skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Eg that unless something is obviously wrong you wouldn’t action based on any findings from a full body scan; instead you would retain the record and repeat the scan 12-24 months later. Compare anything notable for growth or other irregular change, rinse and repeat. I would imagine that would greatly decrease the amount of pointless imaging and biopsy done. There would certainly still be some done but is that not the case now?

The problem is birds vs rabbits vs turtles (I didn't invent this; it's a classic metaphor [1]).

For any given finding on an MRI, they're going to be, tautologically, in one of three categories, in descending order of frequency:

* turtles (i.e. slow growth tumors). Most people of a certain age have them, and they'll never be an issue. MRIs will find them. You can't know they're turtles.

* rabbits (faster-growth, non-metastasized tumors). Maybe we can catch these, because they're slower than birds, and maybe can make a difference. Everyone wants to believe they're finding rabbits, but just because of the nature of the distribution, they're most likely finding turtles.

* birds (i.e. fast metastasizing tumors; think days or weeks). This is what you want to catch, because they're metastasizing. They're deadly. They're rare. You'd like to catch these before they fly away, but how often are you going to run an MRI? Daily?

Asymptomatic screening almost always catches turtles, sometimes catches rabbits, and rarely catches birds. You can't tell the difference from a single scan...so when do you choose to go further? At what cost?

[1] https://lactobacto.com/2018/02/13/viewing-cancers-as-birds-r...

[1] https://www.northcoastjournal.com/humboldt/cancer-part-2-tur...

[1] https://www.thedailybeast.com/all-these-cancer-screenings-pr...

I included that third link -- even though it's from the Daily Beast -- because it really drives home the practical implications of the metaphor. Consider this:

> In 2012, Archie Bleyer and Gilbert Welch published a study in the New England Journal of Medicine titled, “Effect of Three Decades of Screening Mammography on Breast-Cancer Incidence.” They found that, with the advent of screening mammographies, the incidence of breast cancer in the U.S. had doubled. For every 100,000 women screened, the number of women diagnosed with breast cancer had increased from 112 to 234. At the same time, the number of women presenting with late-stage breast cancer (the kind that often results in death), decreased from 102 to 94 (per 100,000). In other words, only eight of the 122 women diagnosed with breast cancer appeared to benefit from the screening. Eight. The others had been treated with mastectomy, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy without clear benefit.

This is a common story in the world of cancer diagnostics.
Clubhouse always had the same stench of hype about it as crypto did.
Browser domination is the Holy Grail. They will persist as long as the EXPECTED VALUE of the fine is less than the projected benefit - which is existential for the company.
Yes, but you're (1) still dependent on "The Algorithm". Popular channel Lesics saw its ads and views disappear overnight with no obvious reason. Hopefully the EU's DMA/DSA legislation will force some transparency there.(2) for most the ads are not enough and true income is made through Memberships and Patreon and swag in a store.
At any commercial yacht marina, the wharf will almost look like a Tesla parking lot, with rows of chargers. There's a plug for every berth.

If you do an image search for "marina" you can even spot them on most stock photos.
According to the bosch-home.com website this model does not exist anywhere, the closest is SHX65T55UC, are you sure you didn't misread the label?
There's a reason the body scan is $2500 and a simple surgery with anaesthesia starts at like $15000 before insurance.
Full body scans are a common preventative measure in Taiwan.

My parents (expats, living in the US for over 50 years) flew back and got routine scans (MRI, PET, CT) in February for about $1000 USD total.

Similar to this story, they found a tumor on my dad's pancreas. A biopsy confirmed it, and he had surgery in August. They caught it at stage I. We're very lucky.

The latency from February til August was entirely convincing the US medical system to take his Taiwanese images seriously. They finally gave up and went back to Taiwan to get the procedure done.

I'm getting older myself and will absolutely be paying for any sort of imaging available.

