skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Look at that chart, we changed the way we measure temperature in the 1960's with the introduction of digital thermometers. Prior to that we utilized mercury or worse alcohol. The chart itself raises the question(s) I just highlighted. Further, prior to WWII there was not "global monitoring" of temperature; let's highlight this comment:

> Remarkably, despite the differences in methodologies used by these independent researchers, their global temperature estimates are all in close agreement

Let's assume that's true (which I would argue is not true), even "similar" results will have a 2-5% fluctuation -- which is the entire range of the increase in temperatures. If something reads 98.2 one year and the prior reading is 97.3 we have a 0.9 increase in temperature, but in reality it could be the margin of error based on cloud cover or a change in instrumentation. We simply don't know. The article you linked admits as such:

> Each organization uses different techniques to make its estimates and adjusts its input data sets to compensate for changes in observing conditions, using data processing methods described in peer-reviewed literature.
I am not sure why everyone is holding back on using the “L” word. The surface images of Bennu alone should have been enough. You can see the remains of what looks like marine animals (rocks shouldn’t have bilateral symmetry). The samples returned have amino acids which is exactly what proteins structures would decay to over billions of years. So bennu is likely remnants of a planet with life (either debris or an attempted seed packet). So let’s get this conversation moving! We only have 5 billion years left on earth. At the rate we are going we won’t have any of those critters named by then. -Not that anyone asked me but I recommend naming them all versions of either Cthulhu or Gilgamesh.
> I'm not aware

This public admission is a great start; keep going.
> Things are doing great while: [...]

>Fudging the statistical measures by which we define economic slumps or saying its all cool cause Wall Street is recovering doesn't change what reality is for the average person

But so far as I can tell indicators like GDP or unemployment were used for decades, and they haven't changed the methodology for those. Therefore I'm really sure what you mean by "fudging". However all the other indicators that you've listed are real and point to real issues, but aren't traditionally used in economic contexts. If anything changing the goalposts from gdp/unemployment to "Drug usage increasing" or whatever seems much closer to the "fudging" that you're decrying against.
It’d be easier to have productive conversations if you just plainly stated your position on the topic at hand, if you have one.
I'm personally devoting my career to AI safety, on a volunteer basis, because I think it's is legitimately of high importance. (See my blog, e.g. https://amistrongeryet.substack.com/p/implications-of-agi, if you want to understand where I'm coming from.)

What makes you think it is for show?
In other words, when we say "nutritional value", what we mean is carbohydrates.

This is something that everyone understands when we're talking about bears, but somehow forgets when we're talking about people. Those "empty" carbs are 99% of the reason you eat anything. "Nutritional value" and "energy content" are the same thing.
In the US, company B would probably be in the clear--at least for the list of names and numbers. You don't necessarily get copyright protection just because something was a lot of work ("sweat of the brow"). The most relevant US Supreme Court case is Feist.
Im sure immigrants leave places, that are too expensive, all over the world. Especially compared to eastern block countries, the North Americas are very expensive.
A problem with science vs popular opinion is that science is gathering new knowledge that justifies reevaluating our old (often simple) patterns and adopting new (often more complex) ones. But people are resistant to change and also prefer simple solutions. I haven't seen any general solution to that.

The cases you cite began with simplified solutions, to try to get people to adopt change. Then it turned out that the solutions were actually oversimplified and harmful without broader context.

What should we do when clearly doing nothing is also a problem?
There are two lengths I'm familiar with though I'm not an expert, the short for regular hot dogs one commonly sees on supermarket shelves in the USA and the long for foot long hot dogs and those breads in the photograph appear longer than the long or maybe just much wider than the long ones I've seen. Also, having a hot dog at a sit down restaurant would be slightly unusual for two adults in my experience, it's more a street/fair food or sports audience vendor food for people on the go that is easily eaten without a plate and utensils for the most part.
> Of course if you convince the populace that fat is evil and you can avoid weight gain just by avoiding dietary fat that food companies will respond accordingly.

But was it really scientists who convinced the populace that fat is evil? Or was it journalists, public commentators and business interests who convinced the populace that fat is evil, based on scientists' (retrospectively mistaken) results suggesting that substituting dietary fat in favour of carbohydrates was likely to improve certain health conditions?
I don't disagree there are uses for stored procedures - but the question as stated is about CRUD operations, not about complex queries or reporting.
Eh. The model he describes is actually standard for analytics.

And because it's standard there are literally databases designed and optimized to do what he says. It's not madness when it already exists and is really common.

Think, redshift, snowflake, biq query, clickhouse..

