skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Fine, I’ll elaborate.

The Limits to Growth (the linked text) led directly to the one-child policy in China and forced sterilization in India. Its supposedly scientific recommendations were adopted by the UN, the World Bank, western aid organizations, and the governments of those countries, with evil consequences.

For further reading on the ethical implications, see below:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1506469.stm

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-30040790
So we can conclude that the user (OP) is probably a programmer!
> People can (and do) point at the C spec for fault of this and it is true that if the C spec was more strict then these compilers would not have the free pass to do these crazy miscompilations. However there is nothing stopping these compilers from just not doing that, there is nothing stopping them from just defining their own sane behavior for what the C spec defines as undefined behavior. It is no longer the case where we have a dozen or so C compilers that people need to target with their programs, the spec is not the bottom line anymore.

Some compilers (like gcc and clang) do give you the option to make most undefined behaviors well-defined, using flags like -fwrapv, -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks, -fno-strict-aliasing, etc.

The key thing to understand is that if you use these flags, you opt-in to a non-standard C dialect. Going forward, you are no longer writing C code. Your code is now non-portable. Your code can no longer be compiled by a compiler that does not support these special C dialects.

Using these C dialects is a perfectly sensible thing to do, as long as you understand that this is what you are doing.
The smartphone from 2030 just arrived today [video]
The Race to Put Brain Implants in People Is Heating Up
Banks do not need your deposits to make loans. To be fair, the previous is not 100% correct. They do need some money, but that is just a tiny fraction of the credit they issue (how much depends on the risk factor etc.)

When you go for a loan, and it is approved, the the bank creates a credit line from which you can draw according to terms in the agreement, and it creates an asset representing the future revenue stream of your payments. No 'money' is directly involved.

Once every night a bank's reserves are checked to see wether the bank is in compliance with fractional reserve holdings. Note that while they do need some small % of money at that point, they can actually 'borrow' that money for literally a few seconds, and return it right after the checkup. This is not 'cheating', it is an accepted common practice. That borrowing is not free ofc, so in the long run no bank can stay solvent without having some actual money.
See my other comment:

The Limits to Growth (the linked text) led directly to the one-child policy in China and forced sterilization in India. Its supposedly scientific recommendations were adopted by the UN, the World Bank, western aid organizations, and the governments of those countries, with evil consequences.

Further reading:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1506469.stm

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-30040790
Ignore the naysayers replying to this. I have no vested interest in Xojo except I’ve been coding with it and enjoying it since 2004.
I've experienced this from friends too. Once you say no, their understanding improves as they pick up the work themselves and then they realise that actually, no, it isn't easy or quick.
Their ideas drop pretty quick after that.
It is not a city problem. It is a US city problem, but people are used to it, the are no incentives to make US cities safer.
The biggest reason I think its possible is that there are a lot of different ways you could build a quantum computer. Different groups are exploring building physical qubit systems out of transmons in superconductors, topological systems, linear optics, trapped ions, quantum dots, NMR driven spins, cavity QED and probably many other setups I don't know about.

It would be weird (and scientifically quite interesting) if all of these approaches fail for some reason.
> If you think you own your employees, it's easy to see why they'd want nurses to be subject to non-competes as well.

I think this was their biggest point. I don't think they agree with non competes.
The only exception I could find is in the case of how I used it in this sentence.
Star Wars Holiday Special: 5K 60fps Upscale (1978) [video]
> promises got standardized, even though the node community largely disliked them.

Node is a phenomenal project, but it doesn't dictate the entire direction of the language. I have a hard time chastising TC39 for standardizing promises simply because Node developers didn't like the way it affected their core dumps. Like I said, JS is in a unique position as a language that runs on the server and in the browser. There are lots of stakeholders and not everyone is going to be happy, but I personally prefer promises over the callback hell we had before.

Your comments on Python:

> I'm aware that the python packaging story sucks. However there is broad awareness and strong desire to fix this.

Your comments on JS:

> There's been plenty of time to fix things

Python is one of the oldest programming languages that most engineers will likely ever work with. It was released the same year as Linux. Hasn't Python had "plenty of time to fix things"?

> The Python article you linked itself admits "expirienced people will know what to do, this is not for them".

First of all, the actual quote is "The people that will understand it’s not for them will self-exclude from the recommendations, as they should, since they know what to do anyway." The article also says the following: "I could not tag this as being “for beginners”, because it is not that simple. I know veterans that still struggle with this stuff".

But besides that, why in the world should you have to be an experienced engineer to figure out how to download and run packages of code from the internet? This is table stakes for most languages. You want third party JS frameworks to form a working group to establish interoperability before you'll grant the JS ecosystem your blessing, and yet you'll accept Python generally being bad at packaging code. You'll excuse anything when you're evaluating your favorite languages, but you nitpick when it comes to JS.

