skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> It seems like there should be a place for both: one where diverse literature and meta-debate is both accepted and maybe even the point (e.g. make the premise actual critical to the Ks), and another where you are expected to argue for or against a position you don’t agree with.

There are many regional circuits in this country where running a kritik is an instant loss.

Aside from that: debate and meta-debate are not meaningfully separable. If arguments are being made, then there will be an argument about how to evaluate the arguments.

Meta-debate is not unique to debates that contain critical theory. See e.g. http://open-evidence.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/file... which is full of meta-arguments that happen when there isn't any critical theory introduced into the round.

Once you ask the question "what is fiat?" -- which becomes necessary far before any critical theory arrives on the scene -- the door is open to "perhaps pretending something happens and then evaluating the effects isn't the best way to test a resolution".

My basic thought about how academic debate should work:

1. Students should be allowed to choose their own arguments as often as possible.

2. Judges should try to be as impartial as possible and should evaluate student's arguments rather than impose their own opinion. (Pedagogic debate and non-pedagogic debate serve very different purposes. The emphasis on the student's performance rather than the judge's understanding of the world is motivated by pedagogic considerations, and obviously isn't how debates should be evaluated in the real world.)

3. The kids are fine. I promise that seeing a bit of critical theory isn't going to rot their brains.
Why? It has no impact on the validity of the results, and as others have mentioned, the fact scientists are engaging in drama arguably makes it more likely they believe in the results. The drama is about receiving credit for the work, not rushing fraudulent results.
Running from the client side says that the config command doesn’t exist. Not sure how to run from the server side on elasticache.
There is definitely a mix of evidence from the people side of the equation. Rank amateurism mixed with well credentialed researchers. Check out this vid from EEVBlog highlighting one of the worst “amateur hour” parts: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QHPFphlzwdQ (tldr is that the main website shows a vid waving a magnet in front of a copper disk coated in their new material. The copper plate moves around because of Lenz’s law! Nothing to do with superconducting)

Meanwhile, the very well credentialed HyunTak clearly believes it’s real, but he was parachuted in late in the development.

Personally, I think we will just have to wait the week to see if this is real.
The display name for the app is X, yes. But the app’s store name has a minimum of 2 characters required, so it’s currently stuck as “Twitter”.
Chasing the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker
Change URL to use Nitter to view without logging in: https://nitter.net/i/lists/1684446795731206144
> strode

Stroad.
I'm kind of torn on the DNF reviews as I have left a couple myself. Usually after several chapters at least though.

On the one hand, if I'm leaving the review because I disagree with the author of a nonfiction book, that's obviously not cool. But (this usually applies to novels but sometimes nonfiction too) if the book is badly written trash and I want to save other people from the wasted hours I just put in, a DNF review seems reasonable.
> And you are the only one who can see clearly through everything. How nice.

I'm not the sole arbiter of truth. Lots of people research and write about these topics. I'm also autistic and this happens to be one of the things I research to death (being human, how humans "human", power dynamics, group dynamics). I really like this topic actually.

Apologies if I'm coming off callous. It's not my intention.
On the other hand, public schooling can cause lifelong psychological or physical trauma due to bullying, abuse or neglect by other students or school staff. In the US, the risk of school shootings is a reasonable concern as well.
The failure modes are commonly fairly apparent. One sensor will go to a static low value and the other will show normal variability.

In the theoretical limit of all mathematically possible failure modes and all possible environmental conditions, this would be impossible of course. But we live in a fairly predictable environment and the nature of the failures is not unlimited. As such, it is pragmatically pretty easy to see the difference.
> Bicyclists … indignant and entitled

I will tell you who is entitled, driver of a 20 ton construction truck that drove over pedestrian area, where children play, to beat traffic. This was on pavement, few meters from the front door of my house.
Serial numbers encode production-specific parameters. We don’t yet know how to produce uniform displays batch to batch. Running Toyota engine code on a Subaru will produce glitches without requiring any conspiracy.
> None of them were claiming they were the only people who thought "rationally"; rather, they were mostly claiming that only rational thought could reach truth, and empirical evidence need not factor into it.

This is not my understanding. Rather, the disagreement relates to the primacy and necessity of rational thought in some places. Check out https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationalism-empiricism/ and you can find two examples of possible interpretations of each position. To be a rationalist does not mean to say that empirical evidence need not factor into knowledge, but just that some is unobtainable via experience, or that gained via rational thought is superior.

There's no doubt multiple views people have held that fall under each umbrella, but I just wanted to highlight that I think the rationalist does allow for some sources of knowledge that are obtainable only via experience. And I can't see how they could deny that experience is required for some knowledge.

(I may have gotten some subtleties wrong, it's a long time since I looked into this)
I don't buy the politically laden, existentially fraught spin being sold here....

"Users have to accept the spelled out mantra and change their attitude before accessing the next piece of information."

"The user should transform themselves into a “doer,” rather than being considerate, evaluating options"

"Before proceeding, users should identify with this new aristocratic class."

C'mon. It's just a way to visually emphasize an important next step.

Is the text sometimes self-indulgent and annoying? Yeah, it's marketing copy. That's nothing new.
Because its all part of learning how to think critically. Policy Debate is not about actually expecting policy outcomes. It's about learning how to think and argue.

These kinds of questions are not interesting, because EVERYONE ASKS IT. Every single HN question on this topic of "why would you do this" would have reams of evidence/theory to refute it and explain why you're a crazy person for questioning this strategy.

Even back in my day, we definitely had debates where the argument effectively was "This debate is racist, and if we don't win you are all racists" And so you would have to figure out strategies to fight back.

You can see it all the time in the rhetroic online with activists and whatever, people who don't know how to argue, arguing with others that are making either bad faith arguments or trying to figure out how to deal with Kritique style arguments. It waste's their time and everyone elses time.

By being able to argue for/against Kritiques, you gain the ability to quickly call out the fucking bullshit and go straight to the meat.
Found this fascinating, thanks. I’ve been circling SBERT over the last few weeks (along with a range of other techniques to improve the quality of retrieval). Reading your comment and the linked post and comments has really cemented for me that we’re on the right track.
Excellent example showing that beauty is subjective and very much in the eye of the beholder.

I for one thinks code-as-s-expressions is almost as bad as code-as-XML.
I wonder if drugs that affect humans affect sharks in the same way!?
To me it’s obvious there’s a ton of intuition that led to that question.
Moore's law was never really "on track". Asianometry nailed this topic beautifully in this video:

https://youtu.be/nRJgvX6P8dI
> Just because you haven't been able to negotiate a contract with residuals shouldn't prevent anyone else from getting better terms

Residuals are nothing magical. You can calculate the net present value of the future expected value of your work and negotiate based on that.
The difference is that it's legal and widely enjoyed by others. Cigarettes are too but there's been a widespread shift in public opinion meaning this doesn't occur.

You'll sometimes see the same stuff said if someone announces they are vegetarian or made another dietary change.
Every morning, I get up at 5AM, and walk 5K.

1/2 mile of it, is on the local high school running track.

That’s because the neighborhood after the high school (where I would prefer to walk) is actively hostile to pedestrians. No sidewalks, no shoulders, lots of blind curves, and a ton of distracted drivers. It’s dangerous as hell.

In fact, I often smell weed, when cars pass me.

At 5:30 AM.

That’s a great way to get started on a productive day.
David Bowie : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bowie
Because I'm a bad faith imposter here to bully lesser nerds
It makes it less likely this was the result of careful scientific work. It increases the likelihood there was a screwup somewhere. The more outrageous a result, the more likely that was anyway.
That screenshot shows LLaMA recognizes you're not asking how to kill a person, and recommends avoiding data loss with alternatives such as debugging.

It's a dumb answer, but it's not confused about the concept or the context.

GPT4 doesn't even need the "in Linux" qualifier to get the correct concept and context.
There is what pundits describe as a "loneliness epidemic", in the last 10 years so, so it's somewhat normal, in the sense of it happening a lot. Millenial/Gen-Z world has a lot more isolation that the past. Aside from the general bleak perspectives, one reason is that up to 80s and 90s, if you wanted some fun, you had to get out in person and make shit happen. Nowadays people spend hours on their smartphones, game setups, and social media, "communicating" but ultimately physically alone.

Hanging out with friends being less than before is also common in the mid-20 in general, as people that age don't automatically get spend time together (as is the case in high school and college), and everybody is getting busy with the rat rate. And when when you're back home from work, they're more likely to Netflix+doomscroll, exhausted from the day, than to go hang out.

As for improving the situation: try to see if you can increase the frequency you see your existing friends and make a deeper connection. You might want to see if you can propose and initate some common activities too (like some baskeball game, or travelling together somewhere, or something like that).

Try some social, in-person, hobbies, where you can meet people (from gym and rock climbing to sculpting and dance classes). Maybe try some scenes, like hacking clubs or comic book fan clubs. Put yourself out there, where there are other people also looking to connect.

Social isolation can also be a symptom of ASD. If one addition to rarely seeing friends you have some social difficulties (like being bullied at school, or not reading social situations well, feeling alien, or probems with making and keeping friends in general) you might want to explore that possibility too. ASD/HFA is more common to people in tech than in the general population.
Or folks coming off a night shift...
I had a very similar path. One thing that turned me away from radical thought was noticing that critical theory operates in the same way as a conspiracy theory. Getting really sick of it all these days.
This isn't really surprising. I thought Debate seemed really interesting, my high school didn't have debate. So I went to the debate club in college, and it was literally the dumbest thing I have ever seen in my life. Its not well reasoned and well researched arguments, its people speed talking and hyper ventilating as they cram as many points in as they can. The point system just doesn't work and debate doesn't come close to a real debate. I am not sure what the fix is, make it entirely subjective? crowd appeal? Or what, but the reality of debate clubs vs the movie version, the movie version is much better.
> Within the context of a system with certain algebraic properties.

This downplays the importance of the set of systems for which his proof holds and makes it sound like it applies to some obscure branch of mathematics.

It applies to a huge set of important systems, not least of which is any system that is sufficiently expressive as to uniquely identify the natural numbers.
It's easier to see functions as vectors if you first see vectors as functions.
You mirror my sentiments. I greatly enjoy my time in my car. I rather have a bigger home and drive to recreation areas.
The news cycle is artificial and mere political theater. None of it is honest. All of it is propaganda. Journalism died when it got into bed with democrats.
So it described you accurately, and you felt wounded
Actors and writers deserve meaningful residual income just like the authors. And they actually did, as a result of a similar strike in the 60s. The model was disrupted due to the advent streaming as the dominant media, so they are merely asking for a correction.
Couldn't you check the response before you send it to the user? I'm sure there's tons of keywords you could check. You could also run the response itself through an LLM to characterize it.
This is made worse by the modern sparse/industrial designs in a lot of newer restaurants. Exposed blank walls and wide open areas for echoes to proliferate. No carpet. No wall hangings. Concrete everywhere.
Cars kill children not just on sidewalks, but inside buildings.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/wimbledon-school-tea-...
Yeah, but it’s true in a sense because an element of a finite-dimensional vector space can be thought of as a function from a finite set into a field.
Prison for the board, too.
... and the British (and everyone in the 'enlightened West') are taught that savage destruction of Asia (incl. India/China) by European powers was for their own benefit and that they ought to be grateful for having had their ancestors murdered, subject to famine, and sometimes outright genocide (not to mention having their cultures completely destroyed to the point of total alienation).

They even do this with the so-called 'enlightened Islamic invaders' in India. The West has pathological hatred for the 'inferior pagans' and it shows very clearly; and indeed there's very clear evidence for this in white-supremacist fields like Indology[1], where half their time is spent bad-mouthing India, and the other half appropriating her.

[1]. The Nay Science - A history of German Indology (OUP).
They are heading towards the train station (not away from it).

In any case, it doesn’t matter. They are DUI. Pot may be a bit better than alcohol, but I’ve seen some … interesting … decisions made by drivers on it.

No one would drive around sipping on a can of beer, but no one thinks twice about blazing 420 behind the wheel.
I've been thinking a lot about this, too. I believe open source software is beneficial even for non-programmers; if anything else, the preservation of the software isn't completely dependent on the goodwill of the company providing it when the source is freely available under generous licensing terms. If the maintainers of the software do something unpopular, then if enough people complain and there are enough technically-minded people willing to do something about it, then something will be done, which is more than what can be said compared to the "well, tough luck" attitude of many commercial software companies. While the FOSS ecosystem isn't completely immune from these things (e.g., the controversies surrounding GNOME, systemd, and Wayland and the resentment that some users have), it's easier for those using the FOSS ecosystem to adapt their computer environments to their own preferences rather than having to accept whatever Microsoft/Apple/Google/Adobe/etc. does. Personalization is an important part of the personal computing experience and should be preserved.

Even so, the complexity of today's software is a challenge to the idea of an open source software ecosystem where users are encouraged to use and modify their tools as they see fit. Even though I've been programming for more than 20 years, learning the code bases of modern desktop software products like KDE, GNOME, LibreOffice, and Firefox is a major undertaking. This is why I'm very interested in the research behind Alan Kay's STEPS project (http://rickardlindberg.me/writing/alan-kay-notes/tr2012001_s...), which attempted to implement an entire desktop environment (including an office-like application) in just 20,000 lines of code. The researchers accomplished this through the liberal use of domain-specific languages to define subsystems and applications. If our software stack was less complex and easier to understand, then it would be easier for users to learn how to understand and modify the code making up the software they use.
Have you tried the glasses already? I always wanted something like this but from the LinusTechTips review they seem horrible.
It sounds like the subtext is that this dev was incompetent, but if all they did is mess up a staging environment, it sounds like things were working as intended.

If a junior dev can cause catastrophic harm from one wrong command, it's the org's fault for not having safeguards in place, not the dev's fault for an (understandable) error.
Just like the daily articles I see proclaiming “Ukrainian counteroffensive will take Moscow by the end of the week” or “Putin will have Zelensky’s head on a pike for CNN’s cameras tomorrow”.

When the reality is that nothing much is happening aside from Ukraine slowly getting put through the meat grinder, and we likely won’t see any major action until mid-next year as the weather changes.

People have a psychological thirst for “bad” people to be punished, and by golly it had best happen now.
The problem is that people get sucked into communism due to its success and the fact that Capital is crucial reading. Capital is also difficult reading that requires pre-Marx prerequisites, and The Communist Manifesto is really short. So people read The Communist Manifesto, which is really all Engels, and pretend to have read or understood Capital.

No need to get hung up on Communism. We have wonderful traditions of class politics in the US, pre- and early-Soviet Russia, Spain, Italy, Germany, India. You can almost entirely avoid that century of cargo-culted Bolshevik word salad.
High school debates are remarkable for managing to put in 5 slogans in the same amount of time a president would manage one.
I’d probably have titled this something including either the term “linear” or “functional analysis”. Because submitted here, we will first interpret “functions” in the context of a function in computer programming, where the statement is more provocative and thus clickbaity.

The problem is many real world functions and problems are nonlinear. But they may have linear components. For example, a dog can be recognized by its outline and the texture of the fur, pattern of the face, etc within that outline. Deep neural nets solve this by composing vector operations, hence the universal approximation theorem and existence of NNs that can recognize dogs (though I could have picked a better example as dog recognition is not continuous I think).

In the context of computer programming, it is not really a helpful statement to say that functions are vectors. But because of the universal approximation theorem and its relatives you could say that “functions are (can be approximated as) compositions of vector operations”
You're missing what was literally the entire point of my comment, which is that government action has worked. Shaming the wrong party does not work, regardless of your personal opinion on what the rest of humanity "should" enjoy consuming.
You sound like me.

The supplier answers all your questions on their website (and as you can see, the founder is taking your suggestions)

Also, their software is just as hackable as you seem to want. I was able to create my own dashboard in a very short time using numpy and plotly. I query my archive using duckdb.
I don’t understand why the authors valid complaints about libraries being removed randomly inserts complaints about a field he doesn’t like in incredibly juvenile tones.

The author makes a great case for the serendipity of stumbling across information that you didn’t even know you didn’t know—but not that field! That’s a field for children how dare it defile his libraries with its existence. He doesn’t care about it, so why on earth would anyone?

He betrayed his entire thesis.
Perhaps adding a strict time limit to a debate is also a gimmick.
There's the story of TACA 110, a Boeing 737-300 which landed on a grass levee, and took off from an auto-traffic boulevard (albeit one built on a prior NASA airfield runway).

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TACA_Flight_110>
Two things here that seem unconvincing:

> It is actually truly revolutionary to disagree with [Critical theory], e.g., take the stance that capitalism is an effective way of organizing labour.

There is not a lot of abolishment of capitalism going on in the west these days in practice. Dominant in certain demographics, sure, but claiming it's "actually revolutionary" to disagree seems to be a sidestep of actually engaging with the claims of why changing things would be important to anyone involved or affected in the first place. "It's revolutionary to say things should stay the same"? So instead of debating the premise, you then try to pull a have-your-cake-and-eat-it-to of saying "you're just following the crowd" as a justification for... following the crowd among those really calling the shots instead of the crowd of high school debaters.

> I also think a white elephant in the room, is that a) a lot of critical theory is incredibly badly reasoned / detached from reality and b) a significant amount of the use of it is done in bad faith (e.g., for virtue signalling, and to shoot others down, invalidate others rather than engage with their arguments and views)

This, similarly, shifts from "here's why I don't support the formats/tactics" to slipping in "just take it for granted that the contents of the arguments are actually wrong, regardless of format."
It’s always funny seeing how utterly divorced from the world of actual art all the “new artists” are.

> “If he contacts me asking for removal, I'll remove this.” Lykon said. “At the moment I believe that having an accurate immortal depiction of his style is in everyone's best interest.”

No dude, the scarcity and the mortality is the point. He spent decades developing this style and it’s obviously counter to his goals to have it “immortalized” under the name of anyone with an internet connection and a keyboard. If that wasn’t obvious prior to his opting out, it sure is obvious after that, isn’t it?

Gee wiz I hope people still choose to spend their lives developing novel art forms and styles, knowing full well they’ll be “immortalized” and mass-produced as soon as they reach noteworthiness. Art is a profession for Christ’s sake, not a charity project.
Definitely I'd want residual income. To avoid the opportunity cost in case one of my works become bestseller.
I recently had an opportunity to chat with a machinist who works for a shop that makes some parts for ASML’s machines. He showed me a picture of a couple of parts he finished that day. He said they weighed about a hundred pounds sitting there on the table, but at the acceleration they experience in the machine, they weigh roughy the same as a Toyota Tacoma.
Anti-stress browser puzzle (and productivity killer)