Additionally their already exists user interfaces and web services that already do what he says.

Datadog, splunk, Google analytics... Anything related to logs, analytics and aggregation of those analytics. What he proposes actually already exists.

That being said I don't agree with the articles point to replace everything with this model. Usually these types of services target very specific use cases.

I think your reaction is a bit extreme here. I don't agree with his proposed model but I see where he's coming from and it's not that the model won't work... It's been proven to work from all the examples I gave above.

The problem with it is that it's just slower and much more complicated. But his proposal does increase the capabilities of your data.

You can increase speed by having a pre-caching layer for your aggregations. Basically what was originally your static store is now a caching layer where the developer or user pre specifies an aggregation that the system should count live as the events come in as well as throwing the events into the event db. If when querying for that aggregation you get a "cache miss" then it hits the event layer and has to do the aggregation job live.

So essentially if you build it like this you have all the capabilities and speed of your original static data store but now you have the ability to re aggregate events differently so you have MORE ways to deal with your data. It can work and it will have more features its just really really really complicated to make an entire system centered around events. Additionally theres also a boatload of extra data to deal with which is another engineering problem.

That's why when people do build these systems it's usually centered around some business requirement that absolutely needs this ability to dynamically query and aggregate events. Logs and analytics being the two big ones. Or some service to data scientists as well.

The theory behind it is attractive. All static data can be represented as a series of events. In fact static data is simply the result of a certain of aggregation query on an event database. It's attractive to use smaller primitives in programming and build higher level abstractions through composition so this style of event driven services seems more fundamental and proper. But of course like I said there's practical issues with it when you look past the theory such that this model is usually only applied to the specific use cases I mentioned above.

So there is a failure here. Not of your intelligence. Failure of your experience.

And as I side note I agree with you on the tone of the article. He's trying to be witty but he's trying too hard.
B&O will have to build hand carved (wooden) or CNC milled electronics that borders on art. Hopefully the’ll incorporate upgradeable CPUs or microcontrollers then to really make it timeless.

I can possibly see a direction there.
New red galaxies turn out to be already known blue galaxies
On the subject of habit change, I think the author makes some interesting points, but there’s a failure mode lurking here.

Sometimes unhealthy habits did form for a reason, but trying to understand those reasons isn’t always necessary or even helpful, and can seriously hold a person back from making positive life changes. Some habits are inherited through conditioning, and the original factors are long lost memories.

I think the potential failure mode is a kind of Learned Helplessness. Here’s this thing that I do, and I don’t understand why no matter how hard I try. If I wait to change until I understand, I might never change.

In these cases I think it’s most important to evaluate whether the habit is indeed something that I don’t want, and leave it at that while I go about making the effort to change it.

Time and time again, I’ve found that the thing stopping me from doing the thing that I know I should want to do - is thinking about it too much. It’s possible to get trapped in thought processes that go nowhere because the habit itself doesn’t actually make rational sense.

It’s often not until I’ve started to make a change that I realize why I was doing the old thing in the first place.

When the fences are internal/psychological, I think there’s more latitude and just jumping in and trying new things can be incredibly useful.

Understanding the function of unhealthy habits can absolutely be helpful, and habit replacement is most effective when you understand what you’re replacing, but don’t let a lack of understanding be a fence of its own.
My point is that in order to evaluate what is the optimal solution going forward you have to look at what's already been done. It matters.

If you're asked to take over the completion of a project it matters whether it's 20% done or 80% done.

The sunk cost fallacy isn't about it not mattering what has been done.

Sunk cost reasoning typically applies to a situation where some cost has been spent or effort made which was largely or entirely a waste. We continue to be emotionally attached to the effort or cost even though most of it was wasted. The cost or effort are irrecoverable and have not resulted in any benefit so which means we're emotionally it has to nothing real at all, only a memory of the past.

In order to go forward you have to look at what's been done. But that means looking at the actual effect or result, the state of it, and not the effort or cost.

If you're thinking about throwing away some result but you actually need it then the effort to recover that result is relevant and should factor into your reasoning. That's a future effort, not necessarily the same as the past one, but the password could be a good estimate for it.

If you've been refactoring all day and one test is broken, should you scrap it? Don't look at the "all day" sunk costs, but a realistic estimate. Having done the refactoring once already, maybe you could re-do a very similar refactoring in two hours. So that's what it is.

In a word, don't confuse replacement cost with sunk cost.
Scientists should stop trying to make policy off the back of their studies, which are too narrow to provide a full picture of something like food and environmental issues.
It would be, if it had a bearing on reality. Your fantastical scenario is only relevant for sailors before they ate limes.
A steak has 58mg of Magnesium.

