skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Rationalists will always dismiss anything that has a woo quotient ascribed to it. This is unfortunate because traditional astrology provides a remarkably sophisticated toolset to study this aspect of reality -- _but you have to know how to look at it_.

The system deals with archetypal reality. Archetypes have an unboundedness to them that live within a fixed topical frame. Astrology says: at such and such time, such an archetype is active; it is probable that this _type_ of event will occur, but it is impossible to say exactly what it will be. Using the more ancient toolset one can narrow down the type of event quite precisely.

An extremely simple example of this:

Astrologer says to client, "In two years your 5th house will be active and you will have a baby". Two years pass, and the client does not have a baby, but rather publishes a book they've been working on for a long time. As the 5th house covers children and other labors of love, this prediction is in fact accurate. The book is their baby, and it has been born. This mode is how one must look at all topics covering all of the 12 houses houses and signs, as augmented by all of the planets and their myriad significations. And crucially, this is how one must understand predictions made by skilled astrologers. It's a different gaze, but also one that is testable assuming the experiment is designed correctly.

Discussions about pop astrology (as seen in this article) will always fail to comprehend the true depth and potential of the craft.
"If a good enough X logo is posted tonight, we'll make go live worldwide tomorrow" sounds impulsive to me.

A rebranding would make more sense at the point where you actually roll out those everything features. Him being a marketing engineer, I guess he just had to stay in the conversation this week.
I'm pretty sure it's just 2D checkers and they're not even using half the board.
Also of note is that the stock ticker symbol "X" is, for whatever reason, US Steel [0]. If Elon ever takes his X Company public, I bet there will be a lot of erroneous buys of US Steel, similar to what happened when Twitter originally went public [1] (an unrelated penny stock with the ticker symbol TWTRQ surged), or when an unrelated company with the ticker symbol ZOOM surged when people started buying Zoom videoconferencing stock (ticker symbol ZM) at the start of the pandemic [2].

[0] https://www.google.com/finance/quote/X:NYSE

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveschaefer/2013/10/08/after-...

[2] https://www.yahoo.com/video/confusion-over-stock-names-zoom-...
How long do these “moonshots” have until they are considered failures?

It seems like an anti pattern that some huge, futzy organization launches a “moonshot” to explain why they burn money on something without needing a return because it’s a “moonshot.”

JFK gave his “to the moon” speech in 1962, targeting 1970 [0]. And the USG did it. So 8 years was the first one. It cost a ton of money and was successful and had massive returns culturally, scientifically, and financially.

Google launched its X/moonshot org in 2010 [1]. 14 years later, have any “landed?”

It seems like orgs should stop using this terminology unless they are seriously committed.

The USG launched their “cancer moonshot” [2] for very good reasons, and very sympathetic, but their goal was by 2020 and they didn’t make it. I think we should increase cancer research funding, but draping it in hyperbole is negative when we don’t achieve what we said we targeted.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_choose_to_go_to_the_Moon

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_(company)

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21st_Century_Cures_Act#Medical...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_(American_band)
It is not the same.

One way to tell is that we think protecting human creators is so important that the US Constitution says Congress has the power to "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries".

So yes, we absolutely try to pay all those authors. And we also have a variety of cultural mechanisms to reward them in other ways, from honorary doctorates to literary prizes to genius grants to homages. Not to mention a widespread hatred of plagiarism that goes well beyond what copyright covers.

None of that is respected by the current crop of text generators. They chose to release these things knowing of these lacks. And that lack of respect is being richly returned, as it should be.
Consider you may be the person disrespecting your time
> I think crypto solving this issue is definitely of value.

I am far from convinced that cryptocurrencies are actually a solution to this, but even if it is -- at what price? Not all solutions are worth the cost. I am not saying cryptocurrency would fail this test, but I am saying that it's a mistake to proceed without a genuine cost/benefit analysis.
"using a dedicated stack of hardware and software owned by one company"

advantage - one throat to choke

disadvantage - they've got you by the balls when it comes time to pay the licensing and maintenance fees
I’ll second that; the beta introduced massive keyboard issues related to stare reporting, dismissal and height.
I built a library https://github.com/Evernote/Aquaman meant to accomplish some of these same tasks for a Redux app (also did the same think for React context, but that was never open sourced).

The things this misses, I think, are that 1) you probably want the state of you app to trigger a guided tour, 2) you probably want a multistep flow at some point, and 3) the state changing logic of that flow probably should be separated from the rendering logic (all the steps of the flow should be together).

That’s what I was able to accomplish with Aquaman.
I despise websites that add useless interactivity like this. We already have scrollbars that work perfectly well.
The gist of the article is to find bottlenecks in your service pipeline. I.e., when a request gets queued up because an earlier request is still processing.

