skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Doesn't have to be a tiny place. My college town of 100k had like...3 cabs for the entire town - and it was a party school.

Street hailing never existed.
My mistake. I got misled by the “serving size” of half a grapefruit (who just eats half?). But volume mattering is pretty well attested and most people have experience with it. Why wouldn’t it? You physically can only fit so much food inside your stomach before it is uncomfortable to continue, no matter the caloric content.
The "Can you spot the mistake?" thing just instantly killed any interest I had in that presentation. It's the job of that page to sell me on it, not to try and make me do homework.
Correct. It will still overflow, but it's not UB and won't be optimized away.
I'd be interested to know how the policy was created. When it comes to other sports, an awful lot of the discussion seems to be argued about by men, without involving or even asking women.

I'm not a woman, either, so take this with a grain of salt. But there are a number of reasons why women set up women-only events. Some of them have to do with safety, and not having to be constantly on your guard about stereotypical male behavior. And some of them have to do with community: they know that they're not "the best" players of a sport, but they do want to experience the joys of competition among themselves, and the camaraderie that creates among and between teams.

A lot of cis-women recognize trans-women as women, on both those scores. A few express concern about the unfairness of competing against bodies exposed to hormones that would be illegal steroids if they took them, but it's not as widespread as men seem to think. Most seem to accept that it's not yet a significant issue, and that the widely adopted rules about androgen inhibitors suffice to make it as fair as the vagaries of human bodies allow.

Either way, it's really something that women should lead. They're the ones who it affects. But it's often men leading the discussion and making the rules on behalf of women, without understanding why women's sports are a thing in the first place.

I have no idea what women chess players think, and I'd be interested to know. I do at least appreciate that FIDE said that this is "evolving", because even the women themselves don't yet have wide agreement what's right and fair yet.
An example is SSL root certificates, which expire by design. Also ABI. But if you use containers or virtual machines you can basically have a program run forever.
Show HN: Albert Bro – Your AI Math Tutor
Hey

I'm thrilled to introduce the MVP of my app: Albert Bro – your personal AI Math Tutor!
With AlbertBro, you can receive step-by-step solutions, snap pics of problems, and clarify concepts, all in one place.

What is Albert Bro?
AlbertBro is an AI-powered Math Tutor designed to make math homework easy for students. They can snap a picture of a math assignment, sketch formula freehand or just input a math problem in the chatbox.

Try It Out!
No signups or emails required – we want you to experience AlbertBro hassle-free. Give it a spin at photo2math.com?hn-show or on iOS at https://apps.apple.com/app/albertbro-ai-math-tutor/id6462422...

Your Feedback Matters
As an MVP, I'm seeking your invaluable feedback on everything – from the idea, design, and user experience to suggestions for our pricing model.
This is bad advice.

SES is the best among the provider.

They treat spam very seriously, compare to other. You would need to maintain a baseline, failure to do so will get the account into soft-susspend or permanent suspended quickly.

AWS, being an engineering focus product, provider tooling and automated around bouncing, spam reporting handling. Having sophisicated tooling help user deal with that.

They strongly againtst and not suggest end-user to buy dedicated IP. Where as other providers always want user to pay more for "dedicated ip" to "get better delivery".

AWS has procedure, best practice to encounrage slowly warmup when sending mass volume. They had their own rate limit (14 messages per second by default), move the account out of sandbox, a good domain/sender verification.

They are the best among providers when it comes to email.

Sometimes they appear to be worst than others, but that is a specific case. The way email works will always have false positive. If user decided the email is spam(even it isn't) and keep reporting it may appear in a certain spam list.
Nothing lasts forever. Things need to be fixed and patched continuously, (especially since floppy disks aren't exactly known for their durability) and at some point it's just not cost-effective or even reliable to maintain the old tech anymore. Eventually, a non-networked system will have to be upgraded with newer hardware.
Should have used the billions to create competition instead
I belong to a don't ask or guess culture where i would rather just lift a mountain myself than ask my friends for help just so I don't inconvenience anybody, or be in their debt on a favor.
> At the same time, automation and productivity has reduced demand for human labor, and people increasingly can’t afford the rent

Given the juxtaposition of the claims above, I think it is useful to note that demand for labor is still relatively high (unemployment rate at ~3.5% in the US). The reason for unaffordable rents is driven more by the supply of housing not growing along with demand IMO.
The Doylist explanation is that of course the human brains are being used as computing substrates; the energy explanation is a symptom of how little the Zion people actually know about the world.
Hazing is the term.
The issue is not plants vs animals. It's the messaging and misinformation around "plant/animal-based" terminology. People align very strongly one way or the other because of an intersection of morality with strongly held cultural beliefs. Then they advocate, one way or the other, and fund studies designed to show their outcomes. Food is a space very, very fraught with intentional misinformation.

