skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> In April 2022, Minesto announced a detailed plan for large-scale buildout of tidal energy arrays in the Faroe Islands. The large-scale buildout plan sets out a stepwise installation of tidal kite arrays, each with 20-40 MW installed capacity, at four verified locations.
It's absolutely not like that at all.

Equating encouragement to try a new food and encouragement to bring another life into the world is... a bit silly.
Wow that's a lot less negotiation than is required to tell a TCP joke! ;)

Hello, would you like to hear a TCP joke?

Yes, I'd like to hear a TCP joke.

OK, I'll tell you a TCP joke.

OK, I'll hear a TCP joke.

Are you ready to hear a TCP joke?

Yes, I am ready to hear a TCP joke.

OK, I'm about to send the TCP joke.
It will last 10 seconds,
it has two characters,
it does not have a setting,
and it ends with punchline.

OK, I'm ready to hear the TCP joke
that will last 10 seconds,
has two characters,
does not have a setting,
and will end with a punchline.

I'm sorry, your connection has timed out...

...Hello, would you like to hear a TCP joke?
I was on the Cypherpunks list, mostly as a lurker. The technical discussions were amazing. I was really into it at the time, but now I find some of the political ideas to be embarrassing.

Other people had a lot to do with the spread of strong crypto as well. Many people realized that encryption was necessary if we wanted to do business online. Matt Blaze (who was on the Cypherpunks list, but never said anything crazy), helped blow up the government's compromise solution, mandatory key escrow, by demonstrating flaws in their Clipper chip technology. The MIT Press published PGP's source code in book form, using an OCR font, because books couldn't be blocked as munitions. I think Hal Abelson, who wasn't on the list, was the person behind that.

The basic political idea behind the list was that you could effect change by writing code. Instead of going to the government, with your cap in your hand, and saying, Please, sir, can we have strong encryption?, you write code and give it away, thus making the law impossible to enforce. This sounds really cool when you're young, especially if you write code, but it's an anti-democratic idea.

The political positions of some of the leaders was kind of an extreme, anarchist spin on libertarianism. Bitcoin is a currency designed to solve a specific problem -- it's kind of the ultimate solution to the old goldbug fear that governments will print money and dilute the currency. That's impossible under Bitcoin.

The original crypto currency the Cypherpunks were really into was David Chaum's Digicash, which was designed to solve a completely different problem, the same one Monero is aimed at today. It was supposed to be untraceable. Instead of asking governments to lower taxes, the idea was that programmers could create a way to transfer funds anonymously. In theory, taxes would become impossible to collect, and national borders would collapse.

Eventually this led to things like discussions of anonymous murder contracts. There was a proposed protocol that was supposed to allow you to put out a hit on someone with complete safety. You could pay the killer anonymously with digital currency. I think the payment would go into some sort of escrow, so the killer would know they'd get paid. I don't remember how the system was able to know that the hit had taken place.

Those murder contracts were one of the things that made me pull back from the list. But it really was terrific to read, even though I think it would be a mistake to lionize it too much. Arguably, they were struggling to make the whole world run on 8chan's rules.
(I've edited "its Tesla killer" out of the NYT's title, in the spirit of "avoid clickbait").
it should literally be `git clone && npm i && npm run dev` if you have a local backend then `docker-compose up --build`
No OP but I enjoyed contributing to Minetest!
It's a fascinating read, and makes a lot of sense why it's so hard to develop a commercial aircraft that actually ends up being profitable. One thing that got me wondering, and maybe someone here might know this, is why hasn't Boeing attempted to miniaturize the 787 as opposed to continually re-purposing the 737? From the outsider's (and complete layman's) view it seems like this would be a more sensible way to build a successful modern aircraft in that vein as opposed to trying to repurpose a design which is now well over half a century old.

I fly a fair amount an honestly the 787 is an impressive aircraft. I'm surprised that Boeing hasn't tried to take what they learned from their developments there and apply them in a way that could potentially help them recoup the costs of that program.
If this is a "short film" then you just read my new novel.
On TaoBao here in Beijing I can get one for around 95USD…. No strong indication whether it’ll work tho! https://m.tb.cn/h.5Hbc2x0sHhXTXZG?tk=nl7YW9gh6MR
Note that Multics had a particularly good work environment: https://multicians.org/devproc.html

In particular, management was tech-savvy and everyone liked and respected each other. Most were also talented.
I rarely see proper anti-semitic posts in Twitter. The problem is that people keep on insisting that posts condemning Israeli government illegal and immoral actions are anti-semitic.
If anything, I welcome that people now can ask how Israel gets a pass of refusing to implement UN resolutions that back from as early as 1948 without any consequences.
Yes, I was being a bit facetious with the remark about spelling rules. I was guessing if I stated "English has an unusually defective orthography", people would not get what I meant. But since you work in education, you probably do.

