skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I believe essentially all mainstream DNS lookup functions retry multiple times with exponential backoff, so its not just ten in a second, its ten in a second over a series of sliding windows that evaporate when they are satisfied for a time. That's a lot of requests.

I only hit this issue when the machine has been idle for quite some time (hours, perhaps). Which indicates that part of the problem is that previous cached answers have expired.

When I hit this issue, I am pretty sure that I am doing on the order of ~10 top-level DNS queries, for about ~4 different domains, a few of them being reverse-IP queries. It's possible that these requests are being amplified due to DNSSEC, so that might be part of the reason.

It's also possible that my caching resolver, when answering a query for e.g. WWW.EXAMPLE.COM, is also doing queries for EXAMPLE.COM and .COM (and their DNSSEC keys), possibly even others, I don't know. I'm not exactly a DNS expert, unfortunately... All I know is that a dnsviz.net visualization seems to indicate that many queries are usually necessary to properly authenticate a domain that uses DNSSEC.

Perhaps another issue is that, since the queries are simultaneous, the retries for these queries are getting synchronized and therefore also happen at the same time?

I can tell you that often some of the DNS requests timeout after exactly 5 seconds, even though I have `options timeout:10 edns0` in my `/etc/resolv.conf` (which is being ignored due to a bug in bind's `host` command). Although I'm pretty sure the real problem is that I was getting a SERVFAIL response from Cloudflare DNS. If I used Google DNS instead of Cloudflare DNS the problem didn't happen.

I don't know, perhaps you are right and some software is doing something silly.
I've read that paragraph with a /s at the end of it.
Indeed...laziness in both cases! I certainly admit I've been guilty of "ooh this function already exists to do this, except in this case I need to tweak it slighty, so I'll just add another parameter" - which is usually OK the first or second time: the issue is when it sets in motion a pattern of behaviour that other devs keep following without stopping to question "has this function grown too complicated", or worse "I know this needs refactoring, but we need this bug fix in now, I'll create a tech debt ticket and come back to it later", but of course never do.
Heated seats is essentially a bool somewhere in the code implemented as artificial limitation.

Self-Driving is much more complex and abides much more as an argument to your view.
The qualifications are mostly physical: a physically disabled person* would necessarily struggle or be unable to do the physical auditing out in the field.

The regions involved vary wildly, depending on where infrastructure needs auditing (either because of catching up on the utility's own documentation, or updating a competitor's docs that they're buying out).
Medium to large cities of differing climates.

People in this role either choose to remain in a region for around a year, or move to various areas as a perk/"vacation".

I was introduced to it by what I found out to be a really disorganized and mildly unethical group, which is why I'm not currently out doing it!; looking to forge a new group with trustworthy people, who also know what a damn computer is!

*(but, if you're reading this and strongly interested/motivated, you may be able to assist on the documentation side or more!)
how does it handle the examples i posted in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36988917
Our WHMCS is protected with some product. I wanted to ensure we are foolproof against at least low-hanging frauds, and I wanted to understand from you if you're using WHMCS or Blesta. What settings or extensions are you using to stop fraud? Is there any story you can share about how changing the settings helped you stop fraud and avoid chargebacks on 2checkout and other payment methods?
Why :-( ? There's no way MIT was using more than a tiny fraction of that /8; now it's actually being put to real use, and MIT probably got some money out of it. Everybody wins.
Us Mac users need to wait until September, but it’ll still be with it, based on the early-access version:)
The market is working :-)
“The Business” by Iain Banks kind of runs with a similar line even though it’s not The Crown per se, more like an old European money power/family, but it would be the thriller you’re looking for.
> American Indians were right... nobody should own the land.

> The British Royal family and the Catholic Church... those lands were stolen and should be returned to the people.

If something is owned by nobody, how can it be "stolen?" If lands were "returned," how can someone who disclaims ownership receive it?
You agreed to EULA.
2021 based on the comments. I remember reading either this or a similar one some time ago.
GPT4 can pass the Turing Test! The Turing test line has been crossed more times than most Popes some would say the Eliza Effect fooled people enough in the 60s to count. No comment on the AGI claim you are responding to - but them putting GPT4 in a septic bubble suit is not relevant.
Both stories can be true at once—it's a matter of record that Henry used his position as head of the church to go through a lot of wives, and that the initial tensions were centered on his rather hasty annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon so he could be legally married to his then-4-months-pregnant mistress. It's also well established that he took back a lot of land from the Church.

History is complicated and events rarely have a singular explanation.
You're right; thank you for reminding me.

However, I believe that Australia could be one of the best places in the world for reforesting those deserts.

The Outback reportedly receives up to 100cm of rain every year already. Reforestation could start at the coasts and then slowly move inland.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biotic_pump

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/mar/20/our-bigg...