The rda for a male is 400+mg.

Unless you’re eating tons of pumpkin seeds everyday, everyone is missing the mark.

And magnesium deficiency is implicated in depression, anxiety, etc.
Has your career taken you across many different programming paradigms?

A C programmer with no experience in concatenative or, especially, functional languages will have little chance of understanding code written in Forth or Haskell. They will have to start at the bottom of the learning curve.

The differences between languages aren't just skin-deep. Same goes for the design patterns in those languages. Haskell's applicatives have no analog in C, for instance.
I love this, it might be really useful with MFEs. I'm not sure what I would use it for, but it tickles me pink!
The HN guidelines don't say anything about transcripts: "If you submit a video or pdf, please warn us by appending [video] or [pdf] to the title." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Mostly better from the client project where we run them. Haven't had as many disruptions since shifting from their nomad offering to machines.

I have some reservations about machines but none of them have been actual problems yet :)
It sounds like you did not remove the fence, you replaced it.
Side note, have you tried a firmware update with the Xbox controller, inside the Xbox app for Windows? It helped me a lot, especially earlier generation / early production units.

(But yes, I always have issues with Bluetooth on Windows too)
If the standard is that we maintain fences that don’t have an articulated justification, we will end up with fences that are necessary, but which don’t have an articulated justification. They may be justifiable, but without that justification articulated, we have don’t really have an easy way of telling which are justifiable.

Chesterton finds himself surrounded by fences which have no articulated justification, but which might be necessary/justifiable. This is a predicament of his own making. If he and everyone else in the town always bulldozed any fence they came across which doesn’t have a justification, people who want fences would start writing down why they’d put them there.

This would be helpful, because not only will it tell us which fences shouldn’t be torn down. It would tell us which fences we should actively maintain.
Clever. But aside that that it would be hardly appropriate for a generic spinlock implementation, I'm not sure how would you thread a store-store dependency without a store fence (a load-store dependency would work of course, but that's not enough).

I.e. how do you make your spin lock release store depend on all stores in the critical section? A store->load->store wouldn't work because of store buffers and load forwarding.

[Edit: another way of saying this is that there is no store equivalent of load_consume]

But I'm really only familiar with x86 and I do not know all the control and data dependency tricks used in more relaxed arches.
The scientist in this article didn't just "release his results", nor did the anti-fat scientists of the 90s just "release their results".

First, in both cases the science was actually bad science. Here there were tons of other scientists that said their estimates were overrated (and the original authors later admitted as much), and in the nutritionists case there were never any scientific studies that would lead to recommendations against consuming unsaturated fats (there was just an assumption that since fat is denser in calories, cutting back on fat would result in weight loss, which has now been thoroughly debunked).

My point is that if you make a "scientific" recommendation, of course companies will latch on to whatever part is in their economic benefit. That shouldn't be a surprise. So to come back later and say "I didn't think company X would do Y based on my research!" means you're either lying or an idiot.

If instead of going around shouting in tons of interviews about how planting trees can offset carbon emissions, which is what this guy did, he had gone around advocating for preservation of existing habitats and reduction of fossil fuel use (which is what he's doing now), this whole thing could have been avoided. This guy doesn't get a "oh, it's not my fault" pass just because he ignored the obvious consequences of his advocacy.
Imagine if somebody took the right to remain silent to our current Supreme Court and they decided that nobody actually has the right to remain silent.
It's sad that when people say "design" today they mean just make it like others.
> The economy is doing stellar for the upper classes which account for maybe 10 to 15% of the population. That’s the so-called disconnect that the Biden administration doesn’t understand.

It's been also doing great for the lower classes. The bottom quartiles have seen far higher wage growth than the top quartiles.

https://www.atlantafed.org/chcs/wage-growth-tracker
The purchase of a Rolex or Ferrari - or an incredibly overpriced sound system - is an attempt to buy a signal to others that you have taste. In fact you’re signaling how much your lack of taste is costing you.

Sound gear is an excellent case in point. The studio monitors many albums are mixed on are intentionally mediocre (eg the Yamaha NS-10) to ensure it sounds great across a wide range of equipment.

Even great quality studio gear is modestly priced compared to “hi fi” gear.

