skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Saudi Aramco's CEO sure seems afraid of the future. Alas, exhortations almost never work. If other sources of energy, like solar, become superior to and cheaper than oil, society will choose them over oil. Superior products at cheaper prices tend to win in the marketplace. No one ever wants to pay more for an inferior product.
I had a similar experience but with my partner. Wrote a longer rant[0].

It's quite hard to notice a lot of these things before you actually have to deal with them. I knew ramps were needed and automatic doors, but the shock was more about little things. But, a big thing I've noticed is that like 90% of things that would help us would make lives easier for normal people too. Which this was a big thing that opened my mind of how to address a lot of accessibility, is just think more deeply. If it affects a wheelchair it also affects a stroller, your wheeled baggage, things being dropped between cracks/small gaps, being able to clean between gaps (and subsequently the mold, water damage, grime, etc that makes things more costly in the long run!), your robot delivery drone, whatever. Ironically making the world more accessible for wheel-chaired people makes the world easier to robotize, which in turn can then also help disabled people. But the lesson is to think deep, because there are so many parallels. So if you hit upon one, you benefit the others. So you don't need to sit around thinking of every possible disability to make things accessible, which is a big blessing in itself. But if you think with care you will make the world much more accessible. No one expects to be perfectly accessible to everyone and disabled people know the world isn't going to bend to them, but that also doesn't mean we shouldn't try and care for our friends and family (other humans). But since it can help, just remember that a lot of things that help them will also help you.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39748213
GDP is always an "estimate", not sure what your issue is. What specifically do you dislike about this estimate?

Physics isn't "complete nonsense" just because we don't know the exact mass of a proton but rather have some small uncertainty there.
My suggested alternative is doing good, well-controlled science.

No, you don't need to deliberately expose people to toxins to do that. That's a straw man, when much of what passes for observational epidemiology is loaded with obvious uncontrolled confounders (like poverty).
This is exactly what will happen, just like with cookie warnings, etc.

To be effective, warnings like this have to be MANDATED on the item in question, and FORBIDDEN when not present.

Otherwise you stick a prop 65 "may contain" warning on everything, and it's pointless.

(This post may have been generated by AI; this notice in compliance with AI notification complications.)
also means you eat a lot faster and therefore probably more
Global OEMs haven't used asbestos for a while. They don't want the liability, and it makes logistical sense for them to use brakes that are legal in all markets.

But some low-cost aftermarket replacement brakes imported from countries where it is still legal to manufacture them, have contained asbestos. Asbestos is cheap and functional.
I have IBD and definitely believe there is an association. But it still goes back to my question about "is there a safe limit". I think in particular for IBD, IBS, Crohn's etc, my suspicion is that there are two mechanisms at play with ultraprocessed diets:

1. Additives + microplastics in modern diets doing bad things to the microbiome.
2. Fiber intake is being reduced by ultaprocessed diets. I think the lack of pre+pro-biotics is a big deal, and ultraprocessed foods contribute to their reduced intake.
Those people who did retrain are the same devs being put out of work - which means they got hit with the setback twice and are worse off than people who started off as devs and thus only got hit once.

Like the allied bomber pilots in WWII looking down below at the firestorm knowing that there is a good chance (~45%) that they too will join their fate only later.
No popping here at all on FF with just uBo, and some adblocking DNS in front of that.
Its so crazy, and I've lived in rural areas, been hunting in Ozark woods, I've never gotten bit by a tick. A friend of mine was literally covered in them one day after shooting stuff, he put one on my hand and it jumped off. Needless to say he was jealous.
It was a joke. Autistic people fail to comprehend sarcasm and humour.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1289051795763769345

Further down in the thread, he linked to a BBC article about how the pyramids were built by human workers.
Going to be a long road with this kinda thing but forums and places I visit often already have "no AI submissions" type rules and they have been received pretty well that I've seen.

Are they capable of enforcing it? I don't know, but it's clear users understand / don't like the idea of being awash in a sea of AI content at this point.

If they can actually avoid it remains to be seen.
I don't think I have anything 90s that still works. I remember ordering from Amazon in 1999 or earlier but my current account has my first order from early 2002, so I must have recreated the account for some reason. Ebay is about the same time, 01/02. My Yahoo email is probably 2001. AIM would have been 98/99 but they killed it. ICQ would have been earlier but I haven't logged into it since 2000-01 probably, if it still exists I wouldn't know the password. Actually Slashdot would have been 98 I think? (six digit UID starting with 100xxx; I'd have gotten 5 digits if I'd created the account a week or so earlier :P), but I went through and did the "delete my account" request there maybe six months ago.