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-009-9626-y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tB-8-sk1V6s
SymbolicAI – Retrieval Augmented Generation, Multimodal Inputs, User Packages [video]
> Do Australians really have that many cows?

Astonishingly, there are more cows than sheep in Australia these days even though the sheep is the iconic fam animal of Australia.
They fall down pretty often. I commute 30 mins, and it is the main reason for cancellations.
Basically every other EV tries to give a realistic range based on the temperate and your driving habits.

Teslas appear to always show the EPA range at full and it sounds like they stay very optimistic for quite a long time, giving drivers a very unrealistic picture.

That’s lying to the customer. They’re not trying to be useful but to look good.

And in every EV range comparison I’ve ever seen, teslas are the ones that can’t meet their claimed range by a fair margin. Other brands are almost always close to accurate or in some cases do noticeably better than claimed.

Only Tesla does this.
Do they have any power, and if so how? Just because they are complicated and ancient, doesn't mean they wield any power in modern times. I don't really know much about the crown but in my impression the only "power" they've had for a long time was that of well loved celebrities, and even that seems to have evaporated in recent times.

It somewhat seems to me that at some point the power and wealth of the Crown was transferred to various private companies, some of which are still quite wealthy but no longer associated with the Crown.
Conservative activist behind US affirmative action cases sues VC fund
My phone hasn't rung with a scam call since I enabled Google assistant call screening. Unknown callers have to explain why they're calling
I've done a fair bit of work with engine ECUs and remapping for more power is almost never "free". It's not like manufactures are offering different power outputs strictly via software, though sometimes they'll make different _tradeoffs_ between power/drivability/reliability.

I mean, it's easy to get 20% more power out of an engine if you don't care if it idles like a washing machine. And for some applications, that's just fine.
My point is that this sub-thread is full of bullshit. I asked kypro for statistics, but he didn't answer and you intervened with conjecture based on "ambient discourse".
Waste is not so much of a problem. We can handle it.

Don't get me wrong. Nuclear waste is a problem. But it is much, much less of a problem than fossil fuels. As in: fossil fuels are currently killing us (so nuclear waste won't be a problem for many if we continue like this with fossil fuels), and nuclear waste is manageable.

We don't have the luxury of finding something truly "clean" (nope, renewables don't remotely have the potential of nuclear power, which won't remotely replace fossil fuels. And technically they are not truly clean either).

What is making future generations pay is fossil fuel. And it is extremely expensive.
Why did Amazon attempt a Fire phone?

I think it’s because there is a certain prestige about being involved with smart phones. It makes a company look like it is hip and cool, particularly if it is part of an authoritarian Chaebol which can create its own reality and socialize any of its losses. So far as Huawei they are based in China which is not a capitalist economy.

The Germans were looking for buyers for this technology for decades

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_maglev_train

they almost sold one to Orlando, FL until Disney made it clear they weren’t going to be part of it if it stopped at any other theme park. That Maglev comes nowhere near being profitable and nothing in China really has to.
Minor, but not insignificant.
So that's a website, but if you look at the URL, it's on the apple.com domain name. So that doesn't really count as "the web".

The "App Store" might look like a website to you but it's actually what we call a "native" app, which means that it's not a website at all but a computer program that runs on your iPhone if you have one.
I don't really buy this line of thinking. I guess you're adopting the 'Malcolm X' approach versus the 'MLK' approach, but actually, meaningful change in an organization devoid of calling people nasty names and criticizing them personally ('cops are pigs') IS MORE UPSETTING to the status quo than your approach.

Going to police stations and identifying issues with them, and describing them in apolitical terms, and asking the police chief to consider and act on them, and voting him or her out if they don't act on them, is more 'revolutionary' than standing outside their office with 'ACAB' posters.
they've collected considerably more than that, but you're right that it's not likely to be anywhere near $300M. but it's up to justice to collect, something the fcc wants to change (as Rosenworcel says ITA).
Modern submarines still have a "log" which is a pole and sensor that extends outside of the hull to measure the speed through the water and other important measurements.
What is a drive image? Is it a standard like ISO?
The Duchy of Cornwall and the Duchy of Lancaster are not really land ownership. The Prince of Wales and the Monarch respectively receive the income, which is not nothing, but the land and commercial estates are held in trust, afair.
Thermal imaging innovation allows AI to see through pitch darkness
I've built bot that you and your Slack team tell it to remember everything, use natural language.
Ask it in Slack channel or direct message for private thing.
It can become search engine for your team!
The flip side of that is when they disable features that were purchased when a car is purchased used.
Obviously you're not a taxpayer here
I just got a cancer diagnosis with an ugly prognosis. Wish I could fast-forward a few years to when this treatment might be proven and available!
Elon is entertaining and there is an excellent chance of witnessing a house of cards implode. Why so serious?
> Does this mean that if I'm filing a vlog at Brandenburg Gate (which inevitably includes video of other people in the background enjoying the area), I'm in violation of privacy laws?

