skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> This is pretty weak and unscientific evidence. The author, directly or indirectly, lumps politicians like Bill Clinton and for-profit business like Scripps into the “science” boat, which in my opinion, is bad reporting. Those are not evidence of the academic field gone awry. A small list of gaffs by institutions doesn’t say anything about the magnitude, and completely ignores how much is going right with science.

Hold on, you are omitting Craig Venter in that statement, also importantly it was a science initiative. And to quote wikipedia: "Scripps Research, previously known as The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI),[1] is a nonprofit American medical research facility"
On top of that the section you referring to is a quotation from another article.

> There’s no question that some academic institutions and people get it wrong and/or succumb to dramatic and wrong science, that has always been true. The pressures in science might even be getting worse over time because it’s more crowded and most low-hanging fruit has been picked, so publishing is getting more difficult. (BTW if you haven’t seen BobbyBroccoli’s “The Rise of Jan Hendrik Schön” on YouTube, it’s fantastic and worth watching!)

That's the issue though. As someone on the inside of academia, the pressures to do "publicity" have gone up significantly.

> Even that isn’t evidence of academics getting it wrong in this case, and it doesn’t compare in magnitude to how bad science reporting in the media is. Reporters don’t generally understand the science they report, they are under space and time constraints, and they have every incentive to drop subtlety and magnify drama. There’s not even a question about why science reporting is bad: because almost all reporting is bad for the same reason.

You're absolving academics of responsibility to easily. Just reading the claims in journal articles (and particularly high impact ones like Nature), makes me want to roll my eyes. The impact is typically strongly exaggerated. I understand the reasons, i.e. the journals want to see this high impact, otherwise they don't publish you. Considering that a Nature article can be career defining, it's understandable why academics play the game.

> Academic Science isn’t crap Bill Clinton or Scripps says, it’s a process that assumes nothing is true and seeks truth by testing. There has been nothing better in human history, and nothing that has brought the world further faster, than science. Yes people sometimes corrupt it, because that’s what people do to everything, but the only choice we have is to keep on top of corrupting influences and keep doing science.

I don't think the article claims that science is crap. The argument as I read it is that academics can just only blame others for the bad reporting if they often make the bold claims themselves, approve university press releases which grossly exaggerate impact and are the ones reviewing grants and giving bad marks if there aren't the exaggerated impact statements.
At this point its clear you are not engaging in quality discussion and this is a waste of time. Have a great day.
> it is not. this style is extremely regular, very readable and writable, and escapes a whole galaxy of typical C blunders. i can expand on that if you wish.

Please do! I'd like to learn. If you can expand on this in the README section as well that would be great.
The only thing that's objective about the link you posted is that Firefox release numbers have been consistently going up.
In my case the primary benefit of a toaster is that it requires minimal intervention, not energy efficiency.

When I'm trying to get multiple small humans dressed and fed in the morning I prefer to put all the slices in a toaster oven and set the automatic timer. If I used the oven broiler I would have to manually set timers to remind me to run back to the kitchen and flip the bread. And of course if I forget or can't make it back to the kitchen in time then it doesn't take many burnt-on-one-side pieces of toast to equal the cost of a toaster.

I agree that there are niche kitchen gadgets that are not worth the space but it depends on the person. For example, I do not have a dedicated coffee machine, but many people consider theirs indispensable.
I think the author should have expanded a bit upon "extremely expensive to apply", because that phrase is technically true but really hides the actual problems with formal verification and why it is seldom used in practice.

People unfamiliar with formal verification think it means "the code is provably correct", but that's not what it does. Formal verification can prove that your code correctly implements a specified standard. You still have to define and write that standard. And that's where the problems begin:

- Standards themselves can have bugs, or the standard you wrote is not what you actually wanted. Note that this is the same problem that often occurs in code itself! You've just pushed it up a level, and into an even more arcane and less-debuggable language to boot (formal standards are generally much, much harder to write, debug, and reason about than code)

- The standard is constantly changing as feature requests come in, or the world around you changes. Modern software engineering mostly consists of changing what you or somebody else already built to accommodate new features or a new state of the world. This plays very badly with formal verification.

Formal verification can work in areas where you have a long time to do development, or where your problem space is amenable to having a formal standard (like math problems). In most other cases it just runs completely opposite to the actual problems that software engineering is trying to solve.
Depends, if you're very diligent, you could use a "smart constructor" (in some languages you can make it so there's only one way to construct a type, and then enforce validation at construction time) and instead of taking in a float/int for temperature, take in a Temperature or OutsideTemperature type as an argument.

