skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Crappy operators tend so save on the quality of the adhesive they use, that saves a couple of bucks and looks just the same right after you leave their place of work but it comes back to haunt you in the long run. A 'proper' operator will use the exact same glue as the manufacturer originally used. Another common error is to not properly glean the surfaces the glue will have to bond to both mechanically and from various residue. This can cause the glue simply not to stick at all. The first is greed, the second is usually crappy instruction. The guy I know has worked for manufacturers on mass windshield replacements, so he has done thousands according to manufacturer spec and that makes a big difference in workmanship, but he says that there is no guarantee that a dealer will do a better job, there is the guarantee that if the dealer fucks up you usually get your next replacement for free and some of those window replacement businesses are 'fly by night', the worse the quality the bigger the chance that you will need them to honor their warranty, but also the bigger the chance that they will no longer exist. Insurance companies sometimes work with a bunch of preferred installers. Here in NL besides by friend I've also had reasonably good experiences with Carglass, not all without trouble but they want to stay in business. Over the course of now close to 40 years of driving I've lost a whole stack of windshields, especially near construction zones but the last couple of years have actually been pretty good. I probably shouldn't jinx it though :)
The writing style, especially the introduction anecdote is so off putting I could barely stomach the article.

However , I agree with the sentiment of most readers that the problem with dating apps seems to be the quantity / quality problem——without being able to accurately portray quality on most of these platforms.
> How can we disprove the hypothesis “If we can’t disprove it - it isn’t science.”?

You can't. That's an axiom. Welcome to Philosophy of Science.

Science, at bottom, has some axioms.

1) Cause and effect

The same causes always create the same effects is an axiom. We assume that the God or the Devil don't change all the rules every other Thursday. If there is a being who arbitrarily shifts the rules, science loses a lot of its predictive power. Science will adjust to that, but it makes science much less useful.

2) Continuity

The rules "today" are the same as the rules "yesterday" are the same as the rules "tomorrow". The rules "here" are the same as the rules "there".

This is a little spicier as we do try to test that the rules haven't changed. We try to test whether or not the fundamental constants have shifted with time, for example. We try to see if things are behaving the same in our galaxy are the same as in otehr galaxies.

In fact, practically everything which defines "science" is about the ability to predict and quantify.

A) Side: "math" is NOT "science". Math, while certainly falsifiable, is neither quantitative nor predictive.

This, in fact, has provoked quite a bit of discussion: See: The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Unreasonable_Effectiveness...
I hope AI replaces most of them. My experience in the ER, at least in Canada. You're not getting a doctor. You're getting a doctor's 10 minutes attention, while they're running around from patient to patient. Don't expect your diagnosis to be anything more then the most obvious, A -> B diagnosis. When your problems conflate from the drugs they just wrongly gave you, and add in random screw ups, staff and equipment shortages. You will be getting reactive medicine, as your condition worsens. A death spiral, from which you will not escape. Many will be transitioned to the after life in hospital in this way.
Give AI better diagnostic testing data, and AI will make better care decisions then any doctor. The doctors/nurses will still be needed to take care of the patient. But it seems pretty clear that AI will be making the decisions, in the short future.
There was gold mining in Britain (specifically Scotland) at least 2,500 years ago [1].

[1]: https://www.bullionbypost.co.uk/index/gold/gold-mining-in-th...
From "Preface to Students":

> You are probably about to begin your second exposure to linear algebra. Unlike
your first brush with the subject, which probably emphasized Euclidean spaces
and matrices, this encounter will focus on abstract vector spaces and linear maps. These terms will be defined later, so don’t worry if you do not know what they mean. This book starts from the beginning of the subject, assuming no knowledge of linear algebra. The key point is that you are about to immerse yourself in serious mathematics, with an emphasis on attaining a deep understanding of the definitions, theorems, and proofs.