Can't think of anything else that would still be around from before about 2001.
My old phone asked me for consent during an update, my new one during first boot. It can also be toggled afterwards[1]. Sadly, I suspect this means it’s legal even though most people don’t realize it’s on.

[1] https://support.google.com/android/answer/3467281#scanning
With ipv6 they can now be fully scaled easily but they are absolutely awesome, much easier to scale because you can give your client a simple list of sse services and its essentially stateless if done right.

Websockets get really complex to scale past a certain level of use.
Many European countries already banned it in the '90s. That was decades ago and the EU is currently discussing making it obligatory to replace old asbestos materials in existing constructions.
I know it has something like 30 episodes, so I had to look; it appears to only cover the first book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Body .
This meme, that the average American is stupid and needs to be told what to do about everything, is patronizing and needs to die.

The average 50th percentile IQ person has a finely tuned bullshit detector. When they sense they're being lead by an author or speaker toward making a certain decision, or feeling a certain way about the set of facts surrounding a current event, it makes them lose trust in the speaker, writer, and the institution they represent.

People have everyday experience with this, for example the moment they realize the person in front of them is shamelessly trying to sell them a car, timeshare, etc. and likely does not have their best interests in mind. You immediately stop believing a word this person is saying. Contrast this with, say, the guy behind the counter at your favorite hardware store who you trust is trying to get you the right solution for your needs.

The problem is when the speaker is an SME in a public service role. Trust in media, government, scientists, the academy, is low for good reason and it's causing huge problems in American society.

Most people are, in fact, not stupid. If you educate them on the facts, don't project false confidence about subjective or uncertain things, and basically talk to them like adults, we will have a more educated society with way more trust and tolerance for evolving science.
One of those points relates directly to paint-only bike lanes. None of the others do.

Any conversation about expanding bike infrastructure needs to acknowledge existing bad bike infrastructure and common bad techniques in order to explain why we can't expect results if we use them again. Otherwise, they'll just get used again and waste more money. If all you say is "You literally have no bike infrastructure" to a city that literally has spent money and effort creating (bad) bike infrastructure, I don't see how that's helpful.
Does any image that's been touched by AI count as fake? For instance, if you took a real photo and asked AI to widen it by 1 pixel, you could argue that this is a new "fake" image generated by AI, but it's 99.9% real. What about something that's been AI-upscaled, like with DLSS?
We could take down the technological civilization, and institute methods more like the Amish...not saying it will happen like that but I mean that's certainly possible.
As I said in the comments on El Reg:

Are there benefits from moving to Linux? Probably. But I think there are costs form leaving FreeBSD.

• As I mentioned in the article as well as in the comments above, significantly poorer memory inefficiency, which renders the Linux-based product less suitable for small/low-end deployments and constrained hardware.

• FreeBSD has a reputation for better stability than Linux, and fewer, less frequent, updates.

• The FreeBSD hypervisor is small, efficient, clean and modern:

https://klarasystems.com/articles/bhyve-the-freebsd-hypervis...

It can also cope with handy features like memory overcommit -- you can assign more RAM to VMs than is available at that time -- and lazy commit, so they don't try to initialise all of it when they start.

Others, readers, have also made eloquent points, too.

Not everyone is using this for the features. Some are using it for the stability. They don't want new features. I don't want new features. I want fewer features: I want simplicity instead, and I want reliability and efficiency.
I remember seeing adverts for this and wondering what it was. Was it used for any commercial games?
The increasing number of innovations and alternative solutions is good!

Compared to its rivals, this is the least open-source.

How can local development (docker-compose based) be achieved here?
I didn't manage to build any Games with it, but I think it helped me to read Postscript files a few years later :)
Its not a regular thing to work on for the majority of people. What's the point of manning up for this particular DIY if the danger is high? Is it really that big of an ego hit to pay someone for a job once in awhile?
Absolutely! On macOS, I use KeyCue to show every hotkey* in every app because it's able to inspect accessibility/automation data. Similarly, this is what permits scripting desktop apps from AppleScript. (There's a word or phrase meaning side-benefits from disability compliance, but it escapes me.)

* Almost
I don't know about long gone. I still support a websocket solution that needs to have server-push as a fallback because of browser incompatibility issues.
> Solving for color contrast limitations benefits everyone even when people have perfect vision.

I saw another IRL example of this in yet another football match over the weekend where one team was in a blue jersey with the other team in a black jersey. I'm not even color blind, yet it was hard for me to immediately distinguish players. I really miss the old days of home team in their club's color, with the away team in a predominately white jersey.

So not even remotely UI/front-end related to a tech forum, but color contrast is a basic way humans separate things. It is not nice to mess with that for normal things.
Watched this happen in real-time last night. The stream cut to a generic "We'll be back" interstitial between rounds, which is normal, but it lasted longer than usual and eventually cut to a "Thanks for watching!" card. Stream ended. Chaos ensued.