This should be more broadly available to everyone. I'd be happy for more of my tax dollars to go to preventative care rather than rear guard action.
market is yes fundamental natural law of universe, and no matter how you try to trick it through political laws it will bite back in the end.
The problem I have with this is not the scan per se but the fact that it's just more pressure to treat patients like a specimen in a petri dish rather than a product of their environment.

Dr. McCoy's tricorder was kind of a vision of tech enhancing the old fashioned "doctor making house calls with a little black bag" idea. Reality: Tech has created increased pressure for patients to travel to the medical facility rather than care coming to them.

One side effect: Doctors who don't do house calls can't incidentally notice things about your lifestyle that may contribute to the problem and may not know to ask or may not ask because it's an offensive thing to say and you may not know to volunteer the info. (If you knew, you might just fix it without seeing a doctor.)

I remember a scene from some TV show that made a powerful impression on me in my youth where the doctor burns a fur after seeing several patients. I think he realized it was a tick borne illness and the bear skin (iirc) was the source (of ticks).

It came very out of left field for me, but I've seen stories that suggest this is in part how medicine used to operate -- by the doctor noticing and fixing the cause of the problem in some cases -- and mostly doesn't anymore. Now we go in for drugs and surgeries and for some people that just means the start of an endless nightmare of chronic illness while doctors question their mental health and imply they are hypochondriacs.
And we already have room temperature conductors...
Microsoft is weird. People where pretty happy about Edge initially and Microsoft fail to capitalize on that.

Why not just create a good browser, bundle it Windows, ensure it has excellent privacy features and if people use it then great, if not, to bad. I really fail to see Microsofts end goal here. They don't need people to use Edge, they don't need to spy on people... So why do they feel like they must?
Ask HN: Why Python relative import is so fundamentally broken?
Seems that relative import is implemented as relative to where the python.exe executed instead of the place where the file is.

So the nature is depending on where you run the doctest or where you put your jupyter notebook, all imports inside the project will break!
how can one do this?
Please don't build up my hopes, I'm not sure I'll be able to withstand additional disappointment.
My understanding was that the regulations applied to a normal wash cycle, but that they don't prevent dishwashers from having additional modes that use more water/energy for a faster clean.

My Bosch dishwasher is only a few years old. On normal mode, it takes 2 hours and 20 minutes. However it has a "Vario Speed" option which uses more water/energy, but performs the same clean in about an hour.

We rarely use Vario Speed. The dishwasher gets stacked after dinner and set on a timer so that it runs overnight. But the option for a fast wash is much appreciated.

One thing I'll say about wash quality is that the detergent matters. In Australia you can check out Choice's list [1]. We did find the Aldi Logix Platinum ones to be pretty good.

https://www.choice.com.au/home-and-living/kitchen/dishwasher...
I've actually become a bigger fan of unit testing private methods over time. :shrug:
This thread is super interesting for me as a Mexican. I've never understood dishwashers: expensive machines you buy to wash dishes you've already had to wash in the sink.

I pay a "human" dishwasher $20 dollars a day and she washes the dishes completely, dries them, puts them out, wahes and sorts clothing, mops and vacuums the floor, washes toilets and the backyard with the dogs' dirt.

The wonders of cheap labour I guess
I think currently M2 max is best bang for buck running interface in open source model. But use case is so niche that Apple probably doesn't actively start supporting open source models. In the long run I hope some smaller company gets shit together and starts competing with NVIDIA.
No, it's not obvious at all as various models can have different numbers of modes, so even averaging them out for a usage/cycle average number wouldn't yield any meaningful info.

e.g. A fancier model with several 'Eco' cycles and only one higher power mode will appear better than simpler models with fewer modes, even though the simpler model might actually use less energy.