No (at least not in France, which also has pretty stringent privacy policy so I think it's still a relevant answer) you can film people or cars in public streets but you cannot do any kind of data processing on the things you film (you can't keep a database with the license plates you have on your personal videos for instance).

In short the line is: pictures and films by themselves are OK [1], but doing anything with the personal info you get from those video is forbidden.

[1]: (under conditions, you must not cause harm in the process: for instance no “happy slapping” videos)
Some interesting points in here, but the author seems to imply that the obesity epidemic is really just in our minds.

I don't buy that part at all.
Just because it’s not web (LAMP or current-fad.js) software doesn’t make it “weird software”. By that definition everyone I work with does “weird software” since web technology (and the halo of stuff around it) never comes up. Just because places like HN are super, super biased towards web stuff doesn’t make everything else unusual.
>lie to customers

Is that alleged? I saw only the support telling customers that this is expected. "There is nothing wrong with your car, don't bother comming. It is expected that sometimes your car gets galf the range." is not a lie at all. It seems absolutely truthful and in fact the total opposite of exaggerating the range of the car.

>We have evidence of Tesla service-cancellation teams. We have evidence of Tesla's software purposefully being inaccurate when above 50% charge, and then slowly becoming more accurate when reaching 50% or less charge.

The algorithm claim seems extremely weak. Unless you can get some actual developer to testify that he was explicitly ordered to build the algorithm to report a range which he knew was impossible to reach or something similar, this seems practically irrelevant.

The "service-cancellation teams" seem somewhat stranger. I don't think cancelling a service appointment is damning in any way, though.
(I'm the lawyer from the original post)

I like that saying, too. But not sure it applies here -- there are huge numbers of lawyers who like talking about 'power structures.' It may have been invented by us. We lawyers invented, for example, critical race theory.

You could be right, though, maybe I am biased. I'd be interested to learn how.
> The Crown also likely hold ultimate title ...

Some Americans think they don't have to pay income tax because the 16th Amendment (1913) was never properly ratified. Some people think they own a star because they have a certificate that says so. You'll see this kind of analysis in all sort of "secret knowledge" conspiracy-theory-eqsue posts like this. It turns out these hundred-year-old (or much more) technicalities pretty much always handily lose to the modern reality of whatever the people alive today want. Nobody gives a shit if Pope Pius V signed a proclamation in 1571 that gives half of Finland to the Knights Templar, and a group today still claims to be the same Knights Templar, or whatever weird shadow cabals always creep into these discussions. If these "Knights Templar" went to claim Helsinki with that justification, they'd be told to get fucked, and they could do nothing about it. If "The Crown" decided to exercise their rights to this "ultimate title" they hold over all of Australia or whatever, they'd be told to get fucked just the same.
> The main factor that prevents even more stuff being exposed to the internet than now (and there's a lot exposed already) is the prevalence of IPv4 NAT devices.

All of this is blocked by default-deny firewall rules.

I have IPv6 at home from my residential ISP, and I get a globally routable a 2000::/3 IPv6 address on my systems (via SLAAC), but they are not accessible from the public Internet by default.

The idea of publicly routable = publicaly accessible needs to die.
A> Pick a measure. That’s what I mean by “effect is 0%”. It’s a straw man here.

I don't understand what you mean by "pick a measure" but maybe the "it’s a straw man here" (that I don't really understand either) indicates that looking at the other two options is enough.

B> Pick a fully specified model. This is a model that, up front, you could ask what is the probability of event E? For a normal distribution, this would require choosing concrete mean and standard deviation.

Ok. That seems to describe a simple classical null hypothesis like the example I gave in my previous comment. The underlying thing of interest is zero and the sampling distribution for the data is normally distributed around zero.

C> Pick an under-specified model. This would be that it’s normal, but you don’t pick the mean and standard deviation. You pull them from the sample. As I’ve described it here, you can’t get P(E) from that.

That is not the kind of null hypothesis I gave in my example, I think we can agree on that.

> The expectation from our alternative hypothesis and model is that it’s fully formed before we look at the data.

I don't understand that sentence. What is "it" that is fully formed before we look at the data? The alternative hypothesis and model?

> It’s a choice whether you want that to be the case or not with the null model.

What is "that"? Being formed before we look at the data? (In that case I hope that the null model I described would satisfy that.)

> “Fair” as I’m describing it is that you would pick something.

Pick something of what? I'm completely lost, I'm afraid.

I'm just saying that I can have a null model of the form B like in the example "the underlying thing is zero and the data generated by this model has a probability distribution p(x)=exp(-x^2/2)".

