skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'll concede that its less "give up your voice and everything about yourself for a boy" and more "give up your voice and everything about yourself for this way of life that you are clearly irrationally obsessed over and don't understand at all". But its also made clear via the voice subplot that her mad dash to separate herself from who she was to begin with is itself a source of conflict. Certainly, don't ignore the voice in your head that says "this isn't the place for you", but also accept that the change needs to happen slower than you want, for a variety of good reasons.

I suppose there's an interpretation of Disney's The Little Mermaid where its an allegory for LGBTQ (especially trans) kids. But even then, it mixes its metaphors by adding in the romantic subplot. Luca does a much MUCH better job of balancing the two worlds, because the happy ending is "gets to be human" and not "gets to be human, so they can get married to the person they met a 4 days ago". The Little Mermaid really muddies the water (pardon the pun) by adhering to that aspect of the old story.

And while I have considerable misgivings about introducing the happily-ever-after romantic ending to 5 year olds, Disney does manage to get it more correct: Beauty and the Beast shows the (potentially problematic) relationship between Belle and the Beast developing over time, as they get to know each other. Tangled has the love story as ancillary to the main story of getting out from under the thumb of an abusive parental figure. Even Sleeping Beauty expends a lot of screentime to show how the love story specifically contradicts the arranged marriage to be (although its all for naught, since they were arranged to be married to each other anyway). Its just that The Little Mermaid piles up a lot of unsubtle allegory and doesn't even attempt to mitigate it.
Our problem isn't with the critiques of Israel, it's with the fact that the people critiquing Israel are almost universally singling Israel out for critique.
Nope, plenty of mediocre people doing great based on nothing but virtue of where they were born or their parents. It’s all luck. Don’t believe me? Imagine what your life would be like if you didn’t get the key moments in your life which defined them. Would you fundamentally be doing the same thing? It’s hard for most people to answer this honestly. For poor people who made it: be honest about what gave you the opportunity to work hard or whatever. It’s probably the fact that you had parents or other support structure to uphold you when you were vulnerable.

Many such people who are entrepreneurs etc. right now would be in the service industry if not for their luck. That’s the only difference between most people, simply luck. That said, I have such admiration and respect for those who truly overcome odds to slowly or otherwise make it despite their bad luck. It’s hard to stop lying to each other about ideals of meritocracy or whatever because everyone has a self image and narrative they prefer about themselves or society. But do you really think that someone else who had your life wouldn’t have done the same as or better than you? Why do you think they’d be worse if you do? Cognitive biases are tricky, I wish people would stop lying to each other and themselves as that might perhaps make for a social environment which is optimal for most people’s self determination
Yeah, totally. If it's private then it's up to whoever owns it. I think my experience is colored by using Slack for a group that's very much intended to be a public record: https://futureofcoding.org/community

Perhaps a better way to state my position is: I think publishing should be a ratchet. Everyone can choose what they want to make public. But once it's public that's it, there's no undo and no do-over. This isn't ideal in some situations, but on balance seems like the greater good. Stuff gets added to the commons of human knowledge, and we do our darnedest not to let stuff get removed once it's been added.
I agree for reading. The example of Cinderella's sisters chopping her feet isn't too much for a child to read about, but nobody wants to watch that in an animated film.

There's also a point where books become unsuitable for children. "All Quiet on the Western Front" with its gruesome WWI details probably wouldn't have been a good idea before 5th grade, and it was a good thing we were older reading "Cupid and Psyche" in Latin where the main character gets r---d within the first 3 pages.
> do not see Assange as a journalist.

Sure, a "journalist" is somebody who works for a mega-corporation, preferably owned by a billionaire with political ambitions, and reports whatever the party that controls his outlet considers to be fit to print at the moment.

> he was guilty of a very serious offence

When somebody is caught on camera robbing or stabbing, the "journalists" always insist he is "allegedly" guilty until the court decision is made. These rules, however, do not apply to people who publish dirt on politicians.

> would agree it’s not appropriate to steal national security information and publish it

"Journalists" have done it many times though. And got prestigious awards for it. Of course, the situation is different here - his wasn't approved for anybody powerful and didn't benefit any billionaire with political ambitions, so no awards for him.
I think it's good advice to not pass secrets through environment variables. Env vars leak a lot. Think php_info, Sentry, java vm dumps, etc. Also, env vars leak into sub-processes if you don't pay extra attention. Instead, read secrets from a vault or from a file-system from _inside_ your process. See also [1] (or [2] which discusses [1]). Dotnet does this pretty good with user secrets [3].

[1] https://blog.diogomonica.com/2017/03/27/why-you-shouldnt-use...
[2] https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/197784/is-it-un...
[3] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/security/app-s...
> We are still using Helm and Manifests under the hood. However, together with the community, we plan to develop an entirely new packaging and bundling format for all cloud-native packages.

