skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I had to do this a while back and it's nearly made me punch my monitor. The lowest circle of hell for the person/people who decided putting this basic functionality behind a fucking arcane flag. Few things make me more mad than having my finite life wasted hunting down solutions to problems that have no reason to exist.
I would have liked to see the data on this.

In my experience (UK), EV drivers tend to be in their 30s and 40s because EVs are expensive. So perhaps "younger" than random drivers could be but not young and inexperienced, although there may indeed be a driver's age element in the accidents stats.
Educate me if this is not reinventing the wheel of ymal, toml, xml, etc.
10-12,000ft is generally accepted as negligible impact on cognitive function. Only above that are pilots usually on oxygen.
It however has been shown not to help with politicians.
In Czech Republic, under communism, they used to say:

"If you are not stealing from the state, you are stealing from your own family."
Your assumptions are based on good faith, and businesses are not run on that :) Imagine Oracle or IBM bought Timescale; that 0% chance suddenly increases dramatically.
But... Alacritty does support and use the TERM variable. What you talking about? TERM should be set to alacritty, which has been in terminfo for years.
Esp. the constraint solver is much better in SolveSpace. Even better than Solidworks
Each time I see a new "fast" terminal emulator I bench it with my only way to do it (`time cat large-text-file`) and urxvt is really quicker than other.
You can ask these questions about pretty much every single performance improvement project. At the end there is always a win:

- cost (this is more relevant to large scale infra perf opt)

- UX (this is what a fast terminal might be achieving)

- energy efficiency (because energy is super cheap these are often overlooked, however battery life might be still relevant)
More broadly:

> "No way to prevent $THIS" say users of only language where $THIS regularly happens

A weird psychological quirk I've noticed (of myself, and others) is we'll often exhibit a sort of 'programming language xenophobia', where we apathetically accept (or don't even notice) unpleasantries of our language of choice, yet be quite averse to the unpleasantries of other languages.

Maybe it's due to sunk cost; time/effort has already been spent finding work arounds for or adapting to the warts of our native tongue, whereas doing so for unfamiliar languages would require additional effort.
I noticed this too, I find 4.0 is still better for giving me what I ask for.
Russia (and others) have been doing this for a decade+ neutrally using AI, specifically translation AI.

I particularly like the Inception ones where they AI already AIed articles.

I wouldn't look past they are targeting an audience for clicks and $$$$.

It's the next step, you can rewrite stories multiple times. And keep your individual sites politically consistent.

A example site - https://web.archive.org/web/20240321181849/https://gbgeopoli...

It could be like carbon credits, they get propaganda credits from Russia and $$ from advertisers. But propaganda is hard, real hard. Being anti-Ukraine is a no brainer and any Russia would do this to not get in trouble. But past that, Biden or Trump? Who's better for Russia, that's a hard question.
For non Django code, the IPython REPL with the %pdb magic enabled drops you in a ipdb debugger on an exception. Doesn't allow resuming but still very useful.
I've using ddg for years but I find myself unconsciously ending up appending "!g" to almost all my searches. DDG results are just really not good, especially if I'm looking up something local.
Love this. Aligns with some of my recent musings.
Even better, it would be largely immune to certain recently discovered problems with AI, including ingesting AI-generated content.
Huh, I’m guessing from the downvote that the answer is no. That’s kind of what I thought.

Risk is often a stand -in for comfort.

In general, I find that teams that are willing to be uncomfortable will come through. Ones that aren’t will fall apart.

I think this is because at some point, the level of commitment that is typically required to thrust a project above the noise floor implies a significant level of discomfort and sacrifice.

A great idea and a great team are not going to make it without either a) being logistically able to do what most projects are unable to do (backing) or 2) being willing to do what most people are unwilling to do (chutzpah).

It’s very rare that an idea or product is so great that it will succeed on its own merits alone.