> For example, at some (relatively short) point in time around 2019/2020, react-native simply didn't work with pnpm

So you'll accept that the general Python packaging story is bad right now and has been for decades, and your only retort is that for an admittedly short period of time 3 or 4 years ago a single package supposedly had a bug related to pnpm (the least popular package manager)? Meanwhile the Python community is still debating how to install packages locally in a folder [1].

You don't think you're maybe contorting yourself to make some of these arguments work?

[1] https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-582-python-local-packages-d...
Advent of Technical Writing: Being a Technical Writer
Guess that is why many corporate proxies / firewalls block websocket by default...
Nutshell: A tool to make expandable, embeddable explanations
Can anyone quickly explain what's the commercial licencing and patent encumbrances on this?
> which provided memory-safety for many many decades now.

That is a plus, not a minus.
Incredible scientific breakthrough here. Kids may speak sooner and have a better vocabulary if their parents talk more. Almost as if they learn from us. Amazing!
> Have you considered that this might be precisely because Rust is catching and stopping something bad with a safe panic

Absolutely! But I counter: How do you know that all of them are? Or that even many of them are?

The developers that work on it may well know, but it isn't something we can axiomatically assume. It is not a true statement that any rust panic would have been an error in C(++) code written by the same (competent in both) developer.

Increased error visibility can be either more errors or more error sensitivity. It's worth being mindful of this because otherwise we may adopt programming practices that increase the overall defect rate, and think we're making things better.

Perhaps it's easier to see with asserts. If your defect rate is 1 defect per 1000 lines of code, and you go add 1000 asserts you'll add a bug (actually I think you'll add 10: the boundary conditions that asserts test are far more likely than average code to be implemented wrong). Like any other code they could also start off correct but then become desynced with the rest of the code. If you go and ship those asserts in production and the effect of asserting is important in your application, then unless the asserts prevent more bugs than they created you made the program worse off. Even if the asserts don't cause bugs they may make the program harder to maintain or extend. Therefore in any codebase there must be some optimal level of asserts, more or less and the program is worse off.

Is the implicit assertion of rust's behavior optimal? Probably not for all codes, because different codes call for different tradeoffs. Or even for every code there might be language changes that could make things better. But we'll never find out this stuff if we can't admit that there is the potential for uncertainty or improvement and confuse memory safety for program correctness. It's one of the more important aspects of correctness but the world is full of serious bugs in software written in inherently memory safe languages.

And after all, a program consisting of nothing but exit(1) (or perhaps while(;;){}) is the most perfectly memory safe program possible. :P If memory safety were the only goal programming would be much simpler.

> and possibly a portal into the space between dimensions from which optimising compilers will happily allow the Others into our world

As mentioned up thread, rust also can create portals into the hell dimension if there is unsafe code (including in the standard library) that fails to obey all the not-very-simple contract requirements. Also the number of times errant C code has actually opened a portal in to the hell dimension thereby destroying the universe is greatly overstated, that's only happened twice at most, usually undefined behavior is just a crash or an exploitable misbehavior that lets some haxor steal your data and those can also happen from pure logic errors (or a panic, in the case of a crash). I do fully agree that narrowing the potential for UB misbehavior is very important and rust is an important advance there. But Rust doesn't just do that. It also has its own costs and quirks.
"Worse Is Better", as a description of a set of engineering values embodied by C, is from 1989.

I'm taking your word for it that UB was invented for C standardization (I have no knowledge of that history, and your claim seems plausible), and I'm going to say that probably they didn't invent it in the last year of the seven-year standardization effort, so probably UB is older than Worse Is Better.
> It was a very different world, and just being able to write in a higher-level language than assembly on a particular computer was a big deal.

It was different then, but not by too much. Our tooling, languages, etc, has improved yes, but the underlying hardware still exists and occasionally the general solution provided by our improved tooling is sub optimal for our use case.

I actually _like_ where C has wound up. I have way better static analysis tooling at my disposal than I had 15 years ago and I can use a "memory safe" language like python or OCaml and say "hey, I know better here", think carefully, and push the memory safe compiler out of my way.
I think it is a good outcome for Cilium. With the extent of open-source, it would have been difficult to grow their ARR. Good outcome imho, because Cisco is a networking company at heart and they know how to grow a network/security business.
Greenwald was in a relationship with a partner half his age.
The problem with topics bans is that you can sabotage topics you don't like to silence them. E.g. Rust evangelicals could have been silenced quite easely by flame baiting their posts.
Neocities – Developers API
I think you are wrong on both parts.

Cognitive / Narrative warfare has become part of standard doctrine for most major militaries.