This fundamentally ignores a bunch of realities around land quality, thermodynamics, and nutrition bio-availability.

Generally what's wrong with (everything in the nutrtition and fitness space) that the terms are overloaded to mean whatever it is the person speaking it deems at the time. Example: Paul Saladino (carnivoreMD) touts an animal based diet. Then when you dig into what he really recommends for eating is animal products + fruits and plants that have limited defense chemicals that can cause (for some people) disruptions in their life.

The position i advocate for is regenerative agriculture where we sequester more carbon by using the animals to mimic the natural grazing cycles and provide fertilizer for plants. This is incredibly important because in order to produce crop yields like we do, we require massive amounts of fertilizer, which requires petroleum inputs to create which gets us back to thermodynamics. To do crop rotation appropriately in a sustainable way, you need ruminant animals.

It's a complex topic that I invite everyone to spend some time taking a look at because there's really big money in meat production as well as artificial meat production that have a vested interest in winning you over.
I think for most founders, exiting with 100% ownership of a small pie is a much better proposition than exiting with 10% of a large pie IF you have that decision to make. The risk, hard work and difficulty in the latter are exponentially greater.
> The ones he claimed he would make a specific point of dealing with, but never has.

If anything, the bots have only gotten worse since he took over, and the fault isn't just the rise of LLMs, it's his decisions to downsize, as well as every single other feature he has cut or changed, like the checkmark boosting comments.
This is the Gell-Mann amnesia effect mentioned in the post.
it's called spacevim. or spacemacs. pick your poison.

i've switched to vscode after 20 years of vim/neovim. the key combos are nice but not having to tweak .vimrc finally won me over.
What Ever Happened to Bitcoin in El Salvador? (Full Documentary) [video]
Here's an example:

https://pastebin.com/raw/fH0Lj2Zb
What DARPA wants, DARPA gets: A non-hacky way to fix bugs in legacy binaries
That was my opinion as a PhD astrophysics student. I didn't recognise the people being presented.
Yes, you can put them in there, but then you're relying on the recipient's client to turn that plaintext url into a link the recipient can actually click on, as opposed to having to copy and paste the url into their browser address bar.

Right? Or do I have something wrong?
I have the same question. It’s hard to judge from the outside like this but there are Trump-ian displays of arrogance, disconnection and incompetence that seem at odds with his massive successes with SpaceX and Tesla in particular. He’s clearly book smart, but seems like a petulant, chronically insecure man-child in most areas from the accounts both public and insider. I find the incongruence strange.
If you don't like undefined behavior then avoid it. It's not hard, unless you're not paying attention.
This always strikes me as funny, because I think the default interpretation (and the one shared in the article) is that it's largely a Western/Eastern divide - Americans are 'ask' and Asians are 'guess' - but from where I am in Canada I generally see exactly the opposite. I don't know if that's specific to my circles though.

My friends who are immigrants (or children of immigrants) from Hong Kong, Taiwan, India are all 'askers', whereas those of us with families who've been here 2+ generations are 'guessers'.

Is Canada a 'guess' culture more than America?

Another funny thing from the article - "A squeaky wheel gets the grease" - I've always understood that to be true, but shameful. Like yes, you can put up a fuss and often get what you want, but only by being "squeaky" - annoying, brash, offputting.
Wikipedia is sufficiently funded for quite some time into the future. They have a lot of money.
> so long as you accept that you are only slightly reducing the chaos and randomness

Life is not chess, it's poker. Gently putting your thumb on the scales is the best we can do.

Certainty is an illusion, only probabilities are real. So what you do isn't "Plan the next 10 years", it's "Make $goodOutcome a little more likely than $badOutcome", then adjust in real-time as the situation changes.
Wikipedia says it's far-right, but AllSides says an Independent Review, Editorial Reviews from Aug 2020 and Aug 2019, 23,058 ratings from Community Feedback and Blind Surveys from May 2022 and Aug 2020 showed it was Leans Right (2.5 out of 6), and AllSides has high confidence in this bias rating.

Lean Right is a moderately conservative rating on the political spectrum.

Info on the media bias rating methods used can be found here https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-rating-method...
Wikipedia as an encyclopedia project is a complete failure. It fails to deliver a consistent representatiuon of reality. The basic premise that if there is an open discussion, inconsistencies can eventually be resolved, is false. Not to mention it's openness gives all sorts of attackers an easy target.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leszek_P%C4%99kalski
Confirmed, I tested it. https://github.com/rurban/smhasher
A friend of mine (we're all pretty solidly "Ask", but ofc there's a mix) pointed out that a really important unspoken part of an "Ask" culture is what you are allowed to ask about - thankfully (and anecdotally) you can generally just straight-up ask "what can I ask for?".