If you have a language where a learner cannot derive spelling from phonetics, or phonetics from spelling, a learner instead has to memorize the spelling _and_ pronunciation of every word. This is highly unusual, and suboptimal! My hyperbolic statement was that, from the perspectice of the learner, there might as well not be any spelling rules because you have to memorize everything by rote.

I don't know why English spelling reform has never happened (AFAIK) but it's for sure making life a lot more difficult for dyslectics or people with learning disabilities.
As i remember Watcom was first compiler that may produce NetWare NLM.
Second was Metrowerx CodeWarrior
Oh absolutely. I have given up on engaging with him, it is pointless (I am jdhoek on GitHub, and have contributed various commits to Carto in the past).

While I can understand that being a maintainer for a project like Carto can be taxing due to the high amount of feature requests which are often not suitable for the general purpose map, lack usage, or are otherwise unclear in their definition, I find that the way Carto has been maintained for the past few years has been harmful to the OpenStreetMap project in general.

I think Christopher Hormann (imagico), despite his contributions in the past, is actively harming OpenStreetMap with his maintainership and (lack of) actions. Although to be fair the OpenStreetMap Foundation shares some of the blame here by shrugging 'not our problem' when the state of the default layer on openstreetmap.org is, repeatedly, pointed out, and letting this state of affairs persist. The typical response of 'Oh, OpenStreetMap is a do-ocracy, haha, if you want to change this, just create your own layer!' does not befit a project which has achieved so much as OpenStreetMap.
I will pay you 5 cents to print 15 of those t-shirts, with my company logo on it and a QR code that points to an article about an internet standard and why my crypto startup is better than it. 10 cents, final offer.
> Everyone in the world, regardless of background, identity, ability, wealth, or status, has a home on the open web as a user, creator, architect, and innovator. It requires participation: The open web is a shared resource and a shared responsibility, sustained by deliberate choice and collaborative effort.

Noble. Achievable? What would a web like this look like? How should it be funded? And why stop at the web? Could creating our future, all of it, work like this?
He asked for a plan to solve world hunger. The plan he got[1] was a band-aid at best. WFP even highlight it in bold themselves:

> US$6.6 billion is needed to avert catastrophe.

So yeah, not a plan to solve world hunger... Which goes to say, the problem is much greater than what some pocket money[2] can solve.

[1]: https://www.wfp.org/stories/wfps-plan-support-42-million-peo...

[2]: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/012715/5-ric...
Technically that makes everyone who's over the age of 60 a sort of parasite. That doesn't mean we look down on them.

Is a childless teacher refusing to do their part to create the next generation? Arguably a good teacher can have more impact on society than any parent will. How about someone who invents a technology that has decades long repercussions.

George Washington didn't have children. Was he a parasite taking just the benefits from society?

I've got kids, but I'm not naive enough to think that people without kids are all parasites. I think a healthy society has a balance of people doing different things - raising children needs a huge amount of attention and emotional labour, and it's definitely not for everyone. But you can contribute to society in other ways.
iOS 17.4 Beta Lets Apple Cash Users Generate Virtual Card Numbers
This is logical thought. Relationships run on emotions. For most of history marriage's sole purpose is to create social security for women. That is really a problem, because once a service is provided, there is always a scope for improvement. If there is a crisis people are busy solving the crisis, in times of relative peace people think they should be optimising for a better deal. There is always a man better than you. Somebody is more healthy, wealthy and spends more on his wife, and you are continuously benchmarked against him.

Heck in most cases you might even be getting benchmarked against a fictional figure who exists only in her imaginations.

The more you do, more that fictional figure gets better than you, and you are expected jump over the bar she just raised. Sooner or later you will burnout and she will hate you for being weak compared to the hero that exists in her mind.
Because triathletes have extraordinary bad taste. Thank God for UCI keeping real bicycle racing proper.
> 4. Something that we have already noticed is actually evidence of grabby aliens, but it is happening in every direction so we assume that it is a natural phenomenon, because it is so uniform

* Brown dwarfs: These are objects with masses too small to ignite nuclear fusion in their cores and shine like stars. However, they are still warm enough to emit infrared radiation.

* There are rogue planet candidates that do not belong to a solar system.
Wait, lower case 'o' works?
There's a bunch of old people that have kids that also very clearly don't give a damn about preserving the world for the next generation. Should they also not be allowed to vote?

Hell, I would bet that childfree people are more likely to support "future-preserving" plans than parents, on average. I'm thinking climate change, Fridays For Future.