An interesting implementation of this idea is outlined here too:
https://medium.com/iterators/to-tag-a-type-88dc344bb66c

A strictly newtype can be very powerful, but needing to "unwrap" your datatype to use it in normal operations of that datatype can be a little unwieldy so tagged types are a pretty interesting mechanism that provides type safety and convenience. I don't think it's strictly better though, it depends heavily on context.
The Download: What's Next for AI, and Quantum Computing Challenges
Isn't Intel struggling now because their definition of 'pretty well' wasn't good enough and they lost key people to competitors?
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/driver-api/fpga/index... is the mentioned linux fpga framework, it would be very useful if a userspace API works.
There are always people who wants to unleash their creativity, but that demographic has moved from Web sites to MySpace to Video content.
Apparently the price of these things can make a grown man cry.
Are you really trying to argue with a hacker news poster that people are smarter than mosquitos?
On later DEC terminals you could also set left and right margins (lookup DECSLRM). They didn't support smooth scrolling when those margins were enabled, but I don't see why a modern terminal emulator couldn't handle that.
To Clear or Not to Clear
I'm not suggesting Turbo Pascal was written in Modula2, I'm saying it implemented Modula2, not Pascal. Modula2 is a superset of Pascal. Pascal never had modules AFAIK but Turbo Pascal did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modula-2
Google working on an 'advanced' version of Bard that you have to pay for
Yet another library that would be better served via conan and vcpkg, instead of putting it into std.
As the author of an open source version (https://www.timestored.com/jq/) I wish the same but I fear the time has passed. Two factors:

1. The other technologies are evolving to take parts of kdb+ that made it special quicker than kdb+ is evolving. See arrow / parquet / numpy / kafka, they each solve parts but kdb+ had them all 10 years ago in <2MB.

2. The ratio of learners to advanced programmers has increased every year for the last 20 years. The languages that have gained popularity in that time range are those with the easiest learning curve. Most beginners no longer want to sit with a book frustrated on 2 characters for half a day.
I grant that is a difference. Whether it's enough is arguable but it's a property I didn't notice.
Hmm, still doesn't seem feasible. Even if you only have 256 "relevant" states (which I think you'll agree is far less than what you need) then given a 32-bit input your state transition table is 2^32*256 = 1 Terabyte.

You could shrink your input size to 2 bytes but then you can't work on a word at a time, and for a realistic number of relevant states your transition table is still way bigger than you can fit in even L3 cache.

Unless I am missing something very basic, this doesn't seem like a viable approach.
Not sure historically but at least doing some OLED programming these days it's often the case they support changing where the pointer starts (in terms of rows or columns) and allowing the behavior of wrapping the cursor around, meaning that when you'd do a full scroll the rows simply wrap around. If you don't overwrite anything in the video memory, then you just see the content from the top/bottom show up at the bottom/top, but if you did (e.g. to implement efficient whole-screen scrolling) you just had to re-paint the lines that were offset, instead of the whole screen.

NES (a 6502, if it matters) had a different approach, where you had four sections with their own memory regions for tiles and sprites. You'd then tell the NES how to lay them out, e.g. if they were next to each other, how they'd wrap, if one was duplicated to another slot, etc and then the scrolling was handled by hardware. This is how Super Mario implemented the long sprawling levels (and I believe why the first wouldn't let you go back).

As for e.g. VGA buffers on x86 for example, as far as I know there's no (standard) way to have them shift. I could be wrong. However I've had to write a few vertical scroller rasterizers before for VGA buffers and I've always done them manually, usually with some cleverness to avoid actually writing to the buffer when it wasn't necessary (since that hit a memory mapped region and thus was much slower than RAM).
> You could put 999 into a variable that's supposed to hold the outside temperature

I've never done this, but you could also define types for stuff like this. type: PositiveInteger, or type: BoundedTemperature that would only ever hold valid values.

Or one thing where it might come in handy would be when dealing with user/potentially malicious input - SanitizedString etc.
For a moment I was thinking that perhaps this could be the foundation for something to replace Google Voice for some people. Unfortunately I am not sure that most SIP telephone numbers will be usable for things like account verification.
Do those existing kernel patches support dynamic devicetree overlays in a running system?
There are a few! Depending on what aspect / approach you prefer. These four are my favourites:

"The Nature of Order" (four books!) is the most extensive - beautiful, comprehensive, a little overwhelming, he lays out a broad philosophy of how built up spaces can foster life. Lots of visual examples, but gets pretty conceptual and abstract too.

"The Timeless Way of Building" is a bit more focused, centers around the architectural concerns. More compact, more practical than the Nature of Order.

"Pattern Language" -- you'll see that one suggested a lot. He lays out the concepts of interacting patterns ("best practices") that act on a variety of scales, some more generic, some more abstract. It's less of a read than a reference, but a few chapters lay out the motivations.

