skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> ... what mathematicians can deliver to genomics that is special and unique, is the ability to not only generalize, but to do so “correctly”.

I think this isn't really special or unique to mathematics. Certainly it's something that some mathematicians work hard to be good at, but many great mathematicians never play this game. Look at like Terry Tao, the man is undoubtedly one of the (if not the) greatest living mathematician, but IMO his best work tends to be these crazy mind-bending proofs or developments within specific areas of math. He's not a Grothendieck or a Hilbert who reorganizes concepts in elucidating ways or creates powerful generalizations. This isn't a knock on Tao, it's just pointing out that research fields are broad and require different skillsets. In terms of hard science it's IMO kind of the difference between a brilliant theorist and a brilliant experimentalist.

Taking that comparison one step further, biology also has its theoreticians and its experimentalists. Being a skilled theoretician, understanding how to organize abstract concepts to the right level of generality, is definitely something that math can help you improve at, but it in no way is limited to mathematics. For example, Stephen Jay Gould was IMO brilliant at operating abstractly, but he had no formal mathematical training I'm aware of. Critical thought belongs to every field, even ones outside of research science (ex. Law, Philosophy).

> But wouldn’t it be better if mathematicians proved they are serious about biology and biologists truly experimented with mathematics?

For the reasons above, this isn't clear to me. Does a first-year Ecology PhD really need to think critically about Hilbert spaces? They might find it to be a fun exercise, and I could see how they could get benefits from it, but they could get similar benefits from like any advanced philosophy course, IMO. I'm all for collaboration when it benefits both fields, but collaboration for collaboration's sake seems like a time sink without an obvious impact.

caveat: this is all said 10 years after the post was written, I do think the cultural divide the author talks about has closed somewhat since writing, so maybe this arrangement is now just more palatable to me.
Sure, but the implied motive for spinning this up is that people care to know if their flight is on a 737max or <anything else>, and because Boeing put its name on this Russian roulette with wings, commenter is attempting to align perception with reality?

Also, first flight number I could find is a 737max according to google but this thing says it isn’t a 737max. AC565, January 9, 2024.
Would that not just be something like a Raspberry Pi Compute Module running an emulator full screen and a custom IO breakout host board?
So should something as mission critical as an aircraft manufacturing co have some ownership/oversight that's not public shareholders? Give the NTSB a few seats on the board
This feature is just a limited sort of pointers.

You can do similar stuff in ~40-year-old sh shell code - with tricks like `eval echo \$$foo` - so I'd bet that the concept is older (& more common) than dirt.
I would hop on a MAX right now and be perfectly happy about it. That’s not to say I don’t hope we get some good lessons from this event, but this could end up being a contractor maintenance issue rather than a manufacturing flaw, for example. Given the MAX series is flying many, many routes per day without incident, I wouldn’t make any decisions to, say, avoid a particular plane based on this incident.
The EU accepted that Safari for Mac, Safari for iOS and Safari for IpadOS are different browsers hence why the Gatekeeper clause doesn’t apply to Apple.

Apple just using the same argument they’ve successfully argued before already.
I think the concern is less about who's to _blame_ as much as "this filter may not be as effective as you think at avoiding this specific disaster."
Surely an AI wrote this one though! /s
The article does not downplay resilience. It merely says that resilience has both internal and external components. That is, you can only get so far while just focusing on your personal ability to overcome adversity, but you'll do even better if you combine that with external support.

To be honest, I'm not sure how that can be misconstrued on Hacker News, when people frequently focus on the power of groups working together (whether that's open source, corporations, or other organizations). It's clear that some of the most lauded organizations are ones that often support their members, especially in times of hardship.

This comes from someone who is very much a proponent of perseverance. My first tattoo enshrines this Japanese proverb on my forearm where I can always see it:

七転び八起き
Fall seven times, stand up eight
Come on, don't sell Google short here. The previous one happened just by changing the UA too :)
It's deliberate AND an error.
Umm, yes? This website is obviously on the front page because of the recent mishaps so that's literally the most on topic possible topic to discuss lol
Does the App Store still ban GPL apps? If so, F-Droid is even more needed on iDevices...
This is like someone trying to argue the reason they like looking at breasts and sucking on nipples has nothing to do with being breast-fed as a child, and they are completely separate things and the correlation between them is irrelevant to bring up.
They should slightly alter it and personalize it per user, then they would have millions of App Stores.
I've started just dropping out of meetings if I haven't participated in any of it for the last 10 minutes. If there's nothing for me to say or influence (and I am an opinionated and loud person that loves interjecting :D), then the meeting should've been in written form instead.