It is definitely a hard text if you haven't had exposure to linear algebra before.
MWI of quantum physics is most likely unfalsifiable. But if I believe that there are other versions of me that will definitely win the lottery if I am the sort of person to enter it in particular circumstances then that may well change my behaviour.

I would argue that occams razor is unfalsifiable but is still a great principle.
The worst part, I created an instagram account for my company, legit and registered one, it got insta-banned after few minutes, asked to add a phone number AND a selfie (which is useless as it’s a company account), and still got insta-response that it’s PERMANENTLY banned, I couldn’t even find any support contact form or anything, doing some googling turned out that Meta overall still work like a syndicate, and you should know someone to know someone to pull some strings there which is disgusting for a company in this size, and I don’t know anyone is working there, so my company account is still banned after it was created by few minutes. And just like you OP, I have an insta (personal) account that I never use but sometimes I get notifications that “Elon Musk” requested to follow you, and when I report them, they are still at my requests list till now, meaning they never got banned. I genuinely don’t know why people are still using anything Meta in this year.
But the batteries dont last the lifetime of the product.

Most iPhones are still very useful devices by the time their batteries have deteriorated below 70% original capacity.
and you think Bitcoin fixes this?

delusional.
Pinephone pro in the keyboard case is pretty fun. I run postmarketOS with SXMO and it’s very capable. It does calls/texts and provides a nice little Linux environment for light coding.
4th edition and still hasn't bothered to disambiguate between polynomial and polynomial function.

Still a good example of mathematical writing. But, as Einstein supposedly said, "as simple as possible but not simpler". Why is it always American authors that forget that last part?
This is a problem with shaken baby syndrome, which asserts that infants presenting a certain pattern of medical findings (mostly subdural and retinal hemorrhage) MUST have been violently shaken if no other alternative medical or accidental explanation is found. It is a diagnosis by default, which raises a number of legal issues. [1, 2]

This medical diagnosis is "certain" even with no witness, no admission of violence, no antecedents of violence, no sign of trauma on the baby's body. There is absolutely no way to falsify the idea that this gesture occurred (and no way to prove one's innocence — it's a presumption of guilt). Yet, this theory is qualified as "scientific" by its proponents, but it does not lead to any predictions, only explanations.

That shaking must have occurred on a given child at a particular moment, while the only person present with the child denies any violence, is an untestable and unfalsifiable proposition that is totally anti-scientific.

[1] https://www.cambridgeblog.org/2023/05/a-journey-into-the-sha...

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37650402
They don't. I don't want paid for content. If you will only make a video because you want to get paid for it then please, don't make the video.

Many people will make videos without expecting payment. See YouTube, for example.
I’m curious, what’s higher than nonzero? Since any positive, finite number is nonzero, are we looking at an ℵ₀ audience?
> And how do you propose we fairly compensate people for the value they've created when making content?

> How can we support artists, journalists, and so on to do the work that we enjoy?

We either pay them before the work is completed or in an ongoing manner to support their activities. Patronage. Crowdfunding. Plenty of people seem to be achieving success via platforms like Patreon and GitHub Sponsors. This is ethical.
Can someone explain why this is remarkable? Is there something special about that ruler? Or about coins that age in Britain?

> "Within a rapidly changing political landscape, I suspect that new political leaders emerged; sometimes flourishing, sometimes disappearing as quickly as they had appeared," Leins said. "If an individual amassed enough power and wealth to extend his/her influence, the striking and issuing of coins was one mechanism by which they could further expand their influence."

Yes, that's pretty much how it works. This is also how we know of a couple of short lived rulers during the migration period after Rome fell. Why is this science 'news'?
Someone's triggered, X is totally tilted to the right now just look at your daily feed emails, I've gotten a huge influx of random right-wing nut jobs who I don't even follow, view, or care about but for some reason, it's being pushed clear as day.

