skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The point is to have some means, some facility, to schedule things 100% correctly in advance. If there literally is no possible method then that's a pretty surprising aspect of computer systems circa 2023.
Does anyone know of any compact Doom wasm examples? Looking for the tiniest Doom that could run in a web browser.
Three geostationary satellites should do fine for the number of data consumers on Mars.
... "we could barely detect atoms." You're a few decades out of date on the science. Almost a century, really.

Atom detection has been ... quite a while. The parts of the atom: electron, proton, neutron (all somethings even smaller) started with the electron in 1897. Neutrons lagged until the 1930s. Quarks were hypothesized in 1964. Now, you'll never find free quarks (due to something called color confinement) but we started detecting that the nucleons (protons and neutrons) must have something even smaller inside via scattering experiments around 1968. We were producing charm quarks in 1974. 1977 we observed the bottom quark, and in 1995 we got the heaviest of the bunch, the top quark.

The current year is 2023.
They found them by blasting protons at each other and seeing what happened when they collided like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark#/media/File:Charmed-dia-... and then using detective skills to figure out what could have been inside them to make those spirals
Quarks are a very useful construct because even if we can't perceive them directly theories based on quarks appear to work. That makes them a useful tool and even if we will never be able to 'observe' (for whatever that means: you can't observe an electron directly either but you can observe electricity) quarks directly we can create theories that hold true if quarks exist and see whether the interaction between particle beams is such that it experimentally confirms those theories. This has been done countless times by now and the various properties of quarks and combinations of quarks have been determined to the point that it would be very surprising if quarks were a completely wrong way of describing the fundamentals of matter.

But: it's a theory and it may well be displaced by something else at some point, but that something else would have to be even better at describing reality as observed than quarks are. Maybe a unified field theory will do away with the 'zoo' of subatomic particles but that would in itself be a very surprising result. But it could definitely happen.
> At least in the US this sort of thing is understandable–if the person is telling the truth it’s usually not a big deal

…says someone who doesn’t understand the experience of community–law-enforcement relations in lots of communities in the US.
I think Pirates of Silicon Valley makes it clear. IBM did not think there was much money in software and they were wrong about it.
I think GP wanted to say “less”. Meaning that some companies are willing to pay $30/h for part time work rather than $7.25/h for full timers, although 30 hours of the former costs (much) more than 40 hours of the latter. Of course, part time workers can be fired much more easily than full time ones, so it’s not such a paradox.
Evolving threats: The state of personal data protection in Brazil
The claim

> Using ad-hoc polymorphism can cause code to silently do the wrong thing after a refactor because of a type error, in a way that monomorphic code would not have

doesn't mean languages with ad-hoc polymorphism are less type-safe overall. Ad-hoc polymorphism allows you to write stronger-typed code more easily.
> someone is losing money when a nuclear reactor is sitting around not generating 100% power

Isn't that true of literally _every_ possible means of power generation though? Sure, there's an opportunity cost to not running your equipment at 100% 24/7, but only if there's enough demand to actually use that excess energy. You could argue solar and wind have it worse, since they don't even have the option to reduce output when it isn't needed (or ramp it up when it is, though it's a bit weird to think of cloudy days as an "opportunity cost").

Really though, we shouldn't _need_ to argue about which option is cheaper all things considered. Just remove as many regulatory barriers as possible and let the market sort it out. The only issue is that, as it stands, the regulatory barriers to nuclear are way higher than the regulatory barriers for wind and solar. (Governments are bending over backwards to accommodate the later, while in many cases effectively banning the former.) I'm just advocating for equal treatment.
What exactly is the problem?
I had no problems booting FreeBSD.
I don't think OpenBSD is any different.
https://github.com/cirruslabs/tart

or

brew install tart (this gets you the last open source version)
> adding hydro, batteries, wind, and or solar would drastically lower costs.

What does "drastically" means? Fine tuning of the grid doesn't require hydro specifically, batteries are not actually used in any meaningful way in countries currently using nuclear, and the projected savings of having such tech aren't transformative: the intraday difference between peak use and low use in a typical winter day in France are about 20-25% [1]. Sure, shaving 25% off your bill is great, but typically it's significantly less than the difference in price between different European countries.

As for wind and solar, it doesn't really lower costs of nuclear as there's no correlation (wind) or a negative correlation (solar) with peak winter hours.

[1]:
Good old xkcd

https://what-if.xkcd.com/31/

microSD is 1TB now (actually hasn't gone up much since the xkcd, where 512GB was the practical max).
No not really? Why would I be asserting that to you or anyone else?

