skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Read the judgement, it's pretty simple.

All this says is that if Congress defers something to a branch, and there is ambiguity, and it comes in front of a judge, the judge does NOT have to accept the branch's interpretation of the ambiguity, and can instead judge it as judges do.

Chevron said that if the branch had a reasonable interpretation (e.g, not batshit insane like saying "no arsenic in water" means "at least ten pounds per gallon of arsenic in water") then the judge should defer to it. Now the judge can but does not have to defer to it - if he pushes back, Congress can clarify the law.

This has been done many times in the IRS, where people find a "loophole", the IRS tries to patch it themselves, the courts say, yeah, nah, and then Congress amends the law to remove it.
That is a false equivalency. The Constitution is an explicit definition of what the federal government is and what they are allowed to do. The Bible is a collection of a bunch of ancient stories.
My idea is to apportion costs to the voter's choices (you want lobster, you pay for lobster), and/or hamstring the ability to move and immediately get access to voting in the new place's elections.
> it's forcing legislative responsibility back on Congress

I mean it's not really going to do this in practice, because Congress can and will continue to be dysfunctional it just means that the court rather than the agency is going to make the call on what the law means. Without a way for the judiciary to be say, "this law is too ambiguous to rule on, Congress must pass a law right now clarifying their intent, then we will issue a ruