skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Since congress never repealed the Telecom act of 1996, I wonder if the FCC could decide to reinstate it, as long as they applied it evenly instead of exempting cable like they did before; leading telcos to complain and it to not be enforced at all.

Of course, enforcement on telcos was pretty iffy too. While initial DSL rollouts were subject to linesharing, expanded rollouts were designed to hit the exception so linesharing wasn't required. Additionally, it was pretty common for telcos to have retail prices less than the price for linesharing, so competitive carriers couldn't have price parity without losing money even before considering operating costs.

If we get new legislation, we really need something with real separation; the company managing last mile should be separate from the company providing IP services. A last mile provider would be on the hook to get (ethernet) packets between my house and somewhere nearby where the IP service provider picks them up. This could be at a central exchange building, a local internet exchange if one exists, cable company headend locations, or somewhere mutually agreeable otherwise. But, there's not really any appetite for this kind of thing, so we're kind of stuck. sigh
> 1/2 to 1/4 as bad as a gas powered car

That right there is huge cause for celebration.

> For some people it's worse than a gas car.

Those people should wait, and let someone else use the EV. But for a good comparison, I think we should stick to lifecycle for the car and not individual owners. Few cars go from cradle to grave with only a single owner.
what is you definition of value?

i feel you and the other poster are mybe talking past each other..
Obviously, not all transfers of money are loans, like your dividend payments, or normal transactional commerce. The statement is that when a bank creates a loan, it creates money. The money they give to the lendee is new money. This is the primary mechanism of money creation in our system.
20 years from now there will be companies making dumbcars just like there are starting to with phones right now
When Facebook Tried to Kill Tinder
Four ways research aims to outwit cancer’s evasion tactics
How to Trust Again
I'm not sure i'm unusual in using the GitHub feed to keep an eye on commit activity on watched repos, all of a sudden there's no option to see push activity in the feed. o.O
What's the difference? The way most people use the term "open source" means the exact same thing as "free software", so I feel like this just being pedantic
It's better, it's not best - we know what 'best' is and what it looks like, we're just choosing not to invest in it.

The main issue I have is it's being marketed as something it isn't to placate entrenched interests.

> Those people should wait, and let someone else use the EV.

Why? Why shouldn't both people take a train? Same kind of argument really.
Thank you for providing us with your valuable feedback. At the moment, the metrics and eBPF sections are configurable but not yet documented. However, we are working on adding this information to our documentation as soon as possible. If you wish to disable the eBPF component and use only metrics instead, you can add the environment variable 'EBPF_ENABLED=false' to your alaz.yaml file.

Alaz utilizes minimal resources for both network and resource collection. CPU and Memory resources are limited in the K8s configuration file.

Alaz is still in its early stages of development and it's being improved based on developer feedback. Thanks again for providing us with your valuable input.
> I, for one, think that mission-oriented organizations should be more willing to admit that they're done and disband rather than endlessly expanding.

what incentive mechanism could possibly facilitate this? because without one, it's not going to happen, whether you or anyone thinks it "should" or not.

this is an open question that seems to be rarely if ever discussed. when presented with any sort of "anti-x" organization (for example), I always wonder: why should I trust this organization as having the definitive position on whether their stated goals have ever been achieved? it seems brazenly obvious that, without any sort of incentive to the contrary, they'll just keep moving the x goalpost such that they can claim x is still an issue, worthy of there being an "anti-x" organization to fight it. this seems like quite the predicament, because obviously sometimes there are xes that need to be opposed by organized groups of people—but how can they possibly be held accountable for remaining on-mission, and, more importantly, for being an authoritative source on societal progress with regards to x?
There may be a forge in your area that you can rent time at. Here's a place on the edge of Boston that offers both classes and an "open smithy" for working on your own stuff: http://www.prospecthillforge.com/ (if nothing else, click for the nostalgic Web 1.0 design)
Yes, I think this is part of it -- when the model sees a new low-res image, it compares it to patterns that it has already seen to estimate what that location might look like at high-res.

The other important part is that the model inputs many low-res images (up to 18, i.e. about three months of images) to produce each high-res image. If you were to down-sample an image by 2x via averaging, then offset the image by one pixel to the right and down-sample it, then repeat for two more offsets, then across the four down-sampled images, you should have enough information to reconstruct the original image. We want our ML model to attempt a similar reconstruction but with actual low-res images. The idea breaks down in practice since pixel values from a camera aren't a perfect average of the light reflected from that grid cell, and there are seasonal changes and clouds and other dynamic factors, but with many aligned low-res captures (with sub-pixel offsets) an ML model should still be able to somewhat accurately estimate what the scene looks like at 2x or 4x higher-res (the Satlas map shows a 4x attempt). The current model we've deployed does this far from perfectly, so there are some issues like figuring out where the model might be making a mistake and enabling the model to best make use of the many low-res input images, and we're actively exploring how to improve on these.