Yes at the moment Glasskube packages wrap around Helm charts and manifests. We don't have a dedicated packaging format as of now.

We are actively looking into OCI images and other possibilities to bundle Kubernetes packages, but focus on features like multi namespace dependencies and simplicity at the moment.

How would you like to package Kubernetes packages or what should be avoided from your perspective?
This is the beauty of open source. I love that you’re being so collaborative here instead of seeing another tool as competition.
Is this a bot account? [video]
I have a hard time seeing how a k8s package manager could ever be as simple as brew or apt. One reason that stands out is that I have different values depending on what environment I'm targeting, and almost every user has a snowflake, just the way it is. The idea of a repl like prompt or web UI for setting those values is not appealing to me.

The main pains remain unaddressed

- authoring helm charts sucks

- managing different values per environment

- connecting values across charts so I don't have to
Historically the assumption was that a machine under question probably doesn't work, so the prosecution must show to a jury that it works or else they haven't met the burden, you're innocent because the machine doesn't work.

This probably feels fine for a while, and then you discover you're repeatedly releasing people who are very obviously crooks who did exactly what they were accused of, but you couldn't prove to the satisfaction of a jury that the machine everybody knows works does in fact work. They need offer no evidence that it doesn't work, that's your problem, they walk free.

So this assumption was reversed. But then you get Horizon. Did you steal £18,284.27 from the Post Office? Don't say "No" because the computer says you did, and unless you can prove why it's faulty, the Post Office can rely on that £18,284.27 because a computer said so and under law the assumption is that it's correct.

Clearly neither of these simple assumptions is adequate. That's a problem.

None of which justifies what was done to these people, that's over and above the technical legal problem of how to deliver a just outcome - nobody at POL or ICL/Fujitsu seems to have cared about a just outcome anyway.
No; but it is a signal that indicates whether we're going in the right direction, or at least not in the wrong direction.

When groups whose primary motivation seems to indoctrinate innocents into a cult are pissed -- then I'm less worried.

Demanding mental assent to questionable claims to avoid punishment, regardless of questions about the predictive failure or successful outcomes of testing the hypotheses underlying those claims seems ... culty.

And, there's a lot of that in modern public schooling.

The first thing I ask my daughter whenever someone tells her to believe something, is "how could you know?". Quite often, the claimant has assiduously avoided informing her about how they "know" their claim is true. It's astonishing.
I'm still waiting for them to discover a special property of prime numbered elements.
Looks like you can get custom colors here too: https://xqd-led.en.alibaba.com/productgrouplist-936470954-2/.... And likely much more affordable than Breakfast.
If the plastic is made from renewable plant material and has no other environmental impact, why does it need to biodegrade? Can't you just bury it without fear of contaminating water or relasing microplastics? And won't that effectively sequester carbon?
Transparency improves security, while secrecy hinders it.
> Why would an employer agree to that?

Because they are rational people who understand that data copied isn't a loss for them, and would rather attract more passionate leftists (if that's what your going for) to work with than people in a wage-slave mentality...

But everyone's going to do what they're going to do... regardless of if it makes sense or not, and having old (materialistic-centric) world views on digital content distribution is something we are going to have to learn to outgrow sooner than later.

Maybe it would jive better with the old school mentality if the diction of 'licensing to the employer' was non-exclusive as a default: resulting in higher wages where an exclusive license is actually required (or legal or moral/ethical reasons).

Being generally open about software makes the wages go up, not down. More of us get more done, faster, while exponentially increasing gains by contributing back. Open Source is the Way.
Learning sucks, because it's all boilerplate crap not anymore
How to install multi-container applications with Podman quadlets
"We also release our tooling so that fellow security researchers can dig into KakaoTalk’s broad attack surface to find more bugs." I think this would be illegal in Germany.
It would immediately prevent several classes of cheating. No more wallhacks or ESP.

Ironically the main type that'd still exist would be the vision-based external AI-powered target-highlighting and aim/fire assist.

The display is analysed and overlaid with helpful info (like enemies highlighted) and/or inputs are assisted (snap to visible enemies, and/or automatically pull trigger.)
I’m talking about locals living in Chinese. What you’re talking about is tangential, but the single use culture is astronomical and their middle class outnumbers Europe and USA because of their large population who participate in this single use culture. It’s mind boggling the waste you will see in Chinas river and natures in the cities and outskirts
I don't think we really lose anything about ourselves unless we are going back and changing the original work. The Hans Christian Anderson version of The Little Mermaid is still readily available.