"Notes on the Synthesis of Form" - the most far out one of the four suggestions, abstract, philosophical, a rarefied read. Dissects the essence of concepts, defines what "form" is -- fascinating read for sure, and not too long.
> yet studies point to frequent sauna use being associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality

Is this perhaps because frequent sauna access is correlated with higher socioeconomic status/less stress/more free time/etc. What kind of confounding factors did they include in that study?
> For it to be wrong to say "there is no reason to think it will be impossible" you would have to have some theory that suggests it will end up being impossible.

We don't have a theory suggesting it is possible either. We don't even have a theory explaining how superconductors actually work upon which we could ground claims like, "absent very surprising unknown physics, current physics suggests this is possible".

And the evidence hinting at the contrary is not easily dismissed: we've known about superconductors for over a century and we still don't have a complete theory for how and why they work, and all previous discoveries have barely moved the needle on temperature. LK-99 was the first hint of possibly even approaching room temperature and pressure, and it was clearly wrong. This most recent round is almost certainly also wrong.

This situation is simple: we have yet to see a room temperature, ambient pressure superconductor. There are two possible explanations for this observation: either such superconductors are possible and we have not yet discovered how to make them, or they are not possible and we have not yet discovered why.

How do you take this and then infer that "there is no reason to think they are impossible"? That simply does not follow, for there is a reason to think they are impossible per the above two possibilities: we have seen no evidence that they are possible and since we don't understand how superconductors work, room temp superconductors might actually be impossible to construct.

Edit: let's just cut to the heart of the matter, "there is no reason room temp superconductors are impossible" is a proposition about reality, that, among all possible knowns and unknowns, there exist no reasons entailing their impossibility. This far exceeds our knowledge of reality and superconductors specifically. It is simply incorrect to make this claim at this time, at least until such a thing has been created.

My correction was that they should say, "there is no known reason ...", which is instead a proposition about our state of knowledge, and is the correct description of the state of things.
I absolutely love smooth scrolling in the VTE terminals on Linux, but I can't find anything other than maybe the default terminal app (which I don't like) and iterm2 (which I don't like) that does it on Mac. As the author said, just about every terminal has a GH issue open asking for it with nothing but 'this would require rewriting a lot'
Yes exactly. That's the approach taken here. The main downside is that it can require sleeps to properly reproduce race conditions.
Injects fake cookies that tells websites you previously declined to accept cookies, or do a JS-auto-click on the button.

Now, how about letting plugins rewrite HTML while it downloads, so we can regex-out EVERYTHING except actual page content?
Hey Sean, I'm familiar with it, great work!

I think you should share it with https://mastodon.cloud/@futurebird@sauropods.win a.k.a. myrmepropagandist
Free version of the Nature article:

https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.12446
Language Servers do a pretty terrific job of this, too, basically for free.
The next generation replacement for CLIs will be Raycast.com or similar. Seriously.

It's significantly more discoverable, faster to use, and provides a high quality interface out of the box.

Composability is currently lacking, but Launchbar shows how that could be done.

Most importantly, it's ridiculously easy to write extensions for. Chances are, if your shell script needs to handle interactive input, you can write a Raycast extension in fewer lines of code.

Developers who seek to advance the terminal should probably focus on building a FOSS equivalent to Raycast instead.
I am very skeptical of research about software development. Whether it's about tooling (static typing, etc.) or process (pair programming, etc.).

It's really hard (I would go so far as to say impossible) to set up useful metrics and it's really hard to create comparable scenarios. And even if you had those, very few things apply generally to all fields of software, let alone the different types of personalities that developers have, even if the stereotypes have a bit of truth to them.
> expound on their love for say Olson Kundig, David Chipperfield, Freddie Mamani, and Kengo Kuma in a single sitting.

I was familiar with buildings by some of them, and looked up the rest. Excepting, as a sibling post does, Freddie Mamani, the best thing I can say about the ones that are not just straight up unsightly is that they are interesting, in the way in which an essay that a verbally gifted student wrote arguing for a nonsense position randomly pulled out of a hat can be interesting. Do you think that, if you polled people who have nothing to gain socially from signalling sophistication in modern architecture (this in particular excludes all architects and politically normal upper-middle-class white-collar workers), many would report that their spirit was elevated by them?
> Submarines with elevated CO2 levels do not consistently lead to weight gain, refuting atmospheric explanations

How are the reduced partial pressure of oxygen and low temperature rejected as causes? The two largest metabolic taxes I experience at altitude are the fatigue during acclimation, which I understand to be the production and maintenance of red blood cells (as well as dehydration), and lower temperatures.
Commenting on internet is not too much luxury when it's an attempt to educate or act for the environment