This shares ideas with burst super-resolution, see e.g. Deep Burst Super-Resolution [https://arxiv.org/pdf/2101.10997.pdf].
what’s your point? all kinds of shit is derived from oil
The difference is that if GitHub is found distributing malware on GitHub pages, you can notify them, they verify it, take it down, and open a process to eventually ban the offender.

They expend enough effort in this as to ensure the vast majority of content on GitHub pages is not malware, and avoid getting blankedly flagged as such.

It's not clear if smolsite.zip can successfully set up a similar process, given that they'll serve just any zip that's in the URL, and they won't have the manpower to verify takedown requests.
That's kinda the point though, right? There's something different about this `IO` thing that uses special syntax. You might be able to guess something and get it to compile, but should you?

fact n = do
let n' = do n - 1
if do n <= 1 then do 1 else do n * fact n'
Are you charging enough for your SaaS product?
> parts of the 1000 page one that couple did like 6 years ago.

IMHO that book is bloated and overrated. Maybe it works for some people, but I find the explanations really weird and some of the exercises are just useless busywork without a point.

There are good parts in there (they do try to teach you how to properly think about types which is nice) but I really feel like you don't need to read 1000 pages to learn basic Haskell.
I’d like to see social media companies taking the opportunity to cut off all services to this country. Use them as an example so other nations don’t get any wild ideas.
The part that's technically impossible is _keeping that key secure_.

https://www.pcmag.com/news/master-key-for-tsa-approved-locks...

More importantly, the thing that's technically impossible is a scheme to detect that the key has become compromised before it is used maliciously.
If you can find a toothbrush. And if your neighbors don't turn you in to the secret police for toothbrush hoarding.

Most people just stay on the waiting list for years.
Dynamic typed languages are perfect for the new programmer. Very forgiving, quick results. But as you get better, you start looking for tools to help you prevent mistakes, and even code faster. That is what static typing can do for an experienced developer. If you're getting frustrated then you're probably not ready yet - go back to learning the basics.
> Hmm, I don't think separating independent units of work into separate pull requests is "overhead", I think it is good practice.

They're not independent, they're related. Having multiple levels of "namespace" - repo -> PR -> commit - makes things easier to navigate, just like having multiple levels of folder in your filesystem.

> And the benefit is that instead of humans spending time deciding whether or not to squash commits in some branch before merging, or being asked to do so by a maintainer, a computer just does it automatically.

If you demand that each PR must be a single commit you just force the human to make that decision earlier and more manually.
Is that necessarily the case for massive LLMs, or could there be a more refined grouping?
So if the package isn't in cache, then suddenly k8s node is building it from source?
First, calm down. Things go up, and then down, and then up again. I am working only a few hours a week right now, it's not just you.

Second, it's not you, it's the programmer labor market. There were a lot of layoffs in Big Tech in the first half of 2023, and the labor market hasn't absorbed all of that yet. It will, and then being a programmer will be a good job again.

Third, to survive in the meantime, you may have to take a crap job for a bit, if you are having trouble paying the rent. That doesn't mean you should stop programming, but you do what you have to do. If you have a cushion to survive on, great, but don't be afraid to take a low-wage, non-professional job for a year if that's what's required. By the way, lots of small to medium sized businesses, if they find out one of their line workers (whatever that is for that industry) can work with computers, will start putting them to work on that (though you would have to be willing to be a jack-of-all-trades). It's not guaranteed, but it happens.

Fourth, remind yourself frequently that this is not about you, it's about the particular place the programmer market is now. You need to have an optimistic attitude going into an interview, so make it part of your interview-readiness routine to keep focusing on positives. One case where "fake it 'til you make it" is a good idea.

Fifth, there has been a shortage of programmers for every year in the last thirty except for probably 2001, 2008, and 2023. It will pass. Just do what you have to do to keep your head above water until then.
Is there a fantasy map of the U.S. with mass transit lines and associated cost?

Hell, I'd even love to look at such a fantasy map for Atlanta, GA where Marta is built out throw all that crazy Atlantan sprawl...
Bootstraps and all that…
I was taught the same slogan in school as well. The 3 R’s we called it! I think where we went wrong is we started ignoring the first two and went all in on the third.

I remember at one point we saw a demo of an alternative 2 litre pop (soda) bottle that used slightly thicker plastic which made it durable enough to be collected, washed, and refilled. It never came to market here, unfortunately. I guess no one was willing to put in the infrastructure.
Exchange value is only a measure of value. A theory of value is about explaining what makes value, not just measuring it.
Are you suggesting 'best' is public transit? We know already that it doesn't come anywhere close to solving the myriad use cases for private transportation. I'd love a very healthy public transit system, but cars are always going to have their place. Public transit has a halfway decent use case for a good number of people, for sure.
I don't think that is borne out by evidence. You build a better bus and people take it. Recent examples that are local to me include BRT lines in San Francisco and Oakland. These are very popular.