I've noticed I've emboldened some of the quieter devs I work with as well to skip the bullshit meetings, and it's nice checking people's calendars and seeing a LOT more focus time and auto-decline timeslots than before.
The Tiny Stack (Astro, SQLite, Litestream)
Javascript, if it becomes viable for web development?
California State Teachers Retirement System PE Performance as of June 30, 2023
>Airplanes shouldn't get a higher safety rating simply because the trips are 100x longer on average.

Note that you can take those stats and multiply by how many miles you're traveling to figure out your per-incident risk (ie. risk for the whole flight). Even if you do that you'll find they're quite safe, compared to other activities you do every day. Sure, the averages might not be applicable for edge cases (eg. very short flights), but for the average traveler it's a pretty good estimate.
Voting with wallets to counter negative trend in an industry made safe by regulations written in blood, seems more reasonable than hysterical.
So is it safe to say, reading your last line, that it's not really most users outside HN but a specific group?
Wasn't it previously that you had to pay a separate $99/year fees for Mac App Store in comparison to the iPhone App Store? These days I think you can do with just one $99/year payment.
Except Airbus doesn't have planes falling apart in midair even if they are using the same supplier. This is clearly an issue during assembly regardless of the supplier of the parts.
The blame could be with a single individual, a group of people, the politics at Boeing or the engineering at AeroSystems.

The point is that none of the Airbus planes had the same sort of in-flight extreme ventilation as the Boeing plane just had, nor are any entire series of airplanes from Airbus currently grounded because of lose bolts.

As I said, it's not logical, it's not based on reason nor numbers. It's just a feeling.
Thanks for commenting, and it is a great point. Keep in mind, we're not touting that Corgea is the fixer-all for every vulnerability. CWE's typically have simpler and more standardized fixes. You can see examples of that here: https://cwe.mitre.org/

A few things we're doing to combat this:
1) We've given the entire corpus of CWE's to Corgea, and how to fix things safely. This we've found from our testing and users does a really good job. I personally QA a lot of results (in the thousands) and we've not seen that to be a common problem.
2) Corgea is designed to require two sets of eye balls. The first being the security engineer and the second being the developer that reviews the PR. We hope, that things should be caught. Additionally, we believe our fixes will be better than what a developer does. There are over 900 CWE's, and it's really hard for engineers to know how to fix every issue. Googling answers and asking ChatGPT can lead to them introducing issues.
3) We provide in the product AI generated explanations on the fix and how it was appropriate. This is to educate non-experts on the topic.
4) We already have checks in place to make sure things aren't misbehaving, but we're rolling out soon a more advanced fix checker to make sure we didn't introduce any new vulnerabilities. Based on our testing, and
5) Finally we QA a lot every week, and run reports on the areas we're good at or not so good at to help us iterate.
You're missing his point entirely. People are trying to make flying out as getting more dangerous, but that's factually incorrect.
Who is response for the QA of components and workmanship? It looks like its was loose bolts from information released from United Airlines and there was a notice to check for loose bolts on the Max.
I switched it to the same color gray as the background. HN actually provides a pref for this in your user settings.
The 'simple' solution you propose is the opposite of what almost all cars with electronic shifters actually do, and no better really than the rotary control.
To keep things in perspective we should compare fatalities per person trips or person miles. Total deaths doesn't mean as much when a lot more people travel by car.
> only reason nobody was injured this time was nobody was sitting in the seats next to the door plug

This was a serious fuck-up. But it remains that there was at risk no more than one, maybe two, fatalities. That isn’t enough to justify the claim that “safety is getting worse.”
Following your logic, we could order the terms thus: A.G.I. > A.I. > M.L.

No marketing team has yet had the audacity to claim that A.G.I. == M.L. but I am alas not aware of any robust long-term protection against marketing audacity. ^_^

A.I. remains a theoretical hypothesis, and that is not an opinion regardless of the marketing tactics and money thrown at the question. As for probablistic text generation, generating dubious text at scale isn't intelligence.

It's good enough for chat-bots but will not do for any task requiring serious responsibility.

It may nonetheless prove to be a viable business... or short-term pump-and-dump. ^_^
Being American isn't equivalent to safety. It was an Alaskan flight that lost its door last week.
I haven't dug into it enough to see if there's an iPhoto integration, but the Aura frames - generally - have good UX and image quality. They've universally been a hit with grandparents.
Coincidentally, decades ago Spirit Aerosystems was still just the "Boeing Wichita division"
When a plane crashes, twice, totaling 300+ dead, people are right to get skeptical.

When the investigation into those crashes reveals a shitload of corner cutting on safety regs, people are right to get skeptical.

When another version of the same plane made by the same company has an in flight blowout and the fleet is grounded AGAIN (yes i know just the 9s but remind me how many other companies have had entire lines of their plane grounded in the last 20 years), then yes I think it's reasonable to want to avoid any of their newer plane models as clearly the level of safety and quality appears to be declining.