What's interesting is that the two confirmed targets (Hal and Gen—not sure if any others were impacted) are two top dogs on the scene right now. IIRC their respective teams have a somewhat friendly rivalry going on. In other words, these are guys with lots of wins under their belt who don't need aimbots to take home cash prizes.

So I'm rabidly curious to know how the person behind the hack pulled this off, but also really want to how they chose the specific players to target or what their motivations were in the first place. Maybe they have some kind of grudge and they want to "expose" (read as: frame) these guys or just get their hands dirty.
Requiring labeling / disclosure is not the same as banning.
If we had kept up the pace of nuclear construction, we would have finished decarbonizing our electric grid by now. Instead, we've barely started. Was it worth the extra 100Gt of CO2 in the atmosphere?
Did you know for what purposes (targets) made mini-computers and why they was limited?

When computers first appeared, they was big, just because technology limitations made small machines very expensive to use, so scale used to make computations cheaper.

In early 1970s, technology advanced to stage, where become possible to make simplified versions of big computers for some limited tasks, still too expensive for wide use.

Simple illustration, IBM-3033 mainframe with 16MBytes RAM could serve 17500 3270 terminals, and PDP of same time could about few tens (may be 50, I don't know exactly), so mainframes even when was very expensive, but given good cost per workplace.

Known example, PDP used to control one of scientific nuclear reactor. PDP chosen, not because it have best mips/price ratio, but because it was cheapest adequate machine for this task, so is affordable for limited budget.

Very long time, mini machines stay in niche of limited machines, used to avoid much more expensive full-scale mainframes. They used to control industrial automation (CNC), chemical factories and other small things.

Once appeared microcomputers (CPU on one chip), first known on wide market in 1977, they begin eat mini's space from bottom, when mainframes continue to become more cost effective (more terminals with appearance of cheap modems, etc) and eat mini's space from top.

And in 1990s, when appeared affordable 32-bit microprocessors and became affordable Megabytes of RAM, mini's disappear, because their place was captured by micro's.

To be honest, I just don't know anything we could not name microcomputer now, as even IBM Z mainframes are now have single-chip processor and largest supercomputers are practically clouds of SOCs (NUMA architecture).

And I must admit, I still see PDP's (or VAX's) on enterprises, where they still control old machines from 1990s (they are very reliable even when limited from modern view, but still work).

As I remember, last symmetrical multiprocessor supercomputer was Cray Y-MP, later machines become ccNUMA or just NUMA or even cloud.

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

Unix was simplified version of Multics, system considered to run on mainframes (BTW even exists officially certified Posix Unix for mainframes).

You could try mainframes software yourself, it is very affordable now with emulator (sure, be careful about license):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hercules_(emulator)

And you will see yourself, how many things borrowed by modern OS's from mainframes.

This is nature, people choose simpler, cheaper thing (yes, I don't like x86, my love is 68k).
There are things that are more finite than the others.

For all intents and purposes energy from sun, wind and water-flow are infinite - if any of these disappears, we can be almost sure that humanity is also done, so that's one problem solved.

Some of us on this site will see the end of oil most likely however.
Yep, and sometimes asbestos exposure is better than being burned alive.

Life is a matter of trade offs.

We may have better trade offs now with advances in material science, but all those uses of asbestos were not made by mustache twirling villains.
> Official comment on the incident ends there, but clips circulating online showed players suddenly being given cheats like aimbots and wall hacks while matches were ongoing.

Now that's what I call elite.
>If it's realistic who will know?

Look at "realistic" photos , it is easy for someone with experience to spot issues, the hangs/fingers are wrong, shadows and light are wrong, hair is weird, eyes have issues. In a video there are much more information so much more places to get things wrong, making it pass this kind of test will be a huge job so many will not put the effort.
The "sponsored content" tag on youtube seems to work very well though. Most content creators don't want to label their videos sponsored unless they are, I assume the same goes for AI generated content flags. Why would a manual content creator want to add that?

> This post may have been generated by AI

I doubt "may" is enough.
> When they say accessibility is too expensive that’s what they really mean, and it’s not a good argument.

Disabilities can be conflicting which makes catering to all difficult.

Consider, for example, that someone who is deaf will usually use a flashing light to wake them up. However, if you are someone that's prone to seizures, that flashing light is now something that can trigger a medical emergency.

Now consider how fire alarms typically work, big flashing lights and loud sirens.

With accessibility you kind of can't please everyone. Not saying you shouldn't try, but there needs to be some level of "best effort" applied.
Forgive me on an initial reading, it is hard to have a nuanced discussion on this stuff without coming off like an uncaring caricature of one of two stereotypes, or look like you're attacking your interlocutor. When I'm writing these out, it's free association like I'm writing a diary entry, not as a critique of your well-reasoned and 100% accurate take.