Still. Important realization, and definitely something I've failed at before.
I know “the expert problem” as being unable to explain your area of expertise to anyone because your entire vocabulary and mental model of the world is so deep into that expertise. This is why so many of us on HN are ignored at work, for example - the leaders prefer simpler explanations they can understand, even if they’re wrong.
> Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people":

> First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.

> Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.

> The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.[1]

Definitely. I think this very well explains how we got to this position.

[1]: https://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html
It's not immediatley on point, but the title reminds me that many here may enjoy the documentary about the Voyager team as it works today called It's Quieter in the Twilight.
I always enjoy the discussion around this concept.

I do agree that the Guess label is a little off. That's a bit like saying a quarterback is only "guessing" that their receiver will break off their option route where they are expecting. It's really only Guess culture to an outsider who doesn't know the expectations (as you see when a new WR keeps getting the read wrong, leading to turnovers).

And as others have said, everything is on a continuum. There are very few "ask" cultures where you can just ask someone if you can sleep with their wife and expect no negative repercussions at all. And I doubt that you can get a "no" from someone 25 requests in a row and have neither party question the relationship a little bit.

And there's some unspoken aspects to every request; if you ask someone if you can grab some food from the fridge and they say yes, even in an ask culture they probably have some assumption of how much food you are reasonably going to take. If they come back to an empty fridge, you won't assuage their anger by saying "well I asked and you said yes."

In a new situation, I try to interpret requests like an Asker and make requests like a Guesser (without being offended if I get a no), until there's some shared understanding. That's taken a lot of work, since I'm naturally a Guesser through-and-through.
Citation needed. Which people? What did they actually say? What was the text that supposedly forbade this interpretation of UB? Please don't tell me this is again that tired wankery over "permissible" versus "possible". As if the choice of synonym mattered.
I'm sorry, but the world doesn't really align with these ideas, sometimes that is.
It's understandable, but at the same time it really isn't.
try this one

https://spacevim.org/quick-start-guide/#run-in-docker

personally haven't... but it just might work.
Sage advice. Most startups fail, so squabbling over the numbers has always seemed absurd to me. I'd rather see discussion along the lines of "what happens after we do well" because you have no idea of what "well" will be down the line.
> these kind of super-hot loops are quite common

People say this, then they write microbenchmarks. Then compilers optimize the heck out of these microbenchmarks (and numerical kernels). Rinse and repeat for several decades, and every dirty trick that you can think of gets blessed under the guise of UB.

When in reality, real programs do not spend all their time in one (or even a handful) of super-hot loops. C was designed to let compilers have a field day so that 1980s supercomputers could get 5% more FP performance, by hook or by crook. This kind of dangerous optimizations do not make much different for the vast majority of application code, the majority of which spends its time chasing pointers and chugging through lots of abstraction layers.
> As a matter of fact the C standard bends over backwards in the attempt of not specifying a memory model.

I mean, C explicitly specifies a memory model and has since C11
Unless I'm missing something, trusts can still keep nonprofit status without fundraising.
It's been a while since I've seen anyone brag about PHP's speed.

PHP is quite slow at encoding and decoding JSON, very slow at any kind of tree data structure, and has among the highest memory usage of any language at printing a string of text to a console or otherwise.

Python is faster at all of those things and it's quite slow. Those are kind of web related tasks, and the web benchmarks for say django vs laravel don't show that PHP is any kind of winner.
I honestly do not think it would matter much. Most folks in the South and Midwest are already accustomed to hot, humid temperatures. As such, it would be a matter of "hmm the AC is running more than normal" and then back to their normal day-to-day. Places where AC and other hot-weather mitigation tools are not common are the places where a suddenly-warmer environment would be immediately noticed.

Besides, getting folks to recognize the impacts of climate change is one thing, convincing them that the threat is such that any impactful fix would require fundamental and drastic changes to their comfortable lifestyle is a whole different conversation.
Cryptsetup Lands Support for Opal Self Encrypting Drives
FWIW, it seems pretty clear to me that you are the person who is being insulting here. I mean, I can't even figure out how to reply to this comment without making it all about you and how you are involved in this thread and the words and strategy you are using, as that's what you are doing to horsawlarway... who, notably, was addressing an idea and an attitude, not a person and their behavior.

Like, if I put myself in the shoes of the people each of you are replying to, I can see how to reply to horsawlarway: if I disagree with their interpretation of what I said, I can argue back; if I realize that I said something poorly and didn't mean it, I can apologize and correct it; if I disagree with their analysis, I can push back with my own arguments...