The reason transit systems fail is because governments sabotage them by prioritizing free-at-point-of-use car infrastructure like freeways, unmetered parking, etc. My favorite example being the extension of BART into Antioch, where the project budget was divided into half for BART and half for a toll-free 8-lane superfreeway, resulting in a system where nobody takes BART.
I never could wrap my head around the context variables or whatever they were called, where the language would pick a random variable from your local environment and pass that as an argument to the function call.
I find socialism amusing. It is best, I think, to consider socialism as a critique of capitalism. My working thesis is that capitalism is unavoidable. Markets do not solve every problem, but they solve many. The fact that socialism creates anger among many capitalists is, in fact, a point in favor of socialism as a critique: The anger wouldn't be there if the critique had no merit.

It is silly to attempt to achieve socialism. Better to use it as a gauge. Otherwise, it ceases to be a good measure and critique. Is the current system everything it could be? If not, then how could it be better and at what cost? This is like asking if a Market accounts for all costs. If it does not, that is, if a Market creates externalities, then it is time to consider, argue over, and politically implement alternatives.
Vega is an infinitesimal blip on the launch industry and will continue to be a blip.

It costs almost as much as a F9 with almost I believe less than a tenth of the performance. It only exists so that Europe can claim they have access to space as long as your payload is tiny
With demand for the metal, I'm surprised scrapyards don't want it. The scrapyards in my country take many battery types.
I would love to see the flawless code you've written over 20 years where static typing would have done nothing for you or anyone else maintaining your code.
Engels' concept of the reserve army of labor does not refer to a specific group of persistently unemployed people, but to the idea that there must always be some significant number of people who are unemployed. In other words, a statistical unemployment rate of 0% is not possible under capitalism. This is simply because if there was 0% unemployment, it would be impossible for businesses to hire anyone without poaching from another business. According to the law of supply and demand this would result in wages rising rapidly and without bound, much as the price of bread does during a famine, until it was impossible for businesses to make any profit.
Plastic roads aren't recycling, and it's not green - it's toxic waste disposal.

The reason they are getting traction is because at first glance it sounds like a great idea.

Only when you think about the detail that you start to realise that unintended consequences.

The question to really focus on is "why are environmentalists so obsessed with keeping plastic out of landfill?". Environmentalists will go to almost any length to keep plastic out of landfill. But WHY? The safest place for plastic waste is in landfill, not out in the environment distributed everywhere as microplastics.

In Australia there's a ridiculous utter obsession with "recycling plastic", as though it is some sort of solution to the plastic problem. Recycling plastic is not a solution because the flow of plastic is so utterly gargantuan that no amount of recycling can get on top of it. And that is when governments that are under pressure to do something about it turn to plastic roads. "What are we going to do with this firehose of waste plastic? Well we CANNOT put it in landfill because landfill is the worst thing in the world, so we must put it in roads."
Thank you for clarifying, and I apologise as I also became quite hostile.

I agree that we agree on many points; but I think where we diverge (and perhaps fundamentally) is in the base assumption that "because google uses it, it must be the best, because even if it wasn't google would make it so" (at least, this is my interpretation of GPs comment).

I have little doubt that the low hanging... mid hanging and perhaps even most of the high-hanging fruit has been well and truly plucked when it comes to linux throughput at the behest of the large tech companies; because a few percent improvement translates a lot at their scale. -- However I am reminded of an allegory given in a talk (that I can't find) regarding bowling.

In the talk the speaker mentions how they got "really good" at bowling with completely the wrong technique; but it worked for them, up to a point in which they could not improve no matter what they did. They had to go back to the basics and learn proper technique and become much worse before they were able to overtake their previous scores with the bad technique.... but after that point there were further improvements to be had.

My argument that this is the case is merely: doing an architectural re-write of the linux kernel to be more scalable in the way FreeBSD's is would be very punishing for too many people, and additionally that the economics are not favourable when, if you do get to a point where you cannot scale due to the kernel, you could just break out into userland. -- then simply suffer the adequate but not insane performance everywhere else where it's not needed anyway.

So, to summarise my points:

* Because a big company uses something does not mean it is perfect in all areas

* That Linux has a lot of attention on it does not mean necessarily that it has the most potential: though I don't doubt that the majority of it's potential has been reached.

* Diminishing returns means once it's "good enough" people will try to get performance elsewhere if they need it.

* Rewriting the network stack in Linux completely would likely be harmful to many and subtly so, I haven't seen people moving towards this idea either, this feels like it could be political as well as technical.