Boiled water is not a luxury is that's the only way to get non-contamined water, but no need to transform it in beer. Electricity, internet, buildings, trucks transporting non-luxurious food are also base products in our cities, many people need it, but some of their usage become luxurious. For example water plastic bottles when not reused, many devices like air conditioners, usage of internet like streaming, oversized houses/apartments, many usages of personal cars are luxuries by definition (not necessary)

Talking to emergency or for a practical action is possibly non luxury, if it saves a life or save more polluting ways of communication, but spending hours talking to friends is luxury

I'm maybe including "non-sustainability" into luxury, but it's related to necessity, because when you have multiple type of foods, like cereals, vegetable, meat, some are scalable, some are not
I mean, we could definitely run architectures through simulated evolution with genetic algorithms, but then you arrive at the same problem as humans do, which is that you end up with a statistically best solution for given conditions. Sure, that could be a form of AI but there is likely a better (and likely faster) way to build an AI that isn't fundamentally statistical in nature and is adaptable to any and all problems.
https://archive.ph/EY2ca
"But computer people don't need need stinkin unions"

Can't believe someone hadn't replied that seriously to your post yet, moments before their job was outsourced.
Wait, are you suggesting developers are not interchangeable cogs?
You must be enjoying the fun of all these cool games!

The possibility for doing sailing and yachting for you is really fantastic! I grew up in a harbour city, I love almost any activities in water, and was a very decent swimmer as a child. But where I live now is far from sea. Learning sailing is still possible in a local lake, but it's cold here in winter, normally the sailing courses are only offered in summer. Yachting is so fancy I'd like to try it out when there is a chance.

Happy exercising and practicing whatever you like in the new year and beyond!
The ICE is a generator rather than connected to the wheels. The truck operates as an EV at all times and then fires the motor when at low state of charge. How it runs is really not important as long as it charges the battery enough to extend range indefinitely. The game is about peak efficiency.
There is an iOS/watchOS metronome app literally called “Pulse” that provides haptic feedback. That might get you part of the way there
UCLA will transform dead Westside mall into major science innovation center
Thermodynamics is a prime suspect. Higher equals colder. The increased cost of temperature regulation would account for some extra fuel burning. The data should be available to separate the effects.
> Static typing lets you do more complicated things by offloading a subset of complexity-management to robots

I've read some of the research on this! Yes, static typing improves documentation and helps you navigate code.

It also correlates with code quality and reduces smells. Inconclusive whether that's because of static typing or because more mature teams are likelier to choose static typing.

But all the research agrees: Static typing does not reduce logic bugs. You can build the wrong thing just as easily with dynamic and with static typing. The only type of bug that static typing reduces is the sort of bug you'll find by running the code.

In my experience, static typing is best thought of as a way to reduce the need for manually written unit tests. Instead of writing tests that break when a function signature changes, you write types that break when you call functions wrong.

You still need tests for logic. Static typing doesn't help there.
QA roles have been decimated. I get the impression that increased adoption and trust of automated testing techniques have enabled companies to justify cutting their QA budgets. I've seen similar layoffs of entire QA teams even before the recent tech layoffs. And in those cases the QAs were never rehired.
https://archive.is/D97Ez
I have a Fischer CAP-O-MATIC space pen which I've have longer than all of the cars I've owned. I think I bought some time around 1996. It hasn't been used frequent enough to need a refill but it's never failed to write. The only problem is a small bit of ink will crust up on the tip which you can wipe off or just accept a dot where you first placed the pen down on paper.
Haha, I've been doing this for years. When I'm done with my hot shower, I flip it cold and do a cool down even in the winter. Reminds me how much of a miracle hot water from a shower is.

Only downside is I live in a desert so the water from the tap is warm when it's summertime.
Fed Court: First Amendment Protects Engineers Expert Testimony Without a License
You are spot on, was there. The Ataris and ostensibly the Timex/Sinclair's were doing graphics from the very beginning, with their built in BASICs; typing in programs from the popular magazines. The Atari MAC/65 assembler came in 1982; the cartridge in 1984. Manx C in 1986 for Amiga. My school taught BASIC from "Micro-Soft" on an Altair. I went directly to doing bit level ops on Burroughs mainframes directly afterwards. And I still have all my Lattice C software for my Amiga circa 1990.
Thanks! there's also a group version of this app / little experiment I've been playing with. Working title "Space Kalimba".

https://nothing-together.sonnet.io

Sometimes * I communicate with random people via that site, without any words, just sending little "plomks" to each other.

* literally 30 seconds ago!
offloading a subset of complexity-management to robots

Are you calling compilers robots?
That's right! I think it's a good balance between giving the typechecker the info it needs, but also being flexible in how you can supply it!