Earlier discussion about "corporate" spin offs from the intelligence sector. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34803779

Looking how many countries backed the current Israeli government for how long despite targeting the civilian population, as well as stuff like OP on most major platforms they seem to be horrifically effective.
There are ways around that, e.g: number the slides like 1/7, 2/7, 3/7 so people roughly know where we are in the presentation, even better if you can time it, e.g: 1'/20, 3'/20, 7'20.
Others have already correctly pointed out that you'll need a (periodic) interrupt source and facility to handle such. As the Z80 doesn't provide a protected or system mode, it needs to be a non-maskable interrupt, which the Z80 fortunately does provide (iirc, that wasn't used in the Amstrad computers though).

Sure you'll need to save the registers, but you could do that using the stack as well. The second register set just makes it quicker.
Maybe related to the massive amount of microplastifs, PFAs (both strong endocrine disruptors) and air pollution, the use of a tremendous amounts of pesticides and weed killers forbidden in other countries, and consuming a diet rich in antibiotics fed poultry and beef (red meat is a known carcinogen) could be a tiny but contributing factor?

Or not, and this will forever remain a medical mystery.
I'm intrigued by Buck2, do you have good resources on learning it? Last time I checked it was still a bit early and I had issues finding out how to migrate our Bazel build to Buck 2.

The single phase build is amazing as a concept.
>The CO2 emitted by the car during it use,( and you are correct, only ocassional few weekends use) is a rounding error.

Source?

Intuitively, I guess the weight of the consummmed gas quickly exceeds the weight of the car.

CO2 adds 2 O to one C once emitted…
> Think about things like "wildlife disruption from a car-centric culture with lots of roads,"

But now you're making a context-specific argument. It's not about the car, it's about where you put the roads. And then you have to weigh that against alternatives. If you replace cars with buses, you still need roads. Trains need tracks etc.

> "microplastics from tires," etc.

But this isn't any worse than ICE cars. Making some things better and some things the same is a net improvement.

And you could conceivably address this by making tires out of something else regardless of what kind of powertrain you're using.

> One may reasonably argue that these are less important impacts than CO2 emissions, and make one's arguments (I think quite reasonably so), but to round all these to zero for renewables is dishonest, at best.

It doesn't have to be zero if it's less than the cost of oil exploration, production, refining and distribution, which is the status quo.

> The same goes for the amount of mining required for the raw uranium to be refined into nuclear fuel - quite a bit of earth has to be extracted and processed to get the fuel quantity. Again, I think it's lower impact than fossil fuels, but it's certainly not zero - by quite a large amount.

The difference between the energy content per kg of burning oil and fissioning uranium is literally more than a factor of a million. The amount of uranium you need by comparison is basically zero.

> "Because the cars weigh about the same, they have the same production impact," when one has a thousand pounds of lithium ion battery pack.

Lithium battery packs are only a single digit percentage lithium by weight. The lithium isn't a large proportion of the mass of the vehicle. The largest component of the mass of the battery is typically graphite, followed by aluminum.
Oh, this is fun! I love the idea of simple games like this and stranger.video!
The irony of indexing being Google does not want to be index by others and prohibits scraping in their ToS
Procedures and flows is a big one. It really helps for understanding the "flow" of processes and making sure you don't spend too much precious time in the cockpit repeating the same things just to try to get in the habit of e.g., the flow of engine start, going through your checklists, doing crosswind corrections, etc.

For the feel and the mechanics of flying VFR, there's nothing you can do except build that intuition, feel, and muscle memory in the aircraft itself. But I disagree it's useless for all aspects of VFR training.
Up to a certain price point, restaurant websites are inversely correlated with food quality. Presumably, once they get successful enough to charge for fine dining, they can also afford to pay for a decent website.
They were originally charging money for a service using third party servers without permission and which was obviously going to stop working (if nothing else, when the spam protection kicks in because they had thousands of people on the same device ID).

Removing this sounds like protecting Google's customers.
Even their updated 2017 demands did not include peace with Israel if met. They offered only a ceasefire in exchange for 1967 borders, not a permanent peace deal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas

Anyway, they've shown their true colors at this point; very different statements recently:

> Since the shocking Hamas attack on Oct. 7, in which Israel says about 1,400 people were killed — most of them civilians — and more than 240 others dragged back to Gaza as captives, the group’s leaders have praised the operation, with some hoping it will set off a sustained conflict that ends any pretense of coexistence among Israel, Gaza and the countries around them. “I hope that the state of war with Israel will become permanent on all the borders, and that the Arab world will stand with us,” Taher El-Nounou, a Hamas media adviser, told The Times.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/08/world/middleeast/hamas-is...
Except that not every hour is the same. Flying straight and level following a GPS track with no relevant weather or traffic anywhere near accumulates a different kind of experience than other kinds of situations (bad weather, complex airspace, other traffic, ...).