Anecdotally, of the 4 sets of parents I know well enough to know their political opinions, none of them are really concerned about preserving the world for their children. I'm vegan, car-free, childfree and vote for the "green" options.
Like unironically, the things we deal with would be equivalent of somebody coming in, dumping a bucket of mud on his pretty diagrams and saying "integrate with that"
Just build up the pencil using light material like paper. Cross section of balanced cube is a hexagon so it is perfect.
It could simply be that child rearing and career success are substitute goods, at least for a plurality of the population. I don't like admitting that, but it seems reasonable to suspect.
This article screams a lack of understanding of finances.

A finished movie doesn't cost $0 to release. There is considerable spend on promotion, distribution, etc. If you don't do it, then movie revenues would be much lower.

It doesn't make sense to spend $10M to make say $30M, when just destroying the film gets you $30M in tax benefits.
There is no worldwide convention. Go ahead and run your services on whatever ports. That's what I do.
VTunes can tell you the average time that functions take to run but which tools can highlight functions that very occasionally run a lot slower than normal?
Major difference is that musk oxen are essentially an invasive species, whereas wolves play a critical role in the surrounding ecosystem. Look into the impact of Wolf reintroduction to Yellowstone National Park if you're curious about that role.
> The movie is an asset, it has some value, the way to determine that value is to make a good faith effort to sell it (auction or broker of some sort) and if it sells for less than you have spent making it, then you can write off the difference as a loss.

Except you can't simply sell this movie. Releasing it might lead to reputational damage if the movie is not up to par (as many sister comments have pointed out) and selling it will be even worse, as whoever buys it is now entangled with your IP in addition to possibly tarnishing your reputation.
I use rsync with -e 'ssh -p PORT', so that I can also have the ability to resume just in case :D, interesting how everyone has a different solution ^^, let's see how many ways of doing the same thing can we collect in this thread
I think there are a lot of ways to get out of your comfort zone that don't involve kids. Failing to find them is either laziness or a lack of imagination.

The thing about having kids is that once you make the leap, you don't get to step back. A single decision to drop the birth control for a bit, and bam -- you're a parent with daily responsibilities for at least 18 years. That'll certainly get you out of your comfort zone, permanently.

But other things you can do are more or less entirely voluntary, and you can stop doing them at any time. So it takes more willpower to maintain, even if doing those things is strictly less work than raising a child.
Media has them mind broke. The material conditions climate change / etc will inflict on them are nothing compared to the material conditions our ancestors endured before the creation of modern technology.

"Boo hoo, the weather is shitty and some people are moving around because of it" he says, as he doesn't have to worry about Bubonic Plague or Genghis Khan.
Could have been because the room was full. That's AFAIK the only reason why lecture hall doors are closed at FOSDEM. At least Postgres has a room of more or less appropriate size lately. A couple of years ago, they had some of the most interesting talks in one of the smallest rooms. Impossible to get in without queueing up a talk or two in advance.
Anything with rolling wheels will have some tendency to continue straight once the wheels are spinning, but they don't help to stabilize in corners. On small wheels, the effect is very small in any case, especially since the scooter and its batteries are relatively quite heavy.
Yup, the basic HTML spec for example is pretty well defined by now. That really does not mean it is easy to implement it as a working browser.
Because the identity politics has no meaning when we talk about biological phenomenon like pregnancy. We know that only members of female sex can get pregnant. The word “mother” is defined as female parent in a dictionary. So there’s nothing wrong with the term mother in the first place.
Well that's pretty much the definition of a bubble right there.
But the measurement has been constant since the 90's - it hasn't changed.

So regardless of the definition, it's remained constant, thus the idea that living arrangements have suddenly and dramatically shifted is not true.
I think based on the data and projections in the article, your family is still pretty small, cousin-wise. So you're in some ways illustrating the point they're making.
Someone should steal 666 TCP/UDP, no RFC and contact email is of a person who leaved id in 1996.
my 0.02 on the matter - i can commend that they got a reliable system but the deliverables are not quite comparable imho.

not all "HD" is made equal. bitrate is a major component of the perceived video quality. some experienced it first hand when youtube premium started pushing higher bitrate version for 1080p (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34918698).

(disney+) hotstar is an indian streaming service which recently handled more than 50M+ concurrent viewers (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38344265) for a live sports event. but if you actually watch the stream, it is of a very poor quality.

long story short: hub pushes for bitrate/quality much lower than netflix needs to in order to satisfy its paying customers, especially when they discriminate based on how much one pays.

but i wonder how much it would help with non-cpu scenarios when we need to do transcoding for upcoming codecs which might benefit from using hardware accelerators.
There Must Be Some Misunderstanding
> If we are being reckless and just want to use power until we figure out nuclear fusion or something better, let's say a million years or so, we can make some 180 PW from tides. But since it would almost all turn to heat, and since that is more energy than the Earth gets from the Sun, that would probably be unwise unless we find a way to get it off-planet with very high efficiency.