By determining when and where the bottlenecks will occur, teams can plan for resource allocation ahead of time.
Why would the cost decrease? They’ve already seen that the market will bear the price and there’s no competitive pressure to lower it.
I think one of the flaws is: nobody seems to want to agree that editing is far more expensive than writing (the to point where editing is routinely skipped). I think it is well established in software engineering debugging is far more expensive then specification, writing, or testing- so one does not leave the big jobs for debugging. I personally believe the same is true for writing.
I think this is clickbait more than anything. Sensational statements hoping it will be quoted widely- which clearly worked.

Of course we can program AI to react emotionally to stimuli. Or, AI will be informed enough from its own learning to reach for an emotional reaction as a response if it seemed to be appropriate. This isn't the same as experiencing the emotion and then finding a way to express it.
Twitter owners voted for the change unanimously.
Wow - has this guy ever had an original thought.

The Twitter landing page looks like something from the mind of a prepubescent boy pumped on “xtreme” products of the early 00s
Not sure if something like this exists yet, but certainly do-able within my implementation.

For example, when choosing the best route, it penalizes every transfer by 120 seconds [1]. Therefore, a route that takes 2 minutes longer is equivalent to one transfer.

It'd be cool to have a tool where you can dynamically change these settings, and maybe even have different transfer penalties depending on if you're transferring inside a station vs walking outside.

[1]: https://github.com/econaxis/time2reach/blob/main/src/formatt...
I don't think you should write code where it makes a difference if the None came from a T that happened to be None or from a None.
While I’m not aware of any of the incidents actually having caused damage to the master pieces (all have been on the protective glass), these acts are not without cost to the wrong organizations and people: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/11/arts/design/climate-prote...
EVs are still a tiny niche. The resource requirements will mean it will be a long time before than can grow beyond that.

Note that BEVs were selling in the thousands only about a decade ago. FCEVs could easily reach the level of sales of BEVs in a short period of time.

The other point is that FCEVs don’t have the resource limitations of BEVs. They can easily exceed current levels of BEVs without serious trouble.

Your problem is that you are closed-minded and stuck in the past. You think that EVs are the future, but that it can only be one type of it. That the world will shift towards a 100% BEV monopoly and that no other type of EV can sell in any number. You can’t even make a coherent argument why this even is. If you want see an example of a person brainwashed by propaganda, that is it.
You can find reports from before 1988 mentioning SHARD being in development, like the one from June 1986 linked in this sister comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36849634
If you don't want someone/something from seeing your content, don't put it on the internet but if that isn't enough:

- add a disallow in your robots.txt (many people say the bots ignore this anyways)

- somehow have your pages so far down in SEO rankings that bots would deem it incorrect/irreverent

- put your content behind a login; this too has it's issues since the bot handler can just get some login credentials to crawl anyways or a user can copy the content elsewhere

- you could also try gaming the system by making your content so offensive that the current AI censorship fad blocks it

- you could try not linking a domain name to the IP, making it harder to find

- sue any AI developer that you think crawled your content
"Co-cultivation enhanced microbial protein production based on autotrophic nitrogen-fixing hydrogen-oxidizing bacteria"

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S13858...

Certain bacteria can directly assimilate a mixture of hydrogen, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen to produce protein. You could consider it an alternative to bacterial nitrogen fixation in root nodules with much higher productivity. Or you could consider it an alternative to the Haber-Bosch process with much milder reaction conditions -- ambient temperature and pressure. It's a way to turn intermittent electricity into protein with simple, robust equipment. I wouldn't be surprised if this or a related development ultimately supplants much of the current demand for synthetic nitrogen fertilizers.
I don't want to downplay atrocities of that revolution. But, as a quip, if you think the murders were bad wait until you hear what the landlords were up to!

Seriously though using the english word landlord is a gross simplification that elides generation on generation of pervasive horrors. It is very difficult for us to imagine how all-consuming and oppressive this environment was, it was much closer to european manorialism than the current property ownership relationship we call landlords.

Shit like getting an usurious grain loan from your landlord to survive the winter, than having to sell your children to repay it in the spring. Having your wife seized as collateral and enslaved by your landlord. This sort of thing was routine and pervasive, and it lasted hundreds of years. We're lucky to live in an era where we can easily imagine comprehensive change to the conditions of life. These people were not. If you make any effort to understand it it is quite easy to understand why it went the way it did.