For better or for worse, many cultures foster a sense of risk aversion and conservative attitudes about discomfort. It’s hard to assemble a team that will go the distance in these cultures without strong funding out of the gate.

I’m not sure that’s a bad thing, but it does seem to stifle entrepreneurial adventurism.
> graph where you're allowed to move in one direction and cannot do loop

To be fair, you didn't need LLM for this. Googling that, the answer (DAG) is in the title of the first Google result.

(Not to invalidate your point, but the example has to be more obscure than that for this strategy to be useful)
Simple | Fast | Safe. Choose two.
> I absolutely think they were caused by too much democracy. Most people are not equipped and may never be so to vote or have a say on the most important issues. They need to be managed by those that are capable.

Said all fascists and communists everywhere ever.

Oh, and probably all the Ayn-Randian libertariards too.

Which of all those are you?
I have a longer nuanced post to write out at some point about my feelings here, but here's the cliff's notes:

We should not be developing new projects in C, and we should make it politically hard to make new projects written in C in distribution repositories. C is going to stay around for a long time and that's okay, but there are so many inherent problems of its design and implementation that make it unsuited for unsupervised use. I wish that we didn't have to make such hard-line stances about this, but people have continuously proven that this tool is unsuitable for modern development and it's only going to get worse as time goes on.
This. Learning Rust is like a long series of jousting matches with the compiler.
Oh, man, many years ago I used Tiddlywiki (and later Wiki-On-A-Stick) as a browser-based note taking app, but stopped using it because the API they used to save the file to disk got deprecated and removed.

History not repeating but rhyming, I suppose...

Anyway, thanks for this. I've just added it to my bookmarks.
A New CEO Helped This Protein Brand Turn a Profit
ahem https://github.com/microsoft/microsoft-ui-xaml/issues/9414

https://github.com/microsoft/microsoft-ui-xaml/issues/9410#i...
You're clearly struggling.

The point here is that keeping distance from others is a sound strategy to slow the spread of respiratory infections.

The Federalist article is being delibrately obtuse and weasel framing an obviously politically motived line of questioning in a US committee.

It's the kind of thing intuitively obvious to the meanest intellect, regardless of leaning.

Dipshits in the US putting politics above public safety is par for the course.

What's preventing you from seeing that?
Well computing has gotten a lot more complex since c’s inception. It’s model has held up well but the cracks are there
Why do so many comments see not listening to / viewing ads as immoral?

Even if this will become the new norm, and there are fewer advertisers and people would make less money from it, this change could be very positive for the podcast ecosystem. I listen to a lot of podcasts, and the majority are without ads or rarely include ads. They are products of passion, and not full of fake testimonials about scammy expensive multivitamins or really bad mental health services.

Imho, the web was a lot better before Google and social media ruined the discoverability of small personal websites and blogs with great content, and replaced it with (nowadays AI-generated) blogspam and clickbait that is highly profitable, but ultimately worthless.

We will not return to the good old times with the web. In fact I believe that the genie is not only out of the bottle, but we actually created an automated Pandora's-box-opener in the current state of AI, compete with endless unboxing videos. But maybe we can go one step back with podcasts. I believe it would be worth a try.
> There is a place for C, where there's no alternative.

Alternatives to C have started appearing for a long while, and they are quite mature now.

> because they are not doing kernel development

FluentBit, where this error occurred, is a userspace application.

> there is no reflection when they fuck up a codebase

C does not support runtime reflection, that is correct. It's one of the reasons why it's a programming and debugging nightmare.

> If you are using some tricks for type casting to implement your ideas into code

There seem to be no casting issues involved in https://www.tenable.com/security/research/tra-2024-17.

> The best code is the code that is safe and easy to read, and doesn't need to use "clever tricks" that beginners cannot understand.

It's just a pile of truisms.

Is your whole post even related to this article?
Having to pay for tutors to have a chance of getting into the best colleges biases the whole system in favour of the wealthy.

Do you want only rich kids going to college?
the less likely to be heard argument seems strange to me as

- at least in the EU they artificially generate noises when moving at slow speeds

- non EV have also become quite silent

- the sound of the wheels on the ground and wind is still there, and in many situations especially at higher speed louder then any modern non EV motor

- at least in countries with more sane traffic laws drivers are required to look out for pedestrians and I mean they don't become invisible just because your care makes little sound, just to be clear yes that means if you hit a pedestrian even if you had precedence on e.g. a crossing you likely get a large part of the fault in the EU because you drive something which can easily kill people (any car) so you are responsible for acting with care
At the very end of the article,

> Upgrade to iTerm2 3.5.0

I had just gotten the upgrade notification for 3.5.0 a few minutes ago. I scrolled through the release notes a bit and got to the "AI" section and I would like very much to get off this ride. I am grumpy and a terminal should be a terminal.

Features of iTerm2 I don't use and don't think belong in a terminal emulator:

- tmux integration
- shell integration
- ssh integration
- password manager integration
- hooks
- syntax highlighting *that's baked into the terminal*
- installing its own python runtimes (?!)
- ~blindly~ opening URLs when rendering a certain escape sequence [0]

[0] https://gitlab.com/gnachman/iterm2/-/issues/10994 the discussion in there makes it seem like it's okay because many schemes that aren't http[s] cause the browser to open a dialog box

Features of iTerm2 I use:

- fullscreen without using MacOS's spaces implementation of fullscreen

.... This got away from me and went from grumpy muttering to a snarky rant. I like iTerm2, it's just starting to feel like somebody else's terminal, that's all.

Edit: tried to cross out "blindly" above, it does ask you whether you want to open the URL, though it offers to always allow it for that host which seems like it might be iffy, but at least if I never click "always allow", I'll be notified if anything tries to inject this OSC sequence.
That's... quite a Windows mindset.
> Edwards and his colleagues studied UK travel and road accident data from 2013 to 2017. Because of an archiving problem, data from 2018 onwards is not available.

Seems like a pretty big disclaimer that all the data in this study is 7-11 years old. Both drivers and pedestrians have got a lot more used to EVs in the last decade, so I wonder how much that's changed things. And back in 2013 there were only a couple of thousand EVs on the road in the UK, which is a pretty small sample size to draw conclusions from.

> Drivers of electric cars tend to be younger and less experienced

They're quoting statistics from 2024 here (42% of 16-24 year olds own an EV), but that's a completely different time period to the study, and EVs have come down a lot in price since 2013-17 - and I find it hard to believe that 42% of 16-24 year olds own an EV when ~20% of households don't own a car at all.

---

Link to the actual study: https://jech.bmj.com/content/early/2024/05/01/jech-2024-2219...
It looks like Anthropic is now leading the charge on safety
Didn't catch that, thanks!
https://analysesetdonnees.rte-france.com/en/electricity-revi...
Stripe Sessions – A Conversation with Nvidia's Jensen Huang
>
You can't ban people from voice-acting who have similar voices to other celebrities

Actually, you probably can.[0]

[0] https://casetext.com/case/waits-v-frito-lay-inc

Edit: Added the context for the reply
Thinking that ads don't work on one's self has to be some sort of Dunning-Kruger effect
> Many EVs make sound when driving at slow speeds. Does that mitigate the problem? It’s actually really irresponsible that this topic isn’t brought up at all in the article.

This is brought up in the article:

> Since July 2019, all new hybrid and electric vehicles sold in Europe have been required to have an acoustic vehicle alerting system that emits sound when the car is travelling slowly, but there are hundreds of thousands of electric cars on the road without the devices. “If government made sure these systems were installed in all electric vehicles and retrofitted them to older electric cars, that would be a good start,” Edwards said, adding that the Green Cross Code also “probably needs updating”.
Number 16 (spider)
Oh that’s very interesting to hear about tmux increasing latency. I’ve not heard this before but now you mention it, it seems obvious. Could you elaborate?
Malicious distro packagers are virtually unheard of, and another set of eyes on the software is generally better. For instance, if the developer sells out the packager can save your bacon. This is especially true on Android where selling out is more common (see: the Simple Apps situation and F-Droid) but also a valid consideration on desktop Linux.
Give wezterm a try: https://wezfurlong.org/wezterm/index.html

It is cross OS (learn once and use the same terminal in Windows, macOS and Linux), actively developed and written in rust
Everything is open source if you can reverse engineer it [video]
Any system can and will be cheated, that wasn't the point of neither OP's or mine proposals.

Standardized testing is a good predictor. In my country people are admitted based on standardized testing only (country wide subject exams and sat-like test) or results of university-adjacent "preparation courses" and it works fairly well.
The affirmative action is realized directly as a bonus points to your scores based on the background, which reduces the effect of ethical gaming.
A hybrid approach to semi-automated Rust verification
Heh now wait until you realize what it's like for kids coming from areas near the poverty line. I entered ISEF at a local level on a whim, my science teacher knew I was his brightest but didn't know what to do with me, I borrowed a rundown pair of shirt/slacks my dad retired from job interviews. The experience left such a deep mark on me that even now in the middle of a very successful tech career I remember it. I did a project on perceptrons which I learned about at the local community college library (from a copy of Mitchell's Machine Learning!) because my parents knew it kept weird 'ol me busy and off the streets. Fun times!
> The rest seems like a long walk around non-cooperative game theory in different terms.

Maybe I read it wrong, but I understand the main point of the essay is to emphasize social/cultural evolution and de-emphasize biological evolution of morality. (That there is a whole moral superstructure that doesn't come from biological evolution.)

Both can be modeled with game theory, but it is often awfully reductive. Game theory is a great source of moral paradoxes. A canonical example is "mutually-assured destruction" in a nuclear war. Another (my favorite) example comes from Yanis Varoufakis, he offered his game theory students a way to pass exam without grading, but only if they could actually act selfishly-rationally and without implicit distrust to the other members of society. The paradox is enhanced by the fact that they weren't even able to reflect on their decision. This shows the implicit power of social relationships in our decisions, but then - aren't we supposed to make free decisions?

This is also true on personal, not just societal level. With the current events, I am realizing how much of our moral dilemmas are really based on friendships and acquaintances (and you can see the difference between common folks and politicians/oligarchs). The banality of evil is that we often decide to favor existing friendships against firm moral principles.

I realized this watching Angela Collier talking about sexual harassment in academia; assuming I was a fellow professor and another professor, a friend for many years, was accused of sexual abuse, and me knowing that he has "a thing with the ladies", who would I trust, him or some student I don't really even know? Would I be willing to completely abandon the relationship in order to be completely impartial? I think even the rational Machiavellian explanation is not sufficient here (it might be actually more advantageous to be seen as impartial than to keep a friend, it's just I can just like that particular person more and therefore be more forgiving), and this shows this is not really just a status or hierarchy problem, but it permeates all social relationships.
They still use a variant of that word in Dutch: vrijen. With the old meaning.. ;)
Apparently its behind a flag because the feature is not completely ready yet. However I was unable to find what work is still needed for it to be considered ready: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1106626#c18
API Transformation Mad Libs
Given that all Wikipedia editors have explicitly consented to their content being released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License, they don't get a choice about their content being used for any purpose.

Redistribution of content is an entirely different matter, and the legal status of copyrighted material in relation to LLM training is an open issue that is currently the subject of litigation.
The data in the study is from 2013-2017 - so the requirement to make noise at low speeds hadn't come in yet (that was 2019). And ICE cars have got a lot quieter in the last decade compared to how loud they used to be.
> We should not be developing new projects in C

I would give at least embedded development a pass, since you rarely do have a choice there
> But that web doesn’t exist anymore. The dominance of Google means all the creators and authors went elsewhere. Filter out the crap and you’ll realise that there’s very little substance left.

Yes, and that signal/noise ratio will drop even further until some filtering gets done.

Filtering out the crap might slow the trend.
There is a multiple decade long history of coaxing a memory safe C embodiment. If it was possible to simply implement memory safety without fundamentally changing the language, you would have a compiler flag that would give to you, requiring no source modifications.

No compiler gives you that memory safety flag (aside from very specific security features, ex. -fstack-protector) because it's not possible in C.
#CorrugatedPaperMachine #PulpingMachine
If you are interested, you can contact us.
Email address: wastepapermachine@gmail.com
https://drumpulper.com/1092-4200mm-fourdrinier-multi-cylinde...
#papermill #papermachinepulpmachine #everyone
> there's usually another anchor point

The original design supposedly had two screws, but was manufactured with one. When you have two fasteners (typically nuts, as opposed to screws...) they can be mutually secured with lock wire. That is very common.

It is decidedly not common to lock wire electrical terminal fasteners in aircraft, or anywhere else for that matter. Typically lock washers and self-locking nuts are used. I'm not a certified aircraft electrical system designer, so I can't say definitively, but there are some pretty obvious reasons: First, these are typically small fasteners: lock wiring is hard enough on large fasteners. Lock wiring tiny little nuts with small gauge wire approaches the unreasonable. Second, lock wire is not insulated, so you would end up with a rats nest of exposed conductors leading to your terminals. Clearly unworkable. I suppose someone, somewhere has done something that involved insulated lock wire, but I've never seen it, wouldn't know where to buy it, and can't imagine how you'd employ it without abrading the insulation.

The problem here is the shared ground terminal. Stacking wires on ground terminals is common, stupid and a plague on electrical systems. The clamping force on a wire's ring terminal (and, thus, it's contact resistance, mechanical friction, ability to inhibit corrosion, etc.) is distributed among all of the ring terminals stacked on a stud, screw, whatever. Stack just one new terminal with another and you've cut the clamping force on both in half.

Half.

You are now the "engineer" and when someone dies as a result of your field engineered electrical system it's your fault.
This is the compiled to Bash part. Sed is used because `bc -l` can return a float when integer is expected. Not sure if can be done better in generic case but it isn't unheard. Certainly can be optimized for some cases. (Here e.g. can use Bash's built-in integer arithmetic.)
Cause you have to send a line with a single period somehow.

. Ends body
.. One period <--
... Two periods
.A A
..A .A
A A

Anyway that’s stupid and only helps if you compose your email right in a tcp session.
Or you could have done a better job posting an article worth engaging with, right? Getting snitty with the only engagement you actually got seems... If nothing else, at least counterproductive.
This isn't a crazy thought to have about K&R C. They're trying to fit a high level language onto a 1970s computer and so sacrifices must be made. Some of the trades they make are... questionable and others I'd say clearly wrong (they just don't need Tony's billion dollar mistake, nor to be so cavalier with types in general), but it's not as though they're targeting a machine with gigabytes of RAM and a multi-core CPU.

But, people aren't writing K&R C. These days most of them are writing something closer to C99 or C11 and some may be using something newer (e.g. C17) or proprietary (GNU's C dialect) either deliberately or just because it compiled and nobody told them not to.

At that point you've actually given away much of the simplicity, and yet what you get for your trouble is largely more footguns. Trade up for a sound type system and fewer footguns instead.
Microsoft Future Vision [video]
Bad tip. Case in point: on this very flight, 9 of the 18 crew members had moderate injuries (https://apnews.com/article/singapore-airlines-flight-turbule...)
>If someone has a choice, a safer more modern language can accommodate less skilled practitioners

The implication here is thoroughly debunked. We’ve seen over and over again that memory safety bugs will happen in every C codebase(ignoring toy or small codebases). Even for the mythical and infallible “skilled practitioner” spending time re-solving the solved issues inherent to C just isn’t a good use of developer time.