In fact it would be very counter-intuitive and highly misleading.
You would need two since the dishwasher usually has its own dedicated hot valve
Another way to address some of the reasons for comments you call out so well, is clear tests for these edge cases or weird, past problems.
When I was setting up our Bosch dishwasher, there was a water hardness option. The machine has a built-in salt tank and is fully capable of regulating water hardness on it's own. You just have to top it up every now and then.
It's overcorrections all the way down.
Do you mean high-level leadership? Everyone has to start somewhere after all.
bit off thread, I have a sinus polyp that seems to be under control when using nasal corticosteroids, with the massive risk of developing a dependency.

at my wits end on other alternatives
~104k is a world of difference from ambient room temperature.
Oh, staying and voting that we can all opt out and keep our money.
IMO, this is one of the reasons that architectural style is not actually very good...
I was on IRC at the time, on Undernet. It was in the wee hours of the morning here. Some dude came into the channel and said a plane had crashed into the World Trade Centre. I said something like "Dude, it's too low for a plane to hit it, with all those tall buildings around it", because I thought he was talking about the World Trade Centre in Melbourne AU. He clarified that he meant the one in NYC. So along with everyone else, I jumped into a hastily created temp channel dedicated to news of the event, which was filling with people faster than I'd ever seen before. Updates were scrolling up the screen super fast. I was living with my parents and siblings at the time, and I ran around and told everyone to get up, and turned on the old CRT television which weighed about 600 tons. So we all sat there watching, and then the second plane hit the other tower. It felt like it was some Hollywood BS, not a real thing. We watched people jump out and fall. It was quite difficult to believe it was even happening.

Not super relevant, but at the time, they said they had scrambled F16s and one had shot down the plane over the field in Pennsylvania to prevent another attack. Either their initial reports were wrong, or they changed the story later to create some heroes.
Imagine this: suppose there is a big company called Nile that sells a door security camera called Ding. This security camera happens to upload everything to the company servers. Since it is very popular, it has a huge coverage. If there are no restrictions on surveiling public ground, Nile could engage in all sorts of things, like tracking cars with license plates, etc. That's why Europe places restrictions on this sort of stuff.

You can still use a Ding, but it can only point at your private property and you have to inform people who may enter your property that it's being recorded.
> WARNING: this will remove all your data from spotify!

That is quite the caveat.
Basically every human is significantly different inside, and they look nothing like the medical literature. Any scan will reveal all sorts of things that may or may not be at all clinically relevant.
Would you mind explaining the bayes theorem scenario in simpler terms?
In theory, it’s the outcome of #1; in practice, it’s a nuance many people miss.
Underneath that high-level hand-waving there’s still a pretty simple concept. If I buy T—Bonds, I bloody well expect them to be cashed at maturity. Otherwise, who’d buy them? And I am under no obligation to buy goods and services from the US for the dollars received.
Airline pilots have an upper age limit.

Apparently, it's not safe to have anyone above a certain age fly a plane, even with a copilot, traffic control services, and multiple system redundancies.
A service layer is not necessary to have an API contract.
Because liquid nitrogen is fairly cheap, and is usually needed anyway for cooling other components of complex systems.
The easy default here would be to have a runbook that executed on a particular inventory group.

The “linear” execution strategy is the default (which you linked to). By default, if there is an error on one host it will continue executing on all other hosts. You need to set a flag to stop executing on all hosts[1].

The parent process would not be notified of any failures until the end of the run, unless you supplied a custom callback plugin[2].

[1] https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/2.8/user_guide/playbooks_er...

[2] https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/plugins/callback.htm...
Could it be because you're more comfortable with the CLI than any GUI alternative? E.g. I wouldn't go clicking about for installing packages when it's just one line away.

I know many power users of Windows that bring up their terminal frequently as well.
Not sure what you mean about hard wiring. Bosch dishwashers come with the option of either the usual plug, or a hardwire kit. Also, maybe it's a regional thing, but every dishwasher I've ever used (mostly cheaper brands that were in apartments) used regular outlets. You just cut a hole in the cabinet next to the sink, and the outlet was underneath the sink, usually next to the outlet for the garbage disposal.
The fact that the system isn’t opt out is evil.
Can these trackers be used to encourage other activities? Like do more math exercises?
A way to add limits when being clueless:

Estimate what a real human can do in a day, and use that as the limits. Verify that the system behaves ok for some time, then scale up the desired trading volume and limits, observe, scale, repeat.