Obviously I don't have access to the detailed financial records of every major player in SV, nor likely does anyone else on HN.
Sorry, I meant to type "virtual gluons" instead of "virtual quarks."
When people realized that violent speech can be considered violent action as random people took the fearmongering and attacked other people or threatened to bomb hospitals and libraries in stochastic terrorist attacks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_terrorism
Only in the abstract, I guess. If you drop 5 dollars and I pick it up and tell you that you dropped it, I also made a decision for you, no? That you'd want to be informed of such things?

I believe that consent is good, and I believe that voluntarily crossing a person's boundaries is bad, but I also believe that participating in a society means we cannot entirely control all aspects of how we're engaged with and perceived. An employee talking to a vested party about an experience they had is a perfectly normal, healthy and expected behavior. The example we're talking about is even a positive! So some amount of "making a decision for someone else" (even though I reject that concept as existing here) is normal, healthy and expected.
The Quest to Pick Up the Lost Lifting Stones of Ireland
Rapid shifts from drought to downpour occurring more often
Yeah.. how can they possibly be so precise in that number? Anyone know?
There's an obvious political slant here and likely some white savior syndrome. Is racism the reason why managers overlook some high-performers? And why would empty praise from a co-worker help any? What if the manager is part of an "underrepresented group" themselves?

Smart people hate being treated like children so you run the risk of offending them. That actually could offend someone for real.
> The presence of such a photo is also not evidence that the package was actually delivered

It is evidence.

It is not irrefutable proof, but then evidence usually isn’t.
A system to keep cloud-based gamers in sync
"where possible of course"

This is how :-) I am not trying to live like a hermit locked in a forest. I do what is reasonable and learning more about how to do it even better.
The internet is sampling the interesting samples, not necessarily a realistic picture.

I'd love to see a good research study on this that shows the actual error rate as well as a comparison with other non-human alternatives (e.g. googling, using textbook only, etc) as well as possibly human (personal tutor, group instructor, ...)
It depends on how it's done. If it's part of the real message then it's easily ignored and no harm done, if it's a separate message then it wastes the time of whoever is on the receiving end (especially if they wait for a response before sending the real message).
From June of this year: "Here's to another 30 years!"

https://www.volitiongames.com/publications/volition-celebrat...
I'm not sure what the point is you're trying to make?

I'm sure you're aware that US sockets are 110-120V. The power required by a European kettle would too often trip someone's circuit breaker in the US, especially if any other equipment were also plugged in (you usually want to stick to max 1500 W on a circuit).

Clearly the "powerful 1200 W" is in the context of equipment designed for American residential sockets -- the page is produced by an American company after all.

(Which is why Americans don't use electric kettles nearly as much as Brits/Europeans, of course.)
Does it show which one is correct when you get it wrong? It would be cool to see what all the others were too.
Perhaps 6 digit years are intended to be useful for representing prehistoric dates?
I'm 10 pages in and think it should be required reading for not only CS curriculums, and regret not having been exposed earlier.

Thanks for sharing.
Principles of Parsimony and Self-consistency for the emergence of intelligence
It’s useful for Option to be iterable so that it works with things like .flat_map(), and it’s useful to be able to count from an arbitrary iterable.

.iter().count() is a contrived way to find the length of a Vec though, since .len() is clearer and faster.
I'm not qualified to say anything about the science, but every since reading about the theory described in "When the Sea Saved Humanity" (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/when-the-sea-save...), something about the idea of a small band of humans holed holding on to survival near the southern tip of Africa has captivated me.
The theory is that everything, even subatomic particles has a half life. But these are so long that we are not able to perceive them with present day technology. Eventually the whole universe will fall apart into degenerate matter and then much later even the remnants will decay. But such decay is happening all the time, just not fast enough to result in measurable effects (fortunately!).
My experience has been that bills can often be 5X the actual services. It can matter if you have any sort of real interaction. For minor common stuff you're right it is immaterial -- like a doc visit with a copay. But get a frenectomy? Mole removal? Vein ablation? Ortho surgery? I highly, highly recommend reviewing the procedure codes for anyone who recognizes they are their best, and often only, advocate.
> Super slow because for every frame every necessary image is read from the hard disk and for every calculation involving a lookup table the hard disk is also accessed

The 8086 was limited to 640k, a 286 could actually do 16MB with paging.

Is the problem simply the ram limit on the 8086? Is that why assets have to be reloaded off disk constantly?

Couldn’t a 286 with enough memory handle it (if you were emulating that processor)?

I’m curious what the issue is.
At a small scale this might work, as in a study with cases=50 and controls=65, in a largish metropolitan area. Can we see the result of an experiment where 100% of the homeless (say, 3-5% of the population in a given area) are given cash and have to compete for currently available housing? It just becomes a subsidy for landlords at that point.

