skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Science publications need to ensure reproducibility of research before publishing.

There needs to be a journal dedicated to documenting unreproducible science studies and papers.

The inability for scientists to police themselves is the death of Science.
Not from my understanding, it's very rare for peripheral activities to take up multiple hours every day on average, in a well oiled team at least.

Of course there will always be Dilbert esque situations but the vast majority of actual or potential super-geniuses I imagine would have at least a few hours of actual free time per day, on average.
Bruh. I'm with you on IP being useless, but insisting on something being a "fact" is meaningless.

It's a fact that everything can be represented in binary. You can identify every knowable concept as either "cat" or "not cat". That's a fact.

Now... who cares? What does that being a fact mean? It means nothing. It's not useful. It doesn't prove a point any more than what you're saying does. All information is a number, that's a fact. Okay. Now... so WHAT?

The charge here is that some public information deserves protection. You disagree with that but, again, who cares? Prove why your opinion on that is relevant to any other human being, or engage with your irrelevance all by yourself. On the "protect public info" side, we can say that things like your social security number needs to be necessarily public, but we need to be able to stop people from using it however they want. There are indexing reasons for that. There are medical reasons for that. There are (yes, far too many) financial reasons for that.

And if you don't like that example, let's try one more directly applicable with a creative example: trade marks are public info. But if we let every person do whatever they wanted with a trade mark, they lose the real, tangible value that they provide (iconography is foundational to how human brains efficiently interpret information).

So pick you poison, but then engage with the actual poison; don't just wink behind smug tautologies. Tell us how, in your view, we can have a framework that provides the values that we get from IP, when we don't protect IP, as a concept. Because, buddy, I've been longing for, and working towards, that kind of framework since I figured out how pathetically inept IP is at actually doing what it does.
Economics professor, meet corporate SVP:

"it’s time to disagree and commit. We’re here, we’re back—it’s working, I don’t have data to back it up, but I know it’s better."

Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20231129224726/https://fortune.c...
Let me throw SymmetricDS into the ring: https://symmetricds.org/

In my opinion it is quite underestimated giving its various cross platform and cross product sync capabilities. My first experiences with it are quite promising.
Last year I did my run in J (Jsoftware.com) and it was very interesting.

This year my initial desire is to do it in raku, which seems suited to the first task at least (although I haven't managed to get to it).

I did another year in common lisp.

All in all I really can recommend doing them in non-typical languages, it expands your mind.
Not just worldview... there's a lot of money at stake. Providing office space is effectively an entire industry, so an entire industry is at stake here. And then that industry has financial derivatives on top of it, so the financial industry has a lot of incentive to get people back in offices so supply goes down and prices can go back up. There's a lot of money available to PR-submarine articles about the virtues of back-to-office. I'm surprised we don't see much, much more.
But copyright owners prove damages by number of torrent file downloads pretty easily.
Nonassortative relationships between nodes are typical in complex networks
This person has also stated the Linux kernel is hard-coded for 8 cores.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38260935
> Seems like a topic where everyone has made up their mind and will only accept data if it aligns with their world view.

I'm kind of between both camps. I actually like in-office work, but the combination of 1) facilities pursuing bad office plans (open-offices, hot desking) and 2) the rise of remote work and distributed teams makes RTO pretty unappealing.

Co-located in-office work also makes me feel a lot more secure. It's much harder to form social bonds remotely, which makes you much more isolated and replaceable. Remote work pretty ruthlessly cuts away all relationships except direct working relationships, and even makes those much flatter and less warm. It's easier for a higher up to fire someone they don't know, and fewer of your peers will care or even notice if you leave.

Also, here's your daily reminder that an offshore job is a remote job, so once you're no longer in an office you've removed a big speed bump for replacing you.
Doesn't even need SSD's to open a side-channel: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/CAKDzk=-HZardsLFH5c9HYre...
… What would you _expect_ a minority shareholder in a private company to say?
It looks interesting. But how do you change wheels? From the video there's no obvious way, and I'll assume the wheels must be very expensive - if all we see in the video is built in.
Where I live I change wheels twice a year, for winter and summer (vastly different tires, and there's no way around that). So, to start with, I have to buy 8 wheels (9 actually, as my car has a spare wheel too, and that's also necessary here). That will cost a lot, it seems, and then - can I even change wheels?
> Several former lab members provided details of experimental data from Zlokovic’s lab that they say were falsified. These included experiments referenced in the whistleblower dossier. In some cases, they said, data points that would have invalidated the desired results were removed. “It was not real science. He already knew what he wanted to say” before the experiment was completed, one says. “I started hating science. … It made me sick.”