Flying is still safer than just about any other form of travel, but that's basically because we mandated a shit ton of regulations and safety to make sure that even penny pinching corner cutting corps wouldn't have people dying in droves. Boeing has clearly decided to push that envelope and they deserve all the bad press they get for it and I fully understand people who already have a quasi irrational fear of flying freaking the hell out over this.

I would certainly not buy a car from a company that's clearly disregarded safety so badly, and would prefer avoiding being in one for any other reason (friends/rideshare/whatever).
This site went up in response to zero people dying.
And, importantly, it's entirely consistent to hold off on blaming any singular party until the investigation is complete, while simultaneously not wanting to personally fly on a 737 Max!
Julia is my source of pessimism. Julia is super fast once it's warmed up, but before it gets there, it's painfully slow. They seem to be making progress on this, but it's been gradual. I understand that Java had similar growing pains, but it's better now. Combined with the boondoggle of py3, I'm worried for the future of my beloved language as it enters another phase of transformation.
Right, but as soperj said, the people you miss out on are the people who will dump you because you won't spend money on them. Missing out on them is likely to be a net win.
I don’t think we can even remotely say that.

From all photo evidence I’ve seen, some cushions were sucked off the seat. These cushions are designed to be removed. If a passenger was seated and wearing their seat belt, I have every faith that they would have been fine. Uncomfortable as hell but ultimately fine. I’ll bet money the NTSB report will say as much.

And the point stands that the only reason this story is noteworthy is because of airlines’ spotless safety record over the past two decades. Incidents like this are exceedingly rare.
If they change the model of the aircraft at the last second, they should allow a seat change to no longer sit next to the door
I’m sorry you’ve never experienced “friends” who are more than takers/givers.

My parents have had friends who have helped them when they’ve needed them and vice versa. I’m also fortunate that so far my friends have done the same as well and I’ve had the privilege to help them in their need.
How about checking that while booking?
I’m flying usually with Lufthansa and they inform during booking about the used type of aircraft. I’ve a strong preference for the B747 ;)

Other prefer the A380 or ensure that it is a least a twin-aisle or whatever your preference is.
Airliners, even if they lose the big engines under the wings, still have a small one in the back, called an APU, that can provide power and bleed air (!) for all kinds of critical systems. A hypothetical airliner from the future relying on active flow control would absolutely have several redundant systems to ensure controllability.
If your SaaS can be killed by a single customer leaving, then you don't have a SaaS; you have a boss for whom you are developing bespoke software.
I am taking issue with the question implicitly begged by the submission.
Regardless of who is ultimately at fault, this is about people not wanting to fly on these planes. They don't care if it was Boeing or if it was a subcontractor, they just want the information they need to cancel their flight or demand a different plane from the airline.
Is there a conspiracy? Why everyone is talking about heatpumps these days? Including in the UK.

In Europe air conditioners come with heat-pumping functions since ages ago.. all installed aircons can heat or cool. But I personally found such heating ineffective and lame.

What's going on?
We know that Boeing has a lot of Q&A problems with these planes and are taking all kinds of shortcuts. It seems the blame should be placed squarely on Boeing.
Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302, a MAX, crashed in 2019, killing 157 people.
It's been a thing since at least the 70's, maybe the 60's (I know less about that era), at least if you adjust for cost of living and inflation.

In other words, longer than Silicon Valley has actually been a thing (it used to be Santa Clara Valley!)

My dad did the startup thing in the 80's, and still has his old stock certificates representing a non-trivial ownership share. It didn't work out for him, but I tried 3 decades later with some measure of success. So this is at least two literal generations of Silicon Valley economic mobility here.
Submitters: "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize." - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

If you want to say what you think is important about an article, that's fine, but do it by adding a comment to the thread. Then your view will be on a level playing field with everyone else's: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...

(Submitted title was "Google breaks search for Firefox users because of bad UA string sniffing")
I'll take the 777, thanks.

https://simpleflying.com/safest-airliners-all-time/
Multiply all these probabilities together and you have a better chance at winning a billion dollars in a lottery you didn't buy a ticket for.
Just buy glass bottles, tastes better anyway (or use tap water).
We either lower emissions or emissions lower us.
Yes, that's right, that's my current feeling which may or may not change in the future.

Thanks for the summary!

Edit, as you added more content to your comment rather than just a one-liner snark:

> Even with flexible tickets, most carriers don't allow you to cancel less than 24 hours prior to departure

I guess my typical airline isn't in your personal category of "most carriers" as they allow me to change any dates for my ticket up until I've boarded the first flight. YMMV obviously.
That’s a very positive review.