And tilting to the right is in no way getting us closer to the middle given the current politics, agenda, and direction of the right, I think you should rethink that statement.
Tons of things and phenomena in the real world are based on mathematics. Plant and leaf patterns, ocean waves, water flowing in tubes or channels, the weather, mineral and plant and animal structures, rain and snow and ice, mountains, deserts, glaciers, floods, thunder and lightning, electromagnetism, fire, etc., etc., etc. And some of those things are really based on imaginary numbers.

;-)
> One example is the big bang theory being proposed by a Catholic astronomer who didn't like the then prevaling idea that the universe did not have a beginning or end because it went against his religious beliefs.

That’s simply not true.

Fr. LeMaitre developed the theory to explain observed red shifts of galaxies (deriving Hubble’s Law prior to Hubble.) He felt his theory (and science in general) had no connection or contradiction to his faith.
I think there's a subtlety which isn't implicit in what you say. There is the ideal of science - which I think there's a case to be made that it's not something that can be fixed, but constantly evolves - and the practice.

But I think there's also a separate distinction between good faith and successful enough attempts to do science, and people just gaming the system. The fact that there's plenty of the latter must be acknowledged (in fact, I think the people who discovered this current set of issues and made a big deal of it are from the same group of academics as the ones abusing this loophole, and also, it's likely to be a perennial problem), but the former also exists and is not the same as the abstract ideal you bring up.

I'm not sure I would characterize Sagan's system here as specifically best expressing the scientific ideal. I think it's a great list to think carefully about to help with clear thinking, but I'm not sure applying the label of 'science' to all these points is the right way to think about them, although I'm not sure it isn't either.
It takes me 20 minutes and if it requires a minute longer then you're not a 10x savant like I am and you're slowing everyone down. You don't deserve to work here.

JK. IME the cycle is

1. Daunting, complete confusion

2. Find 1 or 2 subsections where I know 100% what is going on.

3. Do work in those subsections, it works, but then something messes up

4. In finding how it messes up I discover the weird edge cases and issues with the code, try to fix it

5. Doing so I begin to understand how it's all put together

Repeat 2-5 over a few weeks until it everything comes into place.

What's most important is finding small, definable areas where you can sink your mental "hooks" into the logical/semantic aims of the code, so you're not spending brain power aiming to compress information too noisy in scope at that point in your knowledge of it.
And one for you too!
Not sure what you need a specialist for specifically, but for ~$300 you can get an appointment here in South Africa for any specialist you want. If I want to see a specialist, any specialist, I call their office, book, and X amount of time later, they see me. The reason I mention it is that SA has a medical tourist visa you can get, so flying here for your medical needs may well be within the realm of cost-effective for a lot of people in the Western world.

As a general aside. That you have to plead, motivate or beg your government to let you get healthcare from a specialist seems alien to me. I just don't even have the words - your government does not own you!
Imagine you're a 16th century Italian mathematician who is trying to solve cubic equations. You notice that when you try to solve some equations, you end up with a sqrt(-1) in your work. If you're Cardano, you call those terms "irreducible" and forget about them. If you're Bombelli, you realize that if you continue working at the equation while assuming sqrt(-1) is a distinct mathematical entity, you can find the real roots of cubic equations.

So I would say that it's less that "Complex numbers were invented so that we can take square roots of negative numbers", and more "Assuming that sqrt(-1) is a mathematical entity lets us solve certain cubic equations, and that's useful and interesting". Eventually, people just called sqrt(-1) "i", and then invented/discovered a lot of other math.

Source: http://fermatslasttheorem.blogspot.com/2006/12/bombelli-and-...
Couldn’t find any email for you :-)
Former junior recruits forget how relatively inexperienced and well paid they were when they started.

They might not come back but there will be plenty of new people willing to.

