how to judge if a drug works or not. Plenty of people believe that homeopathy works. The FDA gets massive pushback when trying to take a drug that is worthless away, because people think it works. This hurts us all and creates an incentive for companies to hide data and deceive customers.

4. The FDA is as fast or faster than the Canadian or EU equivalents. The FDA is not specifically slow, bureaucracy everywhere has become much slower because there are no incentives to be fast but countless incentives to be slow.

5. Lawsuits. It's easy to say "I'm hurting, I'll take anything". But, then, there are rights you cannot give away. If a drug harms you, you will sue. If it kills you, your family will sue. The whole system is bogged down by lawsuits with massive disproportionate payouts. The early biotech companies and scientists involved often cannot deal with even a mistaken lawsuit.

We need a much more comprehensive overhaul of the system, starting with open access laws to all data pertaining to any drugs that are on the market (no manufacturer can keep anything secret for a drug that people take), an FDA that has much more authority and much less industry capture, medical tort reform, to create a system where in exchange it actually makes sense to provide fast tracked approval.
Right. I have mission control set up to one hot corner for when I want to switch between windows lazily with just one hand (mouse) and making out parts of my wallpaper underneath the scattered windows is the extent I see it.
Digitalis/Digoxin/Lanoxin is a life-saving drug that is derived from the toxic Foxglove plant and can still poison someone in sufficient quantities according to Agatha Christie and the internet. (I guess lots of drugs can harm you in sufficient quantities lol.)
dictionary.com lies. It's pronounced 'smohl'. If it were pronounced the same as small then you couldn't use it conversationally.
> I don't want companies to be able to lock down a user's device

Neither do I, thus the cautionary tale of VanMoof. Software is now everywhere, in everything from your toaster to the electric grid. As a result, right-to-repair means right to reprogram. The owner needs to be able to fix bugs, change performance parameters, replace things that break. When my dad was working on cars, that meant put in a new carburetor, adjust the timing, clean the points - all physical parts. It's different today.
> Even if you want the experimental treatment, you cannot get it.

fortunately, Baja California seems to have everything. Or specifically, a different drug approval strategy that is right in the middle of this.

The FDA's main limitation is that it gives a one to one relationship in approvals. A substance is seemingly evaluated for a single narrow ailment. While evaluation process is a threshold of side effects as well as efficacy in treating that single narrow ailment. This process could be expanded to recognize that fulfilling the side effect issue could expand its use in other ways, more easily than whatever semantical distinction of easier the FDA uses now. There could be more possibilities for one to many approvals.
Something like 90% of burglaries are looking for car keys. That's why I keep my keys by the front door in eyesight on anyone who comes in. I have insurance, and don't want a thug wandering around my house.
Explain ? Not a WSJ editorial board opinion. Also interested in when you think the WSJ board was credible and at what point it lost its credibility ?
> Killing someone in an attempt to help is deeply unethical, while merely letting them die is not your fault.

If a train is coming with someone pinned to the tracks, and they are begging you to hand them an axe so they can remove their own leg-- knowing they may die from blood loss, do you just do nothing?
I would disagree with this. Regulators that I have worked with in US and EU knew what it meant. Maybe not the most amazing technical people I’ve ever worked with, but they were as competent as any random sample of pharma/tech types. Their jobs is to verify that you have completed all the valid documentation to demonstrate that your drug does what you claim it does. Their opinion on personal emotions are irrelevant. They are supposed to be guideline checkers.
The curve figures he show in video at 14:03 looks like the curve of memristors.
Immunotherapies are still immature but far from snake oil at this stage. They routinely achieve miraculous remissions but also lead to many adverse events. For most late stage tumors, chemotherapy will only, at best, increase life expectancy a bit. In my opinion, the choice is obvious.
I’ve got an intel nuc and a 2014/15 (not super sure) Mac mini, both running Ubuntu 20.04. Never had any issues with either, they’ve both been running Homeassistant and 15 other docker containers for a few years with no issues.
Ask HN: Which cloud provider should I focus on?
I'm in a position where I can learn any of the 3 major cloud providers at work.

I have strong reasons to believe that I have to pick one, so how do I pick one?

I don't know enough about each cloud provider to be able to decide on my own.

I've already asked Software Engineers and System Engineers for advice.

Both groups have very different and often conflicting/incompatible values.

For example, which cloud provider would you pick if you had to choose?

- System Engineers: Only AWS.

- Software Engineers: Anything, but AWS.

Why?

- System Engineers: It's cheaper and easier to maintain.

- Software Engineers: It's cheaper and easier to use.

Why cheaper?

- System Engineers: You don't need in-house solutions to hard problems.

- Software Engineers: Look at the pricing.

Why easier?

- System Engineers: Mistakes are often prevented.

- Software Engineers: Less concepts to learn.

For example?

- System Engineers: Kubernetes cluster with all nodes in the same AZ is not allowed.

- Software Engineers: To get a Kubernetes cluster, you don't need to know what AZ is.

As you can see, there is hardly anything common in their answers and it doesn't help
that I find myself somewhere in the middle of these 2 extremes.
We can't use proxy servers on corp-provisioned machines.
a case against them, yes.

BTW i would have never even known afroman if notfor the promotional effect of the actions against him.

if you like whimsey he has it. he wont kick your door in, or steal your money.

https://www.ogafroman.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afroman
You can get get experimental drugs/treatments that aren’t approved by getting them under the clinical trial for that drug. The question is who pays for it? Cancer treatments are millions of dollars.
Mellanox switch is like $10k a pop. You install Linux on it (sonic) and configure firewall/vip/etc and you’re done. You can pay consultants to do all that once then save on aws cost for next 3 years.

37signals did basically this with same number of staff you can read about it on their blog. It’s not rocket science
> we’ll know that we at least we made significant effort, and gave everyone a better chance, rather than settle for a “Hail Mary” drug near the end.

I think this is a sensible take for someone who is not facing their own imminent mortality. But no matter what we do, the game theory of terminal diagnoses means there will always be incentive to go for a Hail Mary in the end.
Exactly. The tools exist, they just don't make them available to customers.
This is the regular reminder that you can create your own password, provided it's created via a secret which only you would understand. Then you can store the secret safely.

It can't be your wife's name, or your birthday, your kids' names, car license, or anything which someone could research.

We've had this discussion before.
Cotton or linen only in hot weather. Not that thick fruit of the loom stuff but some good fabric that is thin enough to breathe, but it's still cotton so it's wicking moisture. Evaporation results in a cooling effect so long as the cotton is thin enough. That's the only way to go in the heat (imo). Cheap old men's dress shirts from the 80s that are still 100% cotton and have been washed too many times.
Interesting to see there’s only 3 comments here excluding mine. Is the hype dying down?
I really wish they would provide a chart that includes weight
Merino wool t-shirts are pretty great in hot weather.
Agreed, correction accepted. (Using 'acountants' in a loose pejorative sense is a 'disease' many of us have caught, it's good to be corrected.)
There is anothing wrong with using the passive voice.
No one wants to see you, so this is a meaningless statement.
If he's going to die why not give him the option to try medicine that is developed by large players with a good reputation? Weighing historical success into the process seems to make sense to me. Beta programs from Google are usually very functional...
What Are Computers For? (2016)
Off label prescriptions are legal and very common.