...but your comment? You are just pointing at someone and calling them rude. You are then not only refusing to engage with their comment or their points, you are just telling them they shouldn't even be discussed or listened to because they used a word which, to be quite frank, is not insulting; and, in doing so, you have dragged this discussion from one between people who were passionate about an interesting topic that affects everyone on this website--one where I was excited to read both sides--to a bunch of people--sadly, now including me!--squabbling about how words are chosen and how arguments are formed while pointing fingers at each other about who is being insulting, which is a waste of everyone's time so bad I frankly feel bad about how I now feel like I also have to take part.

(BTW, I actually did at first choose to not send this comment: I wrote it, and then decided it was just further feeding you and further wasting other peoples' time, so I put it in a text file and moved on; but, then I noticed one of horsawlarway's responses had been flagged--even though you are clearly the instigator here--so I would need to post a defense of why I vouched for it: you are the person who not only took this thread in a personal direction, but you are the person who decided to start throwing around playground-style bullying: saying an idea is cancer is an opinion and analysis, not an insult... but all of your comments on this thread are patronizing and are the kind of taunting people use to start fist fights.)
> Which is what the interview is about, originally C lacked the optimization tools, relying on developers, with tons of inline Assembly.

I'm afraid that is not the conclusion I draw from the snippet you posted.

It's very clear to me that the HLL under question at that time prevented the programmer from performing the low-level optimisations that the C programmer could optionally do. The debate appeared to be be whether to let the language exclusively optimise the code, or just do no optimisation and let the programmer do it.

This is why the sentence ": Oh, yeah. That would have been fine. And, in fact, you need to have something like that, something where experts can really fine-tune without big bottlenecks because those are key problems to solve. " is in there - it's because the HLL languages literally wouldn't let the programmer optimise at the level that C would let the programmer optimise.

Honestly, if the proponent for the HLL language didn't add in "Use the HLL, but not for OS and low-level code where you really need to fine-tune", you'd have a point, but they said it, and so you don't.
Fast API is very lightweight.
> Quite a racket.

No arguments from me there. Trust-busting and clamping down on anticompetitive behavior has not been a forte of the federal government in decades.
They are being given the opportunity to work in the spirit of the open-source and get the community support they claim to want.
Many little ways and a few bigger ones.

The biggest one would be not using reference counting, which makes execution of cleanup code in __del__ somewhat non deterministic and tricks that rely on the exact reference count of an object outright impossible (for example reusing "immutable" objects that are only referenced once).

I thought that the C-API still had significant differences but going by its documentation it has a compatibility layer that is almost complete if somewhat slow.

A full list with all the minor differences is here: https://doc.pypy.org/en/latest/cpython_differences.html
an NTFS volume can only be mounted by one entity at a time, the same as a zfs volume, ext4 volume, btrfs volume with 100% of the state managed by a single entity

it is almost the definition of "not a distributed system"

the fact there might be nfs/smb/ceph/... volumes bolted into the same namespace that happens to include it does not make it one (and neither does requiring transactions)

> Windows and NTFS combined have strong transaction guarantees that other users and processes must see a highly consistent view of the same files. It makes heavy uses of locks by default even for cached data. POSIX favors the "inode" approach that favors high availability and fewer locks at the cost of eventual consistency and the occasional partition (the "same" file can and will sometimes have multiple "inodes" between different processes/users, many common Linux tools rely heavily on that).

this is literally is not true, they are different abstractions

and I suggest you observe the size of a large file being copied if you want to see how "strong" NTFS "highly consistent views" are

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20111226-00/?p=88...
https://www.nzz.ch/
I mean, the FBI are cops.

We have seen overwhelming evidence in the US for years that our police forces are not worthy of broad trust, and that they need aggressive oversight and much clearer and surer accountability.

This is just one more example.
Extended attributes are definitely turned on in my ext4 filesystems and to my knowledge I didn't do anything to turn them on.
A big reason is because I started a working towards a PhD recently, and so I've been more focused on that. I think micro has also reached a relatively stable spot, where it would only be significantly improved with some large new features. It is serving its purpose well as a simple/familiar terminal-based editor. I have plans to give it more love and release a version 3, but no timeframe.
same as for non-logged in users, namely popular for various categories
Afaik that was in the original script but was removed because it was considered too complicated for general audience to understand.
Netflix/Paramount/Max/Hulu/etc

They sell a subscription to shows, and then remove or enshittify their service. It's the equivalent of shrinkflation, where you buy 10$ of something, and it's 80% the size of last week.

Ticketmaster, and their new bot storefront.
You can try Ctrl+C. Vim will of course not exit but display instructions about how to exit.