It’s nice they are finding more to life and about themselves to enjoy. Maybe the greybeards they made fun of had it figure it out all along and welcome you to your future.
Why is it always the same argument with you people? They’re not mutually exclusive.
We must save our planet and we must terraform other planets.
HIV is extremely challenging to cure, since it writes itself into your blood's stem cell DNA and even if you could somehow wipe out every individual viral unit in your body at once, your own cells can still express that DNA and recreate the virus from scratch.

We've seen blood cancer patients cured of HIV after getting a bone marrow transplant, where the stem cells in their own bone marrow are wiped out before being replaced with stem cells from a healthy donor, but that's a little too extreme a procedure for widespread use.

> A man dubbed the 'Geneva patient' appears to be the latest person cured of HIV after a stem cell transplant for cancer treatment. Unlike the other five known cases, however, he received stem cells from a donor who does not have a rare mutation that prevents HIV from entering cells. The man continues to have undetectable HIV 20 months after stopping antiretroviral therapy (ART).

https://www.aidsmap.com/news/jul-2023/first-person-may-be-cu...

Mostly the focus has been on developing a vaccine for prevention, and treatments that suppress the disease in the already infected.

This is the first safety trial I'm aware of where a strategy that could at least theoretically succeed in curing the already infected has been tried.
If it's a kamikaze thing.. The alternative is a world of e.g. dogfighting drones with a small weapon mounted on the hunter. Think of it as a lightweight airborne AA gun. There you might justify a higher price with e.g. the hunter having a >80% likelihood of surviving an encounter.

Maybe no need for a gun even: dangle a detachable rope or web underneath your drone, now you just need to be fast & maneuverable enough to catch the other drone, and tangle the rope into its propellers.
> I mean many people may disagree with string theory, but it's hard for me to accept that it's science at all.

Science is a method, not a thing. I think most scientists, including those looking into string theory, would agree that the hypothesis is not science. It's a hypothesis. Maybe not even that, depending on whether or not you think it's falsifiable. But either way, it's an intriguing idea that scientists are looking at. That's a legitimate part of the process as well.
Though in the case of dot-bomb a fair number of people left the industry and stayed left or at least switched out of SV-type company space. People need to eat and once many switch tracks they may not switch back—especially if they move.
The first doctor I had wanted to send me to get my thyroid nuked because it was inflamed after a viral infection.

After 2 years and 6 doctors I found I basically had long covid years before it was recognized. Probably from a low grade garden variety viral infection. My gut developed food sensitivities and I started to develop autoimmune problems from that.

After finding the right doctor who could handle researching chronic conditions, things improved within months and a few years later I completely recovered.

Typical doctors have 5-10 minutes to listen to you and click on drop-down boxes on the computer. They won't care about chronic or complex issues. They are good for low hanging fruit and steering you towards pharmacological intervention but unusable for anything more involved.
You're not talking about it. You're using a classic deflection / distraction tactic.

You also don't seem to be aware that history is not absolute. In this case, there are *at least* three lens: the genociders, the genocidees, and the buffalo / bison.

You seem to be stuck on defending the genociders by demanding justification or some sort of analysis. But we know exactly what happened. We know why.
Quite a feel of those seem like while you don't need jQuery (so the site is indeed actually named), it's still often easier. Doubly so when you consider that the non-jQuery methods don't always chain together.

Admittedly I'm usually using it in places where loading the extra library is not an issue, so if you're really going for slimline, then sure.
> instead you run the device with a Qi-compatible battery pack

And lose 20% percent efficiency? A bigger battery for the same usage time and my device is constantly warmer? Sign me up! /s
Robert Roberson Is on Texas Death Row for a Crime That Never Occurred
Thought the sheep not knowing all the other grass was owned by other farmers…
We don't need to be this divisiveabout this. There is no right way as to how people learn