But you don't do it by making a (bad) guess up front and then just leaving it at that.
Great suggestion! Appreciate the feedback. We'll take a look at some edits to make the content pop a bit more.
LSPs of today have a really large surface area to be implemented as LSPs grew a lot on what they can do. I don't think it's easy to wire down a LSP to any IDE, and lots of small IDEs are written around some text component - like Scintilla. If the text component doesn't have a standard way to be wired up to a LSP, that is already properly maintained, it's really hard to implement it.
Oh yeah, this is a great resource for sure.
I spot a flaw in this, aside from the fact that the way this coercion is done is highly unethical and illegal, and it's that Edge is functionally a Chrome reskin with some added Microsoft bells and whistles.

People switching from Chrome to Edge won't help with the browser monoculture. And especially switching from Firefox to Edge will not help.
It depends on the definition of a “day” that you use, but due to Mercury’s elliptical orbit sunrises and sunsets are weird. [1] It takes 59 Earth days for the planet to revolve once around its axis, but from the surface it takes 176 Earth days to observe the sun making a complete circuit of the sky.

https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/mercury/in-depth.amp
Hopefully this heralds the end of shitty businesses getting pumped full of cheap money. We've been living in a fantasy universe for the last ten years.
It's not much different that package-private (the default visibility in java).
You self-contradict with:

> it seems strange that the author EVER thought that no comments should ever be needed - that seems like a strange and dogmatic conclusion to have come to.

But just before that you say:

> There's lots of reasons to comment your code, but mostly I think code should be the documentation.

Exactly that's why it's not at all strange. As you yourself write, code should be the documentation. Need to add comments => your code is unclear, and unclear code => bad code, and so instead of writing comments your time is better spent improving the code.

The reality of course is that things need to be done and there's no time to fix all layers and have perfectly organized and readable code and therefore clarifying comments are needed.

So no need to shame the author, it's just a typical progression from youthful maximalism to more mature shades of grey thinking.
It's a brittle ceramic, nothing we care about changes even if it's real.
All these little changes reduced friction in the right direction.
LN2 is cheap and can be maintained below 77k without a lot of infrastructure.

So, a 104K superconductor is well within the range of being practically useful.
The difference is, there's no Church-Turing thesis for chariots.
https://archive.ph/SAeFR
What I meant was Multi-Account Containers [1]. It is a feature to isolate browsing on Firefox into different categories, comparable to profiles (and often suggested as the better alternative).

Apart from the isolation feature of using different browsers, it is also important for me to reduce the lock-in effect of being dependent on a single browser. If I use different browsers all the time, it will be easier to switch or dump a browser in the future.

[1]: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/containers
If we're going with the "start from scratch if it ever proves inadequate" philosophy, then the person who notices the misbehavior looks at the original code, sees that it's written in some obscure language, is undecipherable, but also is only 60 lines long, and decides that it will probably be simpler to make a new (short) implementation in their own favorite language that correctly handles both the original use case and their new requirement. The key insight is that given how much easier it is to write fresh code than understand old stuff, they could very well be correct in that guess, and the end result is a single piece of small clean code, rather than a simple core with layers of patches glued on top.

In this particular case, we're talking about a "make" replacement, so testing the new implementation can be done by simply running "make all" for the project. If it passes, then the new implementation must be identical to the old one in all the ways that actually matter for the project at hand. In all likelihood, for a simple program like this, fixing one bug will also silently fix others because the new architecture is probably better than the old one.
From the initial look, it looks like you're taking the work of SweepAI, a source-available repo, which gave(?) it to LlamaIndex(1) and then you're just providing a wrapper around the LlamaIndex that provides a way to do an Update statement.