For thousands of years, stories, myths, and legends were handed down through oral tradition and changed radically over time. The key difference today is that anyone with basic literacy and access to a library or the internet can go back and see old "versions" of these stories.
You only return it if it's broken, otherwise you are stuck with it.
AS WELL THEY SHOULD!!!

If an author can do a better job: the publishing house needs the run for its money... for it has gotten fat and lazy.
Look at VDA's KLT system for example to see something that works readily for the reusable crate task.
Just hand over your empty crate into the empty hands/van-shelf-space of the delivery driver after taking the crate with your fresh goods out of their hands.

Bonus: the KLT system easily offers enough assistance to automated/mechanized handling that the box delivery task doesn't require humans.

Could probably easily have a portal crane style 4-wheel robot to drive the new box from the van to your door, drop it, and bring back an empty box you put out for it.

Well, something about curbs, but the stair dolly (big wheel made of 3 smaller wheels) style drive can probably cope with most.

Originally the KLT boxes were made to elide re-packing and manual box handling in the many-small-supplier-companies car industry of Germany. They differ from the more widely seen euro boxes by having molded features to allow a robot gripper to "plug" into any of the 6 sides of the cuboid and get a solid grasp of the box suitable for (re-)stacking them as long as their nominal load rating is adhered to. Also at least one, if space a short and a long side though, have a slot to hold a DIN A-series piece of (tick/heavy) paper describing the box contents, such that the box won't be contaminated with sticky tape residue.

When they're eventually broken from old age or abuse, they can be recycled cleanly because they are normed to be a pretty specific plastic and to (for interchange at least) be one of that colors (grey and a dark blue).

I have seen a local service, picnic, using a small urban-only electric truck (if not even a tricycle) who's back is just a 120 cm (plus tolerances plus door thing) wide shelf to be used with 40x60 cm euro boxes. If they were KLTs you could just put the box as-is in your pantry instead of doing the "dump onto kitchen table" tactic, I guess.
I'm highly sceptical of the Fermi paradox being a meaningful paradox at all. I don't think we have nearly enough data to make any conclusion at all about the frequency of intelligent life in our own galaxy, let alone the universe.

We've only started finding exoplanets in the last few decades, and the frequency of exoplanet detection was very low for most of that time and is still growing today.

The ability to learn much of anything about the environments of these planets is even more recent, just a few years since the launch of JWST, and still very limited. It's still only "reliable" for fairly large planets, mostly gas giants. And even for those planets our ability to model the data is an area of active, painstaking research. The number of planets whose atmospheres we have any data-backed information about is very very low.

So it seems like the only real argument for the Fermi paradox(certainly back in the 50s when Fermi proposed it) is that we haven't been visited or received any communication. But even that's worthy of doubt. Indeed, our ability to detect and characterise very small objects in or passing through the solar system is fairly limited even today, and was practically non-existent before. It seems very plausible that alien probes could have visited our solar system many times without us noticing. It could for instance be the case that this is only possible by way of technologies that can't easily decelerate and so they've only passed through. We'd have to be pretty lucky to spot something like that, at the size it would likely be, passing through only for a short time(given the speed it would have to move at).

As for radio signals, the amount of funding that goes into projects like SETI is not exactly earth-shattering and also hasn't been going on for very long. It's a pretty fringe area of research. The amount of interference from earth-based radio sources also makes this research quite difficult.

I'm not some UFO nut, btw. I'm not arguing for conspiracy theories involving the US government, alien abductions, yadda yadda. I'm just asking what do we really know? Not very much, it seems to me.
Within a systemic lens, yes it is. As weaponry has gotten more deadly, conflicts have gotten less.

There has never been an instance of stable human civilization (beyond small groups or extremely defensible/remote locations) that did not involve the ability to be violent. That ability is not durable. The skills required to ensure it does not become the purpose of a society is not durable. It takes craft, community, and hard work to cultivate the readiness for violence and restrain its application.

It is fine for people to disavow violence. It is beneficial that they do. You will find in the military people who value pacifism more deeply than your average citizen.

We do not have to believe or participate in something to be grateful for the people who do. One personal experience with violence and the value of the readiness to respond becomes apparent.
I made a tool that provides quotes tailored to your mood
Row Level Security for Tenants in Postgres
What's better than 1 nifty tool for querying semistructured data?

2 nifty tools for querying semistructured data!
> No; but it is a signal that indicates whether we're going in the right direction, or at least not in the wrong direction.

This is... sadly contrarian, and really makes no logical sense.
WebAssembly fans might say that it's the kind of universal low-level but portable IR that you envision. It would certainly make sense for a Scheme compiler to consider a WebAssembly target.
Always host your dependencies yourself, it's easy to do & even in the absence of a supply chain attack it helps to protect your users' privacy.
Yeah, saw that... my comment was mostly in snark as the games in question were much smaller than even the Office setup files.
If you are looking for attention from an evangelist, I'm sorry but you are not the target customer for MI300. They are courting the Hyperscalers for heavy duty production inference workloads.
Nothing - just might have to wait a bit for them to come up.
> Not having print copies of a writer’s work is a big mistake.