> Two of the insiders also say Zlokovic sometimes had his team improperly alter existing notebooks. Normally these notebooks—in which scientists record details of their work as it proceeds—provide a ground truth for an experiment’s methods and results. As a result, they’re also often central to misconduct investigations.

> But two of the former lab members say that after an experiment was completed and its results published, Zlokovic sometimes admonished his scientists to make sure the notebooks were “clean.” That was understood to mean pasting into them printouts of the published results and methodology or omitting contrary details that challenged the paper’s conclusions. Zlokovic explained that those changes were needed in case of an “audit,” according to the two scientists.

Those allegations are pretty damning if they are true. Falsifying lab notebooks is very obvious scientific misconduct, and there are no benign explanations for that.
We apologize for an problems you may have with your experience ending.
What happens to io when ldd is run on a program ?
Why doesn't a program that modifies a file not do the same when ldd is run on it ?
Reminding me of an old joke:

Why are the streets of Paris lined with trees?
So the German soldiers can march in the shade!

;-)
The expression used in Blighty is piss artist.

A piss artist isn't a drunk. They are somebody who elevates drinking to an art form.
Region-beta paradox
> I think a simple piece of advice (stolen from Tuft) is to not use colors unless you really need to.

Funny, read your comment as my copy of Tufte's VDoQI is open to page 154:

"Color often generates graphical puzzles. Despite our experiences with the spectrum in science textbooks and rainbows, the mind's eye doe not readily give a visual ordering to colors, except possibly for red to reflect higher levels than other levels [...] Attempts to give colors an order result in those verbal decoders and the mumbling of little mental phrases [...] Because they do have a natural visual hierarchy, varying shades of gray show varying quantities better than color."
> I think it's great that we've gotten to a point where people can pick and choose what is best for them!

They often can't, though. Companies change policies after being hired (mine did), the job market is hard (my son has had his start date pushed back 2x now for a total of over a year), and a lot of time this "choice" of job is not in a context you can deal with. I want to go into the office, but I'd have to move to do it. I want to WFH, but I can't find anyone to hire me for the $ I need to live where I do.

Moving isn't an option for many.
The part you did not quote is that, at the time the Shuttle was being designed, 2/3 of satellites launched were in geosync orbit. Looking them up now, Palapa B-2 and Westar 6 were both intended to be in GEO but failed, and were retrieved in LEO.
Nothing you just described requires an entanglement with full-time technical cofounder. I could get a ROM estimate on, say, your lathe from a product design/engineering firm for a few thousand bucks, use that as PRD + go/no-go, then take it to prototype/evt/dvt/pvt with any number of experienced partners on contract.

Don't know why we're having this argument. Outsourcing is a very common thing.
Is there a plan to release this package as a docker image?
I think the hard problem is that if science was direct, most of the population - the majority, are either not intelligent enough to understand it or not intelligent enough to understand why it is that way.

Take masking for example, and here is a bomb most people are totally unaware of:

You want the population to wear masks so that the sick people are wearing masks. Masks aren't going to do much to prevent healthy people from getting sick. But they will do a lot to stop sick people from getting others sick.

This truth is almost never communicated though. Why? Because then wearing a mask becomes a "mark of illness" and nobody wants to label themselves as sick or potentially sick. So the solution to this is everyone wears a mask all the time. But you cannot communicate this whole scenario either because most people aren't smart enough to grasp it or not smart enough to understand why they need to wear a mask healthy or sick.

So this is the kind of problem science faces, and frankly I think the best thing to do is exactly what they did: Insinuate that wearing a mask protects you and insist everyone wear a mask.
> it's hard to imagine starting remote and then going in person, but I guess that's possible too

wasn’t github started remote-only and then went to some in-person?
Is that what an MoE is? I thought LLMs in an MoE talk to each other and come up with the response together.
No, I totally agree. I just wouldn't use cabal or conspiracy because it is happening in broad daylight.
Yeah, well today's tribes/states also participates in what happened. So unless they condemn, stop doing what they're doing and separate it's all the same people.

I get they may come from various backgrounds centuries ago, but today it makes no difference.
I’m sure everyone is a 5% edge case somewhere
Agree, it's right in the FAQ:

> I don't code but this looks awesome! Can I still help?

> Absolutely! There will be art, documentation, testing, UX and UI work, [...].

I read this and immediately think the project sees UX as "I can't write code ell oh ell". You need to treat a UX role the same way you treat a kernel hacker role - it's a specialist whose input you must respect, or be left to deal with the consequences.
Cool, it sounds like Skyfield is intentionally made interoperable with AstroPy:

> While Skyfield itself has no dependency on the AstroPy library, it’s willing to accept AstroPy time objects as input and return results in native AstroPy units
I don't see a conflict. They're able to execute large projects without changing their minds about them. That doesn't make them unable to change their minds.