1) https://docs.sweep.dev/blogs/chunking-improvements
I agree with you completely: I don't think Russia tasked an unstable loner malcontent with knocking off JFK and possibly kickstarting WW3 in the process. Russia did not want that.

What I think the US government feared was a public perception that Russia (or Cuba, or whoever) might have been behind it.

That's when swathes of the public and various grandstanding politicians start rattling their sabers and thinking about war. Any official story besides "Oswald was a crazy lone gunman" would have looked awful for the US and increased the odds of war, a recurrence of McCarthyism, etc.

So I don't think the possibility of a second gunman was ever seriously entertained, even though there's some evidence for it.
>They had 48-hours to raise the capital necessary to cover their losses (which they managed to do with a $400 million investment from around a half-dozen investors).

I'm very curious about this bit. How exactly do you raise $400m of "investment" to cover such a massive footgun, in 48 hours, when you haven't even had time to understand what happened or whether it would happen again?

Why are people stumping up hundreds of millions of cash here?
How does that refute what I said?
Thanks for this link. It seems to confirm things: "aren’t Conduits and Transducers then equivalent (isomorphic)? I am pretty sure they are."

I view this as a good sign. When two independent parties arrive at the same design it is usually an indication that they have discovered a universal and principled solution.

I consider the "conduit" library to be one of Haskell's "killer features", and sorely miss having something like it when working in other languages.

Maybe when Haskellers dismiss clojure transducers as being "just like conduit" it comes from a place of jealousy? I've seen several articles and discussions over the years of clojure transducers that take place outside of clojure communities and are aimed at the wider programming public, praising the benefits of it. But I've never seen conduit discussed outside of Haskell communities.
Specter Aerospace
I've had the same experience. Linux just requires too much babysitting for me, while Windows 11 just works. I haven't had any major problems nor any issues with my productivity.
Flight Plan Reception Suite Automated (Fprsa-R) Sub-System Incident 28th August [pdf]
So after 30 days, you've spent more money than someone with a lower cost dishwasher, and as the article mentions, your dishes haven't been sanitized and had allergens removed. You've also used a lot more water. Yes, you have to put away the dishes yourself, but that still seems like a pretty good trade to me.
> it seems strange that the author EVER thought that no comments should ever be needed - that seems like a strange and dogmatic conclusion to have come to.

Distressingly common, though. I'd say most of my last few positions have been at places where "self-documenting code" was the mantra even though it was blatantly clear that the code and what it was doing was far too complex for that to work.
IDEs are a deep topic but I don't hold such absolute.

For some languages using commercial IDEs is a very smart choice. Refactoring TypeScipt, for example, with Jetbrains IDE is a breeze, and I think it should be available in developers toolkit whatever their preference is.

For some, more dynamic/niche languages (Hello Elixir!), IDEs stand in a way because they take longer to set up and they still don’t produce results as good as glued together scripts and editor macros (side note: macros aren’t only for inserting text, one can pick text under cursor and search for a specific pattern using rg or even send refresh signal to a browser on the other screen).

There are also two other layers that I always mention as arguments against IDEs.

First is that IDEs change often and no matter how much you try your workflows are going to change. It’s hard to get high proficiency when things are changing and having new IDE feature replacing Your Way is a pain and a learning deterrent (thing that I experienced multiple times).

Second is something I call GPS Development. When I work with IDE I tend to not pay attention where am I and where I should be going because hopping navigation is super easy. And then when I am deprived of those tools I’m completely lost and not productive at all. With arguably dumber tools I can open shell and still navigate and edit with whatever editor I have and it still works well. Thing is that with my line of work stuff breaks often and IDEs rightfully decline to work on broken codebase.

My current stance is to use whatever you’re most comfortable with (on a unit by unit basis). Struggling with editor or IDE, even the coolest/smartest one, is going to interrupt your thinking process and cause performance hit much bigger than whatever gains it could ever produce.