Hoping to get four or so more years out of my current iPhone, but I’ll definitely check them out when it finally dies.
The Eggplant Tp Dispenser
Airlines aren't safe just because. Weakening FAA regulation, critical issues with flight controller shortages/exhaustion, culture changes at Boeing related to safety, etc all threaten to undo that safety record. The system is not working as it should and statistics don't magically maintain themselves at previous levels.
Let's assume American pilots are gods. They were shouting that their crafts were unsafe.

No matter how good they are and how prescient, that doesn't help them if the aircraft computer decides it's stalling, forces a nose down and they cant fight the controls.

But, even if we assume omnipotence from these American pilot gods, and assume they can fly outside the bird and Superman-style catch it, they are still only 30% of American pilots. Just another population to normalize out.
> you'd rather lose a few hours of your life waiting at an airport, than losing a few minutes of your life over the risk of dying from a 737 Max

I’ve chosen a less-than-ideal itinerary for comfort (e.g. lay-flat seat or direct flight).

Flying is stressful for a lot of people. As OP admits, it’s irrational. But if it means you avoid spending the flight in a panic, it’s not unreasonable to swap planes or even eat the ticket cost. (It might be a sign to talk to someone about anxiety.)
So - question - how much initial capital/expertise would be needed to make a new ground-up competitor to McDD-oeing, but with the engineering/quality focus of the old Boeing? I'd imagine there must be enough disgruntled aerospace engineers to create a fresh company w/ a blank slate rethink of airliner design.
Surplus value can continue to exist but as it is today it goes directly to the capitalist class via stock buybacks and dividends, rather than back to the workers.
It's significant because it exposes that Boeing's assembly/QA process is not as bullet-proof as it was in the past. Assuming things work the way they should, this (combined with the other loose-bolts situation that recently happened) should trigger that process to be tightened up, much like the earlier crashes triggered a bunch of pilot training to make sure everyone was aware of the changes in the MAX. But it's not at all a sign that Boeing planes are at risk of falling out of the sky onto your house.

You're still safer on the plane than you are in your car, statistically speaking.

Something I find interesting is that this plane, with the door-sized hole in it, took the extra ~10 minutes required to run all the checklists to do a maximally safe landing before coming back in. The videos of the plane flying with a hole in it are interesting, there's a flight attendant standing talking to the people seated near the hole.
If I understand correctly, this video seems to make the case that this event wouldn't actually have happened at cruising altitude, where the depressurization blast would've been worse, which is also interesting to know. https://youtu.be/WhfK9jlZK1o?si=g2QDFWSgEwkGvuiS
You would care because, presumably, you're deciding on a mode of transport to travel those miles. Otherwise, the measure is deaths per trip, which would prompt the conclusion that cars are thousands of times safer than air travel.
Well a lightning bolt solved that problem, so...
> and there was a notice to check for loose bolts on the Max.

For a different part of the aircraft, yes. I don't think airlines check for every loose bolt ever when the bulletin says something specific.
MAX 8 had the MCAS problems. The recent plug door issues are affecting MAX 9s.
I disagree. Also language.
But if they're separate App Stores, why does Apple repeatedly say they're a single App Store?

They do it again here: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/11/apple-unveils-app-sto...

> "This year’s winners include developers from across the world, whose apps and games were chosen by the App Store’s Editorial team for providing users with meaningful experiences and inspiring cultural change."

Note: not "the App Stores' Editorial team"

> This year’s winners showcase the scope of creativity, technical innovation, and design possible across the App Store and Apple’s ecosystem.

That sounds a lot like one App Store for the whole ecosystem?
Stress seems best for the primordial hunt and battles of my ancestors who needed a powerful drive to see through an ideally short term situation with more response than they might have otherwise been able to muster, I have always found it living hand in hand with adrenaline.

Stoicism seems to also provide plenty examples of people finding stress and emotion to be first reactions muddying the waters of perception necessary for loftier goals and work than simple hunter gatherers.

Stress long term is unusual for the body and a major disadvantage imo.

And stoicism seeing some quantifiable research into aiding in depression leads me to believe the individual in the current cultural hegemony of western culture is simply a victim, a child never truly raised.

"Work, play - at sixty our powers and tastes are what they were at seventeen." - Brave New World
> why would they need tofurther break Firefox users' experience

To prevent the market share from going up? That's the logical thing to do after spending millions developing and marketing your browser to the number 1 spot.

Why would they waste that money and effort by playing nice now and letting the market share go back up?
I'd love to see it eat JavaScript and Java for back-end code.

But I doubt that's going to ever happen.
I took a look and my brain must be wired differently from yours because I don't really see it.
Maybe look at undervolting, you can do it from the AMD software pretty easily and for me it solved a bit of a coil whine problem under boost scenarios but YMMW it depends on sample to sample I think.
I think it gets clicks. Lots of people are passionately for/against them for ideological reasons.