Can you reduce homeless at scale with just cash and without building more housing? If not, why not do the experiment of building a ton of housing and tracing impact on homelessness?
FedNow can't yet do requested payments. It is currently only push. I don't think it will ever have pull payments like ACH. Which means the current flow requires finding the account for recipient and put in transfer for the right amount. I heard they are working on requests, and might be possible to whitelist people to pay automatically.

FedNow was only just released, it is going to take time to add support. My bank doesn't support it yet.
7th largest?

Apparently at the time, the largest was the organ from the 1904 world's fair in St. louis

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wanamaker_Organ
In the culture of prefacing every simple question with empty praise, then all praise becomes an empty formality. It's far worse than receiving a simple "good work" after the job is done. If you have to choose between the two instead of finding some reasonable middle-ground, then you should choose the one that entails treating your coworkers like professional adults instead of emotionally sensitive children.
Unicode Emoji List
Contact improvisation dance. It's a kind of intuitive movement practice you do with other people. Here's a video of some people who are pretty high level: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ED8hNoulZv4

It's great exercise, really joyous, and in my experience the people who go to jams are excellent. A friend told me about it and I just decided to go, knowing that I could opt out of any movement or dance that didn't feel ok. Now I go to the contact improv jams in my city every week and even went to some international jams while traveling recently. There's usually contact improv events near most major cities.
This is my biggest frustration! For some reason, Facebook stubbornly thinks I'm into cars, into Hollywood drama and some other weirdly specific topics. I cannot for the life of me figure out how to indicate that I'm absolutely not interested in any of those topics.

Deep into the ad topics I managed to find a place where I could search for topics and indicate that I would not like to be targeted for those, and that seemed to have done something. But it replaced one topic with another.

It's crazy how they managed to ruin their own product. They're rapidly bleeding real users and it's totally their own fault. Facebook used to thrive with close social interaction mixed with some suggested content that seemed to be actually relevant. Now it's just anonymous filler content and they don't even show relevant posts anymore.

The only reason I'm still on Facebook is because our local town's official communication is through Facebook (sad, I know) and the neighborhood is active there as well. Otherwise I would have happily deleted my account a long time ago.
> Also "allow-list" is so gross. Maybe pick something less divisive for future examples.

What is gross or divisive about that?
Neuronal diversity can improve machine learning for physics and beyond
> Flake schemas are not a type system for Nix, since that would be a huge project.

The lack of a reasonable type system is one of the biggest Nix problems.
I've been riding a bicycle for a little over a year and really enjoy it. About once a week I'll ride 4-5 miles to a coffee shop and work from there in the afternoons. Otherwise, I do small errands on my bike, like picking up groceries, picking up take-out food, or checking out a book from the library. The trips are short and my area is pretty flat, so it's light and pleasant exercise. I also save some gas money by not driving my car so much, and it's just so nice to be outside and feeling the wind go by me.

One aspect I'm enjoying more than I imagined is tinkering with my bicycle. I think that tickles the nerdier part of my personality: comparing different ways to carry cargo, adjusting various things to achieve more comfort, light maintenance like inflating tires and lubing the chain, etc. It's fun.

Historically, a lot of my hobbies involved me sitting in front of a screen (movies, video games, recording music, etc). Now my work is more screen oriented than ever, and I found such hobbies felt a little too much like my work, so I needed to find something very different. Biking has been good for me.
The article did a really poor job of explaining the logic.

> It's strange to me that there are 5-6 options for each exchange, instead of a canonical name.

The point isn't to assign them canonical names, but to define a mapping from the two letters at the start of a word to two-digit codes. These letter-pairs are chosen so that meaningful words can be formed with them (that's why there is no QX, because no English word starts with QX) and that they are distinguishable (which is why there is a BA but not BE, BO, or BU: it would be hard to distinguish BAldwin from BEldwing, BOldwin or BUldwin).

There isn't a single canonical name because the purpose of the code is to allow cities to define their own area codes with memorable names that vary based on the location. One city might use UNiversity (86), MUseum (68) and CEnter (23).

But using UNiversity or MUseum wouldn't make sense in a different city that doesn't have a local university or a particularly notable museum. But they can still use the same area codes with the mnemonics TOwn Square instead of UNiversity (86), OVerlook instead of MUseum (68), or CEdar Avenue instead of CEnter (23).
Phage Endolysins: Advances in the World of Food Safety
> I appreciate what projects like Nushell and Murex are trying to address, but having a saner scripting language and passing structured data in pipelines is not worth the drawbacks for me.