As someone that knows and can read Hindi, Gujarat, Cyrillic, Greek, Arabic and beginner at Hangul and Hiragana, romanization absolutely helps anchor the sound. The actual sound when speaking is going to change anyways as your converse with more people. But at least, romanization helps recall and focus on the actual word that you are learning.
I think a good place to start would be to teach it during highschool. Especially since a lot of bad science gets spread around social media. College may be a bit too late since that's when you really need to start applying those critical thinking skills
I don't think stories like this have much of a chance on the front page regardless. There's more than one force pushing them down: they're political, which attracts flags, they're not technical, which (usually unreasonably) attracts flags, and they're volatile, which sets off the flame-war detector. The big thing though is you can't stage a debate about flags on the thread itself; whatever you think of those flags, debating them publicly works against your goal.
A world where the database is seamlessly embedded in the backend code instead would be more useful. Oh wait…
https://archive.ph/7nfAX
In a world where long distance electronic communication is no longer possible, packets of data must be delivered physically from place to place.

The people who deliver these packets still go by the name…

Courier.
Great! Not build something great and change the world again! Quit writing blogs and crap until you have a product. Get to work!
I really enjoyed the first half talking about how Apple and Nintendo followed a blue ocean strategy. Then the second half ranting about removable batteries felt totally out of place. I’m not sure I buy the blue ocean strategy of that, although well written.
This is true. It remains to be seen if they’re (as in most) willing to readjust their expectations.
Yes but the pandemic forced nearly everyone to figure out how to get work done with nearly everyone remote. A lot of the roadblocks to remote work in the last two decades finally got solved. There are really no technical barriers of any kind anymore.
You might think that in every real world application, complex numbers are introduced as a convenience, and that every calculation that takes advantage of them ends with taking the real part of the result, but that's not the case. In QM, the final answer contains an imaginary part that cannot be removed.
That's a ridiculous take. The Internet isn't just free infrastructure that anyone can use. The data has to live somewhere.
2,500 people work at YT. They pay salaries, have offices, manage servers to store the videos, pay their content creators, etc.

So nobody is allowed to start an internet company and make money from it?

Uber is a business using roads that people pay for, should they not make money? Should those drivers not get paid as well?
Having one product owner is fine. The problem is that it should be a role someone moves into from one of the disciplines involved. Design, engineering, domain expert etc…

Now we have Product Manager orgs with Associate PMs, junior PMs, senior PMs, group PMs etc…

A junior PM almost by definition can’t be a product owner. They don’t have the seniority to make decisions, so what you end up with is a situation where senior PMs are handing down solutions to junior PMs who are coming up with even more detailed solutions to engineers. I’ve seen it time and again.
This is quite small, but you get Linux running on a hard to find Raspberry Pi Zero 2 W. You gotta 3d print your own case, or find someone who can do it for you. It's not practical for your use cases, but still pretty cool. https://beepy.sqfmi.com/
There is some future where AI, deepfakes, and what not become so indistinguishable from real people, that those industries (news media, social-media, etc) that make sport out of hearing "wrong speak" and performing shaming rituals will become obsolete.

Same with the security state, if all the data is suspect, does it matter?
Err, that SciAm author misunderstood that research... what they wrote is exactly backwards. The neutrino observations they're talking about disproved the natural nuclear reactor hypothesis. There is no antineutrino signal from the Earth of the type a nuclear fission process would emit.

https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.02257 ("Comprehensive geoneutrino analysis with Borexino")

What Borexino found was about 25 terawatts of radioactive decay occurring inside the Earth—alpha decay of 238U and 232Th. But, no nuclear fission. If there are fissioning critical masses inside the Earth, the total amount, constrained by neutrino counts, is no more than 2.4 terawatts (and consistent with 0).
37 is a tight window if you meet someone at 35. And it’s still risky to both mother and child:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4418963/

And “risky” here means potential of death or serious defect in child, or death for the mother. It’s irresponsible, unethical, and I don’t understand any parent that would risk the health of their child.
Is there such a flight?
I’ve wondered if a ‘follow’ feature would be useful on HN. It’d allow curating timelines of comments from interesting users.