You may recall that in 2020, they suddenly withdrew the production/export licenses for something like half of the rare earth production on short notice.
The Phuck - who is that allowed?!!! <after review> Ah - there are some quirks allowed by PCI from device to device (E2E) with TLS.
>that means thousands of people read them

ahah, if only that were the case :)

"read" is a pretty loose term. I think its a house of cards. When you cite something, you do so (usually) because it supports your paper, basically "X did Y and we need Y to be true for the foundations of this paper." When you cite "X", you do so with the assumption that X did their due diligence and peer review would have caught any issues... but its still only an assumption. If you had to re-create every experiment for every paper you cite, I'm not sure if one would ever actually finish their own research.

I have only ever published one paper though, so take what I say with a grain of salt. It's just my experience.
I’m trying to think about what the authors unspoken “better approach” could’ve been, because I’m with you—that doesn’t strike me as remarkable at all, it seems like it’s the way things have always been.

Maybe they were trying to argue that for something as simple as that, it could’ve been a div with a background and a font icon, and used CSS to make the div into a circle, and rotate that? It certainly seems more complicated at a glance, but I’m not a frontend dev, so, who knows?
I had to develop some email templates a while back for the first time and was almost shocked that they still use the "tables method" for layouts. Overall I'd say developing email templates now is much like developing websites in the early 2000's, email clients have such a wider range of CSS support that there are hacks all around. We now have frameworks like MJML and Foundation that do their best to abstract all that stuff away through components but take a look under the hood at the rendered HTML and it's a very scary and nostalgic place.
Fair, agreed.
They're essentially saying that between a quarter and a half of work days are spent at home. They're not saying that WFH won, or that RTO won, and technically they're not even saying that hybrid won. Measuring "work days" is useful in some ways, but I'd like to know about the percentage of fully remote, fully in-office, and hybrid office jobs.

I suspect that a hybrid of in-office and WFH work is probably where we are settling, and I think that's far from ideal. With hybrid, you don't get the mobility you get with working from home: you can't live where you want, because you still have to commute into the office a couple days a week. From the business' perspective, you don't get the benefits of hiring people from other time zones (the greater size of the talent pool and, if you are despicable, the option to pay people less for the same result because they live somewhere else). You still have to pay for commercial real estate, even when it's not fully occupied. And, unless everyone's in-office on the same days—which is not the norm with hybrid offices—you still get all the annoyances of having Zoom calls. In other words, I think we're in the process of settling into a mistake. No surprise there I guess.

It would be better, in my view, for some companies to be 100% WFH, and other companies 100% in-office. The "native" remote companies I've worked for, the ones who were built around being remote, for were highly productive. Some office-centric companies I've worked for were productive, too. I've not worked for a hybrid company that was really very good.
RTO was a way for companies to encourage employees to quit without the need to pay severance. Once those people left then additional downsizing happened. For the most part this has already taken place. Companies that were going to play that game are done and companies that didn't need to downsize never played.

I doubt any of this posturing was about effectiveness of remote, hybrid, or in office work.
Because leadership in companies tends to be a bunch of baby ducks. They'll latch on to something they think is the mama duck of good business practices and follow it off a cliff.
Many people refusing to return to the office will complain when their salaries adjust to the new normal.
Yea people say don't sweat the comp difference but I'm pretty frugal, living with my parents and have a savings rate of ~75%. Thus I assume my rate would go down to 40%-60% but I'd still net more and have more $$ to invest.

Unfortunately my company doesn't have jobs in the places I want to go to. Well it does have a nice location in the Valley, and I've tried to work out there but then COVID happened; recently a team I wanted to go onto disbanded, another team got let go. I'm just not happy with the direction we're going in.

I guess I should define my career goals as well. Near term, I'd either want to work at a FAANG or a startup, but as I said before I have a wide range of interests. I could see myself working on robot architecture / integration, VR headsets and application, computer vision for flying cars. One thing I think about a lot is that if I choose one of these niches, is that hindering me from exploring the other ones a year or two after that? I've enjoyed my current role a lot in that I've been able to be a generalist and play around with a lot of different technologies, which I like. This makes it difficult to even start haha.