A famous quote about another revolution often considered to have overstepped:

> “There were two “Reigns of Terror,” if we would but remember it and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon ten thousand persons, the other upon a hundred millions; but our shudders are all for the “horrors” of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe, compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heart-break? What is swift death by lightning compared with death by slow fire at the stake? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror—that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves.”
You’re reading it pedanticly. If a landowner controls solar panel placement, sure, they’ll love to plant hops or make it amendable to goat-herding or whatever.

But, they don’t. Solar farms are setup like any other energy entity - they want to extract the most ROI at the lowest possible cost.

Does somebody care? Probably. But not anyone with skin in the game in the United States.
OS X at least has the excuse of having come out during the time when Generation X were the young adult audience sought after by marketers.

In contrast, today we have Gen X executives who are seemingly trying to recapture the glory days of the late '90s.
Twitter is dying and Musk might actually be OK with this. From a certain angle it clearly looks like that was the brute force plan all along (Hanlon’s razor not applied).

Maybe he just wants to build WeChat ultimately to be sold to the US government, in the same vain as with his other ventures where he runs on government subsidies and/or full-on exclusive privatization mandates.

Extrapolate a potential future for “x.com” from here with what economist Richard Wolff is seeing #trending for the west:

https://youtu.be/w0c5Gfh2ZWY
I remember when HN was comprised of a high ratio of intelligence to factory fodder
The World China Is Building
> It's not like Elon could make that much worse.

It can absolutely get worse than running roughly break-even. If you have $4b in revenue and $4b in operating costs, and your lose half your revenue, you now have a hole that gets $2b deeper every year.

On top of that, the buyout added a $13b loan which has an annual minimum cost of $1b.

So he needs to increase profitability by a quarter of their previous annual revenue just to get back to where Twitter was pre-buyout.
Official TikTok news post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36847411
And after one there is “series”. The “X Box Series X” name is so tacky it’s kind of genius.
You don't know what they know and what they don't know, so you don't absolutely know that they don't know what you know and what you don't know.
> there are massive opposing idiots out there willing to kill themselves for being quoted by musk etc.

Straw man aside, calling your opponents idiots says more about you than about your opponents.
Automated tests can also be provided in far higher volume than manual tests. This didn't used to be the case, back in the stone ages of computing, when computers were much more expensive, so you often see old literature criticizing automated testing as inefficient, wasting expensive computer time.

To give some idea of what automated testing can do these days, I point to the testing I regularly do on Common Lisp implementations, and particularly on the compilers of these implementations. I can quickly set it up to run some 200 tests per second in a single thread on SBCL, with randomly generated code of moderate size (a few hundred cons cells). Over the years I've run billions of distinct tests with this approach.

This sort of testing found large numbers of bugs in every implementation I've ever tried it on. Similar testing on compilers for other languages (like Csmith for C) found bugs in every compiler it was ever tried on, even those implemented in statically typed languages.
That hype didn't stop until interest rates started adjusting back to low-normal in 2022/23.

It's been 30 full years of questionable debt-dependant business models.
Why are you calling the actual, historically factual sexual assaults of women in asylums to be "hypothetical inconveniences for marginalized people"? I guess that's what it means to be marginalized, that the harm done to you and how your life has been ruined is an inconvenience.

The only reason why the rape of women in asylums is historical is because we no longer have asylums. If you want to bring back asylums, justify how you're not going to also be bringing back raping women in them.
> Yes -- once, like Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos

The Amazon.com e-commerce store, Kindle (category-defining), the Amazon fulfillment network (rivaling UPS/FedEx), and of course AWS. That's at least 4 distinct very successful companies. But the way in which one success enabled the next is more obvious, so you don't want to separate them.

The comparison to Gates is just pathetic -- instead of Twitter and private space programs, his second act has been focused on things like food security, HIV/AIDS, and polio.
Okay, but you could release the source code for the firmware, and only accept a signed binary blob. This would still be open source (GPL v2 compliant, but not v3 AFAIK) and auditable, but it still be conforming and certifiable.
Not all coups are violent/military.

Today Israel's extreme government passed the first laws of the judicial overhaul bringing Israel closer to an autocracy, where there is only one power, the government, with unbalanced and unchecked power.
From the submission tite I definitely thought "moonshot factory" would be some kind of analysis of how too-lofty startups fail, not an earnest mission statement from whatever this is. Blegh.
Who said the solution was easy? Do you think dismantling and rebuilding a huge portion of the penal code would somehow be easy? Do you think revitalizing and rebuilding our public mental health services is a cake walk?

Just because the solution can be expressed simply doesn't mean it's "easy".

I'm neither and addict or ex-addict. But I am an ex puritan/teetotaler. I'm well aware of how they think, preach, and talk about this stuff. I'm living proof that it's not beyond them, but the fact is you have to abandon your puritan/teetotaling beliefs to actually understand the problem.
"Publishers want billions (for themselves)" is a headline we could have published at nearly any point in post-Gutenberg history.

> “Search was designed to find the best of the internet”

Says a publisher who clearly hasn't used search in the past 10 years.
It's worth noting that women experience sexuality differently. You can see it clearly in romance novels. Women don't read smut for the sex scenes, they read it for the sexual tension and character development. Male sexuality is image-based, female sexuality is language-based.

To say an astrology hotline is strictly equivalent to an orgasm is silly, but for women the circuitry is very nuanced so I wouldn't be surprised if the same neurons were firing.
I didn't knew about it when I commented. About the .io page: Affiliate links are always a no-go. You can't trust a source that profits from you buying into their recommendations.

Edit: I didn't check if anything OP says is correct. Just asuming and following along ...
Cool, but I think I'll stick to lddtree ;)

(… it also recurses down on the dependencies, presumably you can extend your shell script to do that too but at some point why not just use the existing tools?)
This fills a gap between md/mermaid (easily editable text with no way to do layout) and svg/excalidraw (uneditable text with easily editable custom layouts). I’m not sure people are actually willing to fiddle with that language though without proper wysiwyg tools, at which point you might as well be using svg.
This one surprises me. TikTok is so... different of a platform. I find it utterly jarring and revolting, my wife and kid find it fun and engaging, all for the same reasons. It seems like you're either going to get engaged in a video rabbit hole, or turn away.

In any event, how in the world will this work? Go from watching vids of people shuffle dancing to a cut of some AITA text post and back again? It just sounds really strange, in theory.

Threads at least made some sense, as Instagram is still a more slow paced, time to reflect type platform. TikTok less so.
I have a paregrene falcon that sometimes comes to hang out in a tree in my backyard, grackles and bluejays will follow it around making noise and harassing it. The sound is unmistakable once you've heard it a few times.

Bluejays themselves are known for their mobbing behaviour towards predators.
Ah, thanks for that.

For those reading: after you select a collection, there is a small "i" icon at the top of the screen, near the search bar. Clicking it gives a link to the source and license info!

----

Though as others have mentioned: beware that there is still obviously-trademarked stuff in there, and ones that may require attribution; check the source to be sure. If you're looking at a specific icon, there doesn't seem to be an obvious way to get back to the collection it came from (and thus see the original license terms).
Yeah, I had thought about adding a control to strip the orientation data and reorient the picture as indicated, but had run out of time. Was definitely a learning experience.
People use both, for reasons of tradition, ergonomics, practicality, available toolset. Boldface is obviously common in places where BB is unavailable, more restrictive, more difficult. Web publishing is a great example.

BB is common, in my experience, in hand-written text where bold isn't really an option. It is, to my tradition, the most common and recognizable way to indicate the most common field sets and also generally is a good stand-in for any "large category" of interest.

Bold is used intermittently in my experience, probably due to its inability to be hand-written. To me, it tends to mean "vector" or "matrix" much more than set. In hand-written forms, I sometimes see "arrow hats" instead, especially for vectors.
Money is the fluid within which innovation swims.

It is not, and will not be the point for Elon - he's clearly stated he does not care about money. There are goals beyond what the petty populace panders or bitches about. So again, your argument - while well formulated, is insignificant if the short-term losses support long-term heading changes.

What's your take on Amazon?
I think the relevant part of Asperger’s would be a difficulty experiencing an automatic social-emotional reaction in response to the opinions of others. A sort of congenital tone-deafness.

I could see this being a factor in someone doing things that appear reckless, not because the person is actually impulsive, but because they are unable to intuitively care about the reactions of other people. And so, in a situation where most people would decide against a course of action primarily because of the expected social reaction, an Asperger’s person may just do it anyway.

Also, I suspect the ableist accusations are coming from people who do not themselves have Asperger’s…
I can let you know, but like top astrologers, I charge $10 a minute.
"Tidal"? Isn't that already a music streaming service?
The anthology Committed to Memory by John Hollander appears to be out of print, but not hard to find.
Thriving in the dynamically type-checked hell scape of Clojure
Is this another shot at Elon Musk? Not sure where all the hate for him came from. Was it the hardline free speech direction he took Twitter, reinstating conservative accounts? That seemed to be the downward turning point in his popularity.
What is an emotion if not an "intermediate" stimuli? e.g. lack of food in tummy causes the "hungry" emotion which then causes the organism to seek food.
Even @sama, as much as I respect him and look up to him (for both ycombinator and openai), disappointed me with his attempt at monopolizing AI. At the end of the day, he's looking for his best interest, who am I to comment? :)