Don’t try to buy taste. Learn about the subject and then do the work to buy or build something that is reasonably priced and outshines everything else on fundamentals, not on brand.
Apple Fixes Bug Allowing Flipper Zero to Lock Up iPhones
Exactly. Planting a tree should be good independent of anything the human does. That's kind of the point of science. We want to isolate effects and study them independently. And we want to study these effects independently of any political spin. Then society can make a smart decision.
That's incorrect. In the last 30 years (since 1993), we have got class D amplifiers which can be both power-efficient and as flat as human ears can detect, switching power supplies to go along with them, DACs which are both cheap and absolutely transparent, MP3 and other perceptual lossy codecs, FLAC and ALAC, near field scanners to evaluate speaker performance, the Olive scoring method and several preference curves, and extreme improvements in bandwidth and storage.
A bit of an exaggeration because VSCode (on macOS or any other OS) for example does not recognize any Emacs keybindings.

Ditto textareas in Chrome and Firefox.
If there are less minerals than there are more substitutes. Which are also nutrition content with some value.

Therefore we can say that nutrition value increased as well!
How Quantum Computing Works (Guide to the end of encryption as we know it)
The 19th century was a period of intense social change as a result of the mastery of steam and steel. The economies of western European economies changed incredibly fast and national identities began to solidify around the identities of the people living there. The aristocratic tradition prior to the First World War was a result of an already large change from the feudal structure of pre-industrial Europe.

It's interesting to try to draw parallels to the present day, but I think it's most important to remember we are participants of history and to behave as such.
> If only this had been around during my digital signal processing coursework in undergrad.

I hear that.

At my school the course in Fourier Series & Boundary Value Problems was better known to students as "Mystery Math". This because there was typically a single moment of enlightenment.. where suddenly... the entire content of the course became pud.

If this moment of mathematical satori came before the final exam, you were in luck.
I still use a food pyramid as a reference to date! Is there any particular food pyramid you’re thinking of? The idea in itself seems very reasonable to me.
Sure, but that's an extra device (and a stick) to carry around. The killer feature of phones is that a single device handles both your compute and your camera needs. Even if glasses + voice control handled your compute needs, you'd still need a second device to act as a camera.

There are reasons why compact cameras died immediately as smartphones came along.
I feel like I would only use something like this if I had built it myself.
I don’t use nor recommend Google Authenticator. If you want a secure 2FA/MFA, use a hardware token or a passkey. TOTPs without a backup or sync is pain waiting to happen.

Of course, syncing TOTPs comes with its own threat model. Something to keep in mind.
Of course industrial agriculture routinely applies micronutrients, so no, they are not withdrawing without paying in.

Odd that you would be well informed about organic farming circles but blissfully unaware of the routine practice used by the majority of the agricultural industry.
Refactoring explicitly does not remove functionality, and is analogous to replacing the fence, not removing it.
> Look it just makes sense to start out connecting Threads users to a pretty active user base which creates content for Threads users.

Are there any decent analytics of mastodon's network? Threads has many more users than mastodon, and so many keep posting on there about having better engagement than on xitter. Mastodon interop being axed on the threads side would waste so much of their work, unless the mastodon networks themselves start to empty out.

If another protocol becomes dominant, threads might pivot, but I think the current devs I've spoken to are genuine in regards to thinking of threads as just another good part of the fediverse. Mosseri and Zuck have control in the end, but the 18 devs or so that make threads right now seem to have been pretty thrilled by the rollout.
They do hundreds of millions of revenue per year. I'm guessing they're comfortable with that.
Can you cite some sources?
It's possible to use hydrogen to save helium, while keeping it safe. Even the designers of Hindenburg in the 1930s had in mind a design involving hydrogen enveloped by an outer helium layer to make it inert. But a total ban in US helium exports foiled their plans, leading to risky full hydrogen utilization. See <https://www.airships.net/hindenburg/hindenburg-design-techno...>:

"But Hindenburg’s potentially most innovative features were never actually implemented. Hindenburg was originally designed for helium, which was too difficult to obtain and too expensive to be vented to compensate for the weight of fuel burned during flight. To avoid the need to valve helium, several innovative solutions were proposed. One involved a set of inner hydrogen gas cells to be installed at center of 14 of the ship’s 16 helium cells. The flammable hydrogen would be protected inside the larger cell containing inert helium, and when it was necessary to valve lifting gas, hydrogen, rather than helium, could be released. When it became obvious that helium would not be made available by the Americans, and that the ship would be inflated with hydrogen, the inner cells were abandoned, but Hindenburg did retain the axial catwalk at the center of the ship that was installed to provide access to the valves for these inner cells."
No, that's understanding you don't replace a complex system with 1000 variables with a solution of 10 variables.

Soil are complete ecosystems. Plants are complex organisms.

You can dumb it down a lot and get very good result for some time, but eventually what made it anti-fragile, à la nassim taleb, will run out. And your alternative is not anti-fragile.