Personal thoughts:

- we're already a year past the point where it was widely known you can generate whatever you want, and get it to a reasonable "real" threshold with less than a day worth of work.

- the impact is likely to be significantly muted, rather than an exponential increase upon, a 2020 baseline. professionals were capable of accomplishing this with a couple orders of magnitude more manual work for at least a decade.

- in general, we've suffered more societally from histrionics/over-reactions to being bombarded with the same messaging

- it thus should end up being _net good_, in that a skeptic has a 100% accurate argument for requiring more explanation than "wow look at this!"

- I expect that being able to justify / source / explain things will gain significant value relative to scaled up distributors giving out media someone else gave them without any review.

- something I've noticed the last couple years is people __hate__ looking stupid. __Hate__. They learn extremely quickly to refactor knowledge they think they have once confronted in public, even by the outgroup, as long as theyre a non-extremist.

After writing that out, I guess my tl;Dr as of this moment and mood, is there will be negligible negative effects, we already reached a nadir of unquestioned BS sometime between 2010 and 2024, and a baseline be _anyone_ can easily BS will lead to wide acceptance of skeptical reactions, even within ingroups.

God I hope I'm right.
I suspect bike collisions are more common than car collisions, but generally less of an issue. I would imagine bikes only pose a substantial threat to a healthy person at the high end of their speed range.

Pulling the handlebar causes the wheel to turn and redirect the solid center stalk at you. Perhaps not a direct hit, but enough that I don't think the bike will just glance off.

> but is probably better than getting hit by 2-tons * 15mph force.

I think you're presuming that both are eating the full force of the moving object. Most cars are designed to deflect things over the top of them rather than impart force into them, because doing so with air makes them aerodynamic. A car that just plowed into anything in front of it would have terrible aerodynamics.

It just so happens that most objects behave similarly in front of a car. That sloped shape of the car (especially the windshield) imparts upward force. People that get hit by cars often land not far from where they were hit (relative to where you'd think), because most of the force is vertical. They're also a flat surface that is very good at dispersing the force over a lot of a body, instead of concentrating it.

Bikes take the opposite approach, which is to conquer wind resistance by minimizing their exposure to it (I.e. being small). This makes for sharp, poorly dispersed impacts and a propensity to plow into things rather than push them over. They do have less relative energy, but it's conveyed into other objects in a much harsher way.

This is all presuming similar speeds, though. The high end of a bicycle's speed range is right around the minimum speed cars even travel at.
As a back sleeper, get a pillow or cushion under your knees/legs. Otherwise the arch of your back is in constant stress when you sleep and can lead to back problems. You can guess how I know.
I was pretty dead on with photos of people. Especially if they're in color.

And it's not just a hand thing. There's often an element of surreal excess or a kind of uncanny valley/plasticy thing going on. If I had to point something out, it would be skin. AI seems to be bad at generating skin, it has a slightly cartoony look to it. If I were to venture a guess, it's because of the number of photos out there filtered to shit.

I was the worst at macro(?) landscape photography. I think that's what it is. Whatever it is when you essentially take a picture from far away, but zoom in and focus so the foreground and background are both in focus. That's close to 50/50.
This seems to be a problem of screen resolution, not font. The number of pixels of the font doesn't have to relate to the size on your monitor at all.

I also can't read it at 100% on a high-density monitor, but I can read it very comfortably at a normal size, even though glyphs have so few features.
The worst part is that it doesn't really degrade either. There's literally no way around it, the world just gets increasingly polluted by it.

Smoking causes cancer? Stop smoking, and prevent people from smoking near bystanders. Asbestos causes cancer? Ban it in new products, and mandate secure removal for existing stuff. It's not that hard to deal with: just stop using the harmful thing and it'll be fine.

PFAS causes cancer? Permanently condemn all contaminated land, kill all wildlife trying to get out, mandatory cremation for all humans who lived there, and a total ban on breastfeeding for mothers who lived there.

PFAS might not yet be definitively proven to be harmful in limited quantities, but the bio-accumulation is bad enough that we just cannot take that risk.
That doesn't sound comfortable. I'd probably rather sleep on my arm than a pile of grass...
I was going to post this but decided not to, because it's a nice story until the end, where it devolves into capitalist propaganda.

And, if there were ONE economist 'responsible' for the current economic inequalities, it is Uncle Milty. https://www.theatlantic.com/books/archive/2023/11/-milton-fr...
Probably does not have much value beyond just PR of being open source, as the model is 300+B and worse than Qwen 30+B model.