And I can compare that model it with any other model described by a distribution probability for the underlying thing which, taking into account the measurement error, results in a probability distribution p'(x) for the data generated.
Right, exactly.

Did the Japanese print 80% of their money recently?
Another buisness idea is to make repos look more active by giving Sweep different personas.
That's the entire point. They design a "luxury" car to be sold at a luxury price, with high margins. But by doing so, they go above budget for many potential customers.

So they make a cheaper version, with lower margins, but they deliberately cheapen the experience so that those who can afford the "luxury" version don't buy the "cheap" version instead.
Yes, Casio fx-991ES

I have a TI-84 too, but it's useless compared to the casio.
Fair point. That's generally my inclination as well, but I haven't figured out a tool I like for home CAD stuff.
(disclaimer: i cofounded Chroma)

if you are building locally and dont want to send your data anywhere - try the open-source alternative Chroma https://github.com/chroma-core/chroma
In old telephone systems, each telephone had a dedicated wire to the central, and centrals had a number of dedicated wires between, each one of which could be used for one conversation at a time. Setting up a call involved physically switching your line to one of the wires to the next central, and from there to the next, until the last central where there was a physical connection made to the line the person you were calling (unless if at some place no free wires were available; then you got a busy signal). Once all the switches were put in the correct position, there was practically speaking one uninterrupted wire between the two phones. If you were to put a voltage spike on your line, that could be measured at the other end. At the end of the call the switches were put in another position, and there was no electrical connection between those phones anymore.

In a packet-switched network, there is no direct electrical connection between two arbitrary nodes; there is only an electrical connection between your device and the first router, and between any router and the next one.

Of course nowadays telephone lines don't work with physical dedicated wires anymore either. It's all digitized and multiplexed now.
it reminds me of those hardware hacks to unlock processors [0]

the upside is that by not having much difference between SKUs, and "locking" one SKU from becoming the other, the costs are lower, and manufacturers might turn those savings into lower prices

in both cases, as in cell phones, I believe like you still own the hardware, including everything in it, including software [1], so if you want to "unlock it", that's your right, as is smashing it, reflashing it, and having sex with it. If that makes for an unsustainable business model, nobody is entitled to their preferred business model being sustainable. Analogous examples here might be unofficial Keurig pods, or printer ink cartridges, which bypass manufacturer DRM intending to lock customers into an otherwise arguably unsustainable business model.

sometimes, though, you have to fight for your rights, e.g. build/buy/download and use unofficial tools

[0]: http://computer-communication.blogspot.com/2007/06/unlocking...

[1]: this inclusion stems from my belief that, where possible, you have an absolute right to view every bit of data that happens across hardware you own, whether gadgetry or eyeballs, in any format you desire, as well as the right to remember what you've viewed, as well as the right to modify or prevent modification of any arbitrary bit on said hardware
"The Crown" in Canada refers to the government, which is for all practical purposes is controlled by the various federal and provincial elected bodies. "Crown Land" is land that is technically owned by the sitting monarch, but in all practicalities is owned by the Canadian government, as monarch is legally unable to do anything with the land. All adminstration, sale, land transfers, renting out, and revenue from the land is controlled by the government, not The Crown. The monarch does not meaningfully own Crown Land in any sense, and this is enshrined within Canada's own legal definition of Crown Land.
I don't think either of those is true?

It's not hidden, they put it right up on their blog https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-aws-public-ipv4-address... the opening line of which is "We are introducing a new charge for public IPv4 addresses" and when it starts and what the cost is. I assume like every other AWS charge it's broken out in great detail on their billing statements and even have APIs to query costs. Usually they send an email with these changes too so if they haven't I assume they will. It's a regular old price hike but it's not a hidden one.

Secondly since "the cost to acquire a single public IPv4 address has risen more than 300% over the past 5 years", there's no accompanying decrease in server costs that would be "reasonable" to account for this. Charging for the IP itself makes total sense since that's the cost they're accounting for. If it were packed into the instance costs, then instances without a public IP would be paying for it too. This incentivises you to do exactly what they want you to do: use fewer public IPs where you don't need them. This is way more reasonable than an across-the-board instance cost bump which would be a hidden price hike. This is a bridge toll that covers the cost of the bridge by its users instead of raising taxes on everyone.

I guess you're wanting to pay the same and just distribute the cost between the IP and the instance differently? And hey me too, I love not being charged more. But they want to account for their costs without eating into their margin and this is how they're going about it. You don't have to like it; I sure don't. You can wish AWS would just keep eating the cost for you; me too! But I don't think "hidden" or "unreasonable" is accurate.
UI matters, that's why we're praising it.
Sorry about my presumption.

Could your children form sentences before they attended school? Almost certainly yes, so I don't understand your earlier claim.