Murex doesn’t change any of coreutils. With murex can use the command line as dumb byte streams with the standard GNU / BSD utils if you want…and in fact I do just this myself. What Murex offers is an abstraction on top that allows you to add type hints to those byte streams so you can do fancier stuff with it if you wanted. Think of it like what Typescript does for JavaScript. You have access to all the same POSIX utilities and additional type aware controls on top but it’s completely optional if you want to use those type aware controls (personally, I think once you do, you wouldn’t go back, but I respect people’s personal preferences).
The estimate is the estimate (1280 with SEM of 131).

It's be foolish of them to mask it intentionally.

Once independent estimates are made then you might synthesize an reasonable estimate.

Both the editor summary I'm science and the headline here don't place much emphasis on the precise number.
> The internet is sampling the interesting samples, not necessarily a realistic picture.

A tutor is expected to know the subject and guide the student. If, say, 10% of the time it guides the student into a false understanding, the damages are significant. It's very hard to unlearn something, particularly when you have confidence you know it well.

My personal adventures with ChatGPT are probably close to a 50% success rate. It gets some stuff entirely wrong, a lot of stuff non-obviously wrong, and even more stuff subtly wrong - and it's up to you to be knowledgeable enough to wade through the BS. Students, learning a subject in school are by definition not knowledgeable enough to discern confident BS from correctness.

Will ChatGPT be useful in the future? Yes, almost certainly. But let's not rush this and get it very wrong. The consequences can be staggering in the education space - children or adults.
Firefighters in Greece battling 'largest wildfire ever recorded in EU'
I can confirm this, happened twice this week.
But you see, this behavior is the result of uniformly doing the same thing. You're asking for it to have special cases.

The signature "length :: Foldable f => f a -> Int" is pretty specific. The polymorphism is parametric over `a' and ad-hoc over `f'. It has to select its behavior based only on the "container" type, rather than the "element" type. (The quoted terms are sloppy, but better for intuition than talking about deconstructing curried generative type constructor application.)

Here's the thing about that. If your type is (Maybe (List Foo)), the `f' variable (container type) gets matched with `Maybe'. The `a' variable (element type) gets matched with (List Foo). So the fact that there's a list involved gets thrown away during instance resolution.

And that's a good thing, because it lets you reason about your code's behavior uniformly. Just seeing the type of `length' is enough to tell you it has to work this way. Any attempt to work another way would fail to type-check.

--

Ultimately I think I slightly agree with the original post, but I think it oversells the issue. Using ad-hoc polymorphism inside a definition that doesn't expose that polymorphism externally does allow a few more more incorrect implementations. That is some form of erosion of type safety, but a very minor one compared to what ad-hoc polymorphism allows you to recover in safety when writing code that's useful across many types.
I love finding full course lecture series like this, although I'm usually looking more for History or Political Science lectures these days.
What time zone people use at a given location is not even a function of geographical location; you plausibly also need to know language, culture, political affiliation, and/or employment status.
Great question, which made me think about how they are more similar than I had originally thought. In both cases we're talking about carriers, quasi-utilities, network effects and (alas) real potential for abuse. But wouldn't this very similarity tend to strengthen our intuitions about the need for community standards?

E.g. You are sitting on a bus, and a venerable person comes aboard and launches into paean to Bolshevism, urging the present company to rise up and seize the means of production. Certainly protected speech. You might find it entertaining. You might even feel a pang of nostalgia for a lost world and its simpler problems.

But after a few hours of this, would you really feel like a free speech abuse had happened if the bus driver asks our comrade to give it a rest; or, if he feels honor-bound to continue, would he please go do it on somebody else's bus?

But you asked how I thought they were different, and I do think they are very different, because human attention is limited in a different way than the number of busses, or ISPs are. If you can't fit one more person on a bus without kicking another one off, you can just buy more busses.

Human attention is not like that. No matter how many clones of twitter there are, I can't doom scroll for more than 24 hours a day. If some content is promoted on my feed, that means other content is inevitably excluded from my feed. And isn't this really what people are unhappy about? Not just that their views are not stored in some database somewhere. No, they want people to pay attention to what they are saying.

Can that problem be solved by additional regulations? I really don't think so. No matter what regulations we put on carriers, there will be media winners and media losers. And the losers will always feel like the system is systematically excluding them. And no wonder they feel that way--they are right. They can even go beyond vague complaints of corporate collusion and point to specific line items community standards, or--if we do adopt regulations--to specific regulations which are having the effect of suppressing their speech, perhaps even unconstitutionally suppressing their speech. But the conundrum is that this would be true for any set of regulations. The regulations can change who gets attention and who gets ignored. And they can make a bus ride or a social network more pleasant or less pleasant. But I have a hard time seeing how it can actually solve the problem of people being ignored.
The Depths to Which We Go