Number of landings is probably more relevant for survival.
One of the reasons C became popular because the compiler was actually reasonable to use on the hardware of the time.
Can you also compensate against decoherence? I thought this is the magic limit when the QC breaks.

See also: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/decoherenc...
You also don't need to FFI into some buggy C library to violate memory safety with ctypes. It's trivial to produce a segfault with it without using anything but ctypes itself, which is part of the standard library. I doubt I'd have much trouble finding other ways to make a segfault with pure python and the standard library (struct springs to mind).

CPython really isn't very safe at all. Its focus has always been on being a convenient, dynamic scripting language with minimal-fuss access to native code. It has never been hard to violate its internal assumptions and it probably never will be.

And I'm pretty comfortable with that, FWIW.
It doesn't have to be 200k above in a single transaction to upset the "poorer" market. When you've just sold your house at a big capital gain, you're more willing to pay just a little bit over the average market value if you find something nice, even without being conscious of the fact (buying something is never a perfect decision, you have a span and can be pushed in either direction a bit). And that little bit over feeds the trend delta when lots of buyers think like that over time.

I think that logic ties in with the theme of the article as well. Supply and demand regulates markets in a subtle way, it's not a binary input like "people want to live in SF or not". Maybe it's enough that 1/10 of the people who wants to move there changes their minds when they see the housing market.
Very cool piece of work. Little bit weird that Springfield gets to be the other illustrated city in Massachusetts when Worcester is the second biggest city in the entire region after Boston.
> The most important function of modern society

that is extreme hyperbole making hard to treat your comment seriously.
The really amazing thing is that is the same combination I have on my luggage.
The innovation is the modification of the neural network architecture to incorporate the spatial-aware visual sampler. The data and existing models are not the interesting part.
Yes.

Anyway, what is more important to preserve: artistic choices made according to the medium (which importantly includes the kind of film stock for any movie) or bandwidth?

And, if it's all about bandwidth, why do a high definition version, in the first place, and not stick to the low-bandwidth, but high fidelity 2K transfer?
Montreal is in Canada, you know.
All budget and midrange phones have sdcard slots, but they are kind of useless except for storing photos because Android doesn't support arbitrary mount points, sdcard support must be baked in the apps you use and app data can't be stored on sdcards
Just listen to the live audio between controller and Mr. Russell. Yeah, he confesses he has played videogames and such... his dream came true for a little while.

The most impressive thing is he pulled off successful loop in the sky.

Edit: better link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYpaf8WdppM
Yes. He was 38 when he married his husband who was 20 at the time.

How does this relate to the topic?
Where did you get all this info from?
Is that what it was?

I though it was when the car is on a dyno only the drive wheels turn while the other 2 are stationary.
> and to top it off bundler, and Ruby version manager again were just largely copied over to Python as pip and venv.

Python’s venv is so much better than whatever Ruby has.
I had a job working on an ecommerce site for a company that sold wine direct to consumers. On my first day, a coworker asked me, “What will you do when the website is finished?”

It was interesting to reflect on the misconceptions inherent in her question. The website is never finished. She didn’t understand that maintenance and upgrades are ongoing, and this is the nature of software.

That said, I do wonder if AI will make OP’s friend’s request seem reasonable. “Hey, ChatGPT, I just need an ecommerce site for a winery that sells to consumers. Can you walk me through how to build that?”
As far as I know that is the reason why Matrix and a few other movies have had such drastic changes in their 4k version.

They are indeed forced to redo all the color timing by going back to the negative. And since they have the opportunity, they go “hey why don’t we just improve the grade”

Leading to a movie that looks completely different.

Somehow this also happened with the French Connection.
Once we had a very smart young guy on work. But he always asked things, even if he knew the answer. It was like a sickness, people refused to work with him, because of his many also stupid questions. So I told him he can ask me anything, but he allways has to present at least two ideas to solve the problem. He always came with a possible solution and if I asked him witch solution then the better would be, he always picked the right one. After a very short time he asked much less and it was much more calm to work with him.
I doubt we can model it in a way that is useful.

We have many examples of us both adapting and failing to adapt, and can therefore say things like "adapts X% of the time", except in those cases the solution has often been "move elsewhere and/or fight other people" which I think isn't useful because it doesn't work so well on a planetary scale unless and until interplanetary travel is as easy as the Mayflower/Plymouth Rock journey.

Might still be useful for general governance just by characterising dangerous parts of the phase space[0] where dragons be so they can be avoided.

[0] how does phase space differ from latent space anyway?