I think you're touching on the problem very nicely here: the problem is not "how much raw energy is there" (because there's an absolute fuckton of it) but "when does the impact of capturing this energy - thus removing it from a complex ecosystem whose stability may depend on it - and turning it into something else - thus adding to a complex ecosystem in other ways - becomes a problem", which may or may not come well before the theoretical raw energy cap.
I don't understand what's selfish with that since those kids won't be working for free. That's why people pay taxes until the end.
IIRC, video often had trouble like incomprehensible audio due to way too quiet or overdriven recording at the time (i.e. 2011). But for some years now, it has usually been perfect indeed :)
Great. You could save even more by using Ruby on rails and forget JS (React etc..). For deploy you could use Cloud66 and forget about ansible.
Can't be bothered to go and find it, but this reminded me of another title that I've seen: "why bankers like long distance running".
> The main cause here is that training AI models is extremely expensive so companies are cutting costs where they can so they can make these big investments without upsetting investors.

I highly highly doubt this. Shareholders put pressure on big tech companies to do layoffs because they perceived that these companies had more people than they needed and interest rates rose. LLMs aren't that expensive to train for big organizations like Google and Meta that have the capital to train foundation models. Gpt-4 cost $100 million and Google makes 18b in profit a quarter and already has massive pools of computational capital. I doubt inference is a big expense for these orgs too but who knows.

> Additionally, we should remember that software engineering isn't like traditional engineering in the sense that software doesn't require maintenance like a physical building or bridge would.

This is false.

> Similarly, SaaS companies that built out software products over the last decade are now enabling companies to build complex software products with much fewer engineers. A decade ago it was quite common for companies to have their own eCommerce products, for example. Today most will just use something like Shopify and hire a small team of engineers for the integrations and customisations.

This is a good point

I'm worried you're right about most of the building being done but I can't help but be hugely bitter about it. The software industry has been pretty good about expanding the franchise and giving employees some ownership over the systems they built. That these still hugely profitable systems will continue to exist but that the only people allowed to realize the value of them might be shareholders deeply disgusts me and makes me think if this gets worse, we should nationalize a lot of these firms.
Very interesting insights!

I think often disruptive innovation in mature industries must come from vertically integrated companies doing relatively small products. You can't get innovation by using all the same components as everyone else and all the same manufacturing tooling. Though you of course still utilize many, just not everything. For example in the car industry you start with some hand built sports cars before scaling. Your key innovation might be in-house or use a non traditional industry supplier. In aircraft industry you could start with UAV:s and then maybe light aviation or business aircraft.

Right now one area which could be a seed for huge future change could be E-VTOL companies. The technologies, processes and culture they have could change the industry a lot in the long term.
Bad code in the long run leads to more positions. Someone will be needed to maintain all this crap. Legacy code rarely dies and the beast is always hungry.

The problem is when GPT writes code that seem to work, have people ever really looked at the kind of unit tests it generate? It is convincing, lots of code, but stupid, idiot assertions everywhere, complete disregard for edge cases, terrible setups, the list is endless.

But people get easily convinced. Most people seem to believe that GPT understands the code it generates.
I don't think that holds true here. At many points in history (including recent history) people were happy to have kids because they believed they could give their children a better life than they themselves have.

But it sounds like the GP is looking to the future, and is pessimistic about their ability to do that. History doesn't matter too much here, even if I agree with you that much of history was a cesspool of pain and misery compared to these days. If people don't see a viable, prosperous future for their kids, as good as or better than their own lives, that's what matters.

Now, I say this without passing judgment on whether or not this future pessimism is warranted. Even if it isn't, what matters is how people feel about it.
So basically, they implemented a knowledge base with a NLP frontend.
I think we should just admit people working on major components of file systems, from scratch, are probably smarter than us.
This is a good example of make it easy for others to say yes.
The parent commenter already specified the criteria: "Humans are special because we utilize language."

I am here to tell you: No, humans are not special. Yes, animals (and plants and most other lifeforms) all have some form of language.

Humans are not special.
People nowadays focus on career till 30 and after 30 (when you loose that naive optimistic outlook on life) realize that having kids is too much of a risky obligation - you don't have any guarantee that you will remain healthy enough to sustain family till they grow up and that your kids will be born healthy. Also, life has gotten quite expensive.
as much as this place is a temple of the private sector;

most old and big companies exist because of public money