Long term is also difficult to say, as the tech scene is moving so quickly it's hard to visualize where I'd like to find myself. I'm also not part of any tech community or club that has a lot of visioneering people; I used to be future-focused and had a group of like-minded friends but they've all either left or COVID killed the interactions.
The counterpoint is that pointing out to boomers that Poland and China are multiple decades ahead of us in nuclear technology, tends to make them "hungry" to invest in the technology. (They live in a thoughtset that America Exceptionalism must be real)
Businesses don’t really exist, they are an imaginary construct that we’ve come up with to help organize resources, ultimately in the interests of working together.

Business isn’t more important than anything. There are multiple users, sometimes with competing interests; you can’t be everywhere and everything, so you have to prioritize. Going after more profitable users or users that align with some long-term strategy could be seen as “good for the business,” but really the goal is to serve the users (it might just take a couple extra steps).

When the internal politics get confused to the point that people are making decisions just to further the interests of the business without figuring out how it leads to user happiness, the organization has become poisonous. It shouldn’t exist anymore. It might lurch on in a zombie state for quite some time. But it is on the decline, and all the good people will leave.
Dunno, I use FF on all my PCs with a variety of configurations and do not experience the GitHub slowdown referenced earlier.
you can always do geo and browser signature checks aginst sessions
I tried to, but the quality just isn't there. Eventually I'd like to, only if I can get the accuracy down.
I agree with you in this instance, as early adoption for a project like this relies on people being able to find it and the more people who do and try it, the more testing is done to improve the entire project. I'm reminded of my time on helpdesk when getting people to click on the browser bar was nearly impossible and it basically didn't matter how I asked them to do it. Either they would click into their search bar or they would somehow append the URL to their homepage URL. I learned that my intentions and efforts to do something a certain way don't matter at all if someone else is incapable of doing something I think they can do.

This name is the same way. If someone searches for RavenOS there's another project named that[1]. If they don't see that, they will probably be redirected to RaveOS[2], see "ah cryptocurrency mining" and then back out. Finally, if they miss both of those, there is an Android ROM called Raven OS[3] they might also find. No matter their intention, if people can't find it easily after it being mentioned in conversation it will be harder to grow.

1. https://github.com/raven-os
2. https://raveos.com/
3. https://techkaran.co.in/2022/02/20/official-android-12-raven...
You are describing MacOS 9.

The ribbon had all the settings for the OS, and was always a click away. Finder worked out of the box. These days, copy-paste is hit or miss, and the window manager can’t be reliably controlled via the keyboard.

Also, even in first party apps, keyboard shortcuts are completely inconsistent. Command-0 no longer reliably restores the main window. In maps, Command-L doesn’t focus the location bar like it does in safari; it repositions the map to your GPS location.

Even the keyboard is a shitshow. Notes aggressively autocorrects technical terms to random words on the latest MacOS, but nothing else does, and I can’t find the second “turn off autocorrect” setting that it must be using instead of the OS-wide one (which is definitely disabled).

Current OS X’s UI and filesystem layout are a cruel parodies of OS 9. It’s like a bunch of Shoggoths or an army of slightly better LLMs tried to recreate OS 9, borg-style.

Apple mostly adds software features by acquiring stuff, storyboarding UIs, demoing a prototype to an exec, and then shipping it, so I guess that’s how it got so weird.

Anyway, I wouldn’t say the result has finesse.
But is there any way to know the difference?
Peer (or any type of institutional) review needs to be implemented at the national level--same as the funding for the original research. Why would you pay for research and not check that it is correct? Congress needs to fund a new science agency that explicitly does this. I have suggested before that part of graduate training should be replicating select studies that are published (a national review board could select those that seem the most high impact). State-funded schools could take this on, and students would probably learn at least as much doing this as they do in their other studies.
Performed by is a normal usage as well. See every pop musician who doesn't write their own music, performs it, and is commonly known by every human person to have ownership of that song.

"I Will Always Love You" BY Whitney Houston

"Fuck You" BY Cee Lo Green

I win. Try again next time. Bye.
That's not Booking.com's fault though. Many hotels are hopelessly behind the times and they don't have the capability to process the charges any other way and so there is quite a bit of pressure on booking.com to keep this functionality alive. This is a problem all over the hospitality industry. At least PCI/DSS compliance ensures that there is some minimum level of security involved and ultimately the merchant that is the recipient of that information is on the hook for all of the charges they make if you should dispute them. Credit cards have more consumer protection built in than most other forms of payment.

If they wouldn't send the card information 'in plain text' it would be useless to the hotel. And every time you visit a hotel and hand them your card they tend to make an imprint of the card, the only thing the hotel doesn't have is the CVC and in the normal flow this isn't exposed, only when you escalate to some level of exception (and I'm not sure what the criteria are for that).
And NATO wanted it under their influence, I mean that is just the game of geopolitics.