* Hyperscalers will often trade convenience over performance: regardless, CPU time is much cheaper for them than it is for us.
It absolutely _feels_ like there's an anti-EV campaign to pump out FUD concerning tires. First it was long-tailpipe stuff, but that didn't really gain much traction (har har), so we're on to the next one. Not saying it's not a problem, but saving some car weight by making them all burn gas doesn't seem like the solution.
I think that if you hold a position in the government, all of your communication (including private email, chats, etc) should be subject to public scrutiny. A government official should be defined not as someone who is holding power, but as an elected representative of the people.
Each car costs $50-100K right now, times however many cars we're going to replace over the coming few years. Thats 290M * let's call it $75K = $21T. What kind of transit system do you think that would buy us? How much better for the environment do you think that would be?

A transit system like Hong Kong MTR would get us down to 1 in 3 people owning a car. Down from 179% right now. If the rest were gas, so what? Could still swap them out for electric over time.
> Capital is resources that can be invested into the generation of more resources. In order to meet that definition

"Capital" is my savings, or my toolbox. Or any number of things which are mine.

Pretending that it's $30 billion of investor financing, so that you can goad others into stealing it is disingenuous.
Youtuber Catarina Paolino onlyfans 1º lugar no ranking das modelos mais famosas da plataforma.
Same situation as before, the materials remain as they were until an external influence triggers the "build".

A dynamic page is not assembled until the HTTP request (i.e external) sets things in motion.
I was looking at the bigger picture, and didn't clarify that point enough.

What I mean to say is that web development was more accessible during simpler times. People from all walks of life would develop websites, flash stuff, and even dynamic sites, i.e. LAMP. They could do that because it was simple enough to learn.

Front-end development as we typically do it today has turned into a hardcore engineering discipline of staggering complexity.

It is in fact so engineering-heavy that even within the world of professional front-end development it has caused a split where there's a "front of the front-end" (CSS, UX, accessibility) and a "back of the front-end" (the engineering part).

You may be able to justify every single tool, command line, pattern or best practice and it's not my point to talk you out of it. My point is to zoom out and consider this larger pattern.
I think dropping Typescript the way they did was silly, but you are absolutely correct that they should be able to do so, even if it’s unpopular.
Licensing issues would probably prevent this from happening, I can't comment on third party code from other sources, but rather famously, Microsoft got in trouble for disk compression code in the 6.x releases and had to substitute it later on. Personally, I would like to see one of the very late PC-DOS releases freed (7.1 or so), but considering IBM's indifferent to belligerent attitude on freeing their historical software, I don't see this happening any time soon.
Original article from the Mozilla Foundation:

https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/article...

at the end, it links to a petition addressed to carmakers.

This matter should probably be addressed to legislators instead.
Agreed that terrible code can show up in any language. For some reason, I notice it more with TS. Here's a random example too (not saying this is terrible, just confusing to me):

https://github.com/prisma/prisma/blob/main/helpers/blaze/uti...
https://archive.ph/xYOKw
brilliant idea. let those governments know who really rules the world. we already have a bunch of dictatorships censoring the internet on purpose, so let's do their job for countries whose democratic processes can't do it for them.
Labor doesn't operate like that. If we wake up one day and suddenly need a ton of labor, we don't need idle worker. We can reassign active labor, like in World War II.

Also, it's weird to casually call people becoming homeless and starving and dying due to lack of work "slack". I'm sure the people desperate for money see that as a crisis more important than whatever abstract system crisis you are imagining.
Thus my last sentence: if you aren't shipping to production... you are really just copying files around, and you have a glibc.

I think I just use linux enough that all the macos bugs I don't experience.
If your security model relies on arbitrary hosts on the internet proactively taking down malicious URLs, you're in for a bad time.
https://web.archive.org/web/20220622080307/https://www.cbsne...
WeWork, following investor warning, seeks to renegotiate almost all its leases
fair enough. Maybe my dismissal was too shallow
Socialism doesn't mean no markets. In fact, no attempt at building socialism so far has ever done away with markets.
The primary point of the video, is that when adequate infrastructure and servicing (plowing and de icing) exists, very cold, harsh weather doesn't decrease bike ridership.

In the example city, Oulu Finland, they see a consistent 22% ridership all the way down to -20C, because they incentivize cycling with well designed and maintained infrastructure.
Thank you for your kind words. We greatly appreciate your support, and we're excited for you to try out Alaz. If you have any feedback or suggestions, please don't hesitate to share them with us. Your input will help us improve our product. For support or to share your feedback, please join our community Discord channel at https://discord.com/invite/9KdnrSUZQg.
It's not at all the same as before. Compare what you see with https://github.com/dashboard-feed.