This is an important thing. People rave about how the internet gives almost everyone immediate access to so many thing, but flip a switch (or stare helplessly as a major CME is hurtling our way) and it's all gone for some amount of time or forever.

Did the proprietors even consider and try to sell those many hours? If nothing else they could've auctioned files for private use. No-one there to make a quick buck that way?
I wrote my own because I don't want to stream access to media I already posses through the internet and I don't want to be limited by arbitrary stupidity Apple imposes to prop up streaming media or its app store.
My memory is the US was trying to extradite Assange to the US and was threatening to charge him with Sedition with a possibility of decades of prison time. That was at least the stated intent of the previous CIA director
Yes, I buy software …

I bought iExplorer which lets me sanely treat my iPhone like an external disk … and I bought Mountain Duck which lets me mount remote sftp as a disk in Finder …

… and some other things…
> The point was that nobody would consider a person acting under threat of death to be making freely willed choices, so defining choice in the naive and reductive sense that was suggested is just incorrect because it cannot exclude this case. Therefore this naive and reductive definition cannot be what people mean by "choice" in the context of free will.

I disagree with this characterization as it omits entirely the moral culpability central to Frankfurt's argumentation. Frankfurt cases are about moral culpability[1]. I did not refer to morality or culpability but only the base naive case given that the question was "why can't you have both?" and I think the epistemic force of the base case is nontrivial.

I think your error here is that you are presuming:

(a) If you are acting under threat of death, you cannot do otherwise but save your life.
(b) When you define freedom as the ability to have done otherwise, you cannot be free in the case of (a).
(c) All cases of human choice must be free.
(d) Given (b) and (c), the definition must be incorrect.

As the other person in the thread pointed out, some people can choose death in the face of death or some other choice. It has happened many times throughout history. So saying "you must save your life" is outright false. Some people choose one option, some people choose another. This has no force on the definition of freedom.

Even if you say in that specific case a person is not free because they could not do otherwise, it does not follow that the definition of freedom can't handle the case. It may follow that the person is not blameworthy - which is what Frankfurt was getting at - but that's nowhere near saying that the theory can't handle the case at all. Some might say the person under threat of death could do otherwise, some might say the person under threat of death could not do otherwise. That's not fatal to anything, it just shows the definition is incomplete.

[1] Wikipedia covers it somewhat here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_cases#Frankfurt's_ob... but if you don't like Wikipedia for some reason, the intro to this 2007 paper https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1... gives more or less the same description.
These rulings happen way too late, the damage is already done.
I cannot possibly trust this not to hallucinate.
By that logic the only archive you can trust is the one you build yourself. Not really feasible.
Maybe you can also consider where this sort of thinking might lead:

When the news began circulating on social media, many couldn’t believe it was true––that the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California would remove a longtime professor from a class because a Mandarin word he used correctly in a lesson sounded sort of like a racial slur.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/fight-agai...
There's nothing heroic about supporting a government that institutionalized pedophilia (Bacha Bazi), ran entirely on corruption, and passively accepted the sale of opium out of kickbacks from warlords. Especially not one installed through a foreign invader.

The Taliban are awful, but they're the awful legitimate government of Afghanistan. And they've already ended two of these problems. If you inform against a paramilitary that has no concerns with rule of law, you're already inserting yourself into their war and accepting the risk of being outed.
With margins that high?

There is always financing, there are always people willing to go to the competitor at some wage, there is always a way if the leadership wants to.

If it was just a straight up fab bottleneck? Yeah maybe you buy that for a year or two.

“During Q1, Nvidia reported $5.6 billion in cost of goods sold (COGS). This resulted in a gross profit of $20.4 billion, or a margin profile of 78.4%.”

That’s called an “induced market failure”.
What is shocking, is that random parents with no teaching background can usually deliver a child through a k-12 curriculum with superior outcomes vs. the average public school.

That, alone, is a stinging indictment of public education.

And, usually spending about the total daily time required for just the assigned homework from a public school.
The nuclear plant nearest to me uses sea water, which is put back into the ocean.
> routine loss of control is a better explanation

Loss of control is not routine. It is something that should never ever happen.
Yes, but no concrete plans.

We already looked into pkl, but this would require every package author to either have Java (and pkl) running on their system or we would need to package the jre (and pkl) in order to make it work probably.
But Kubernetes examples are already out there (https://github.com/apple/pkl-k8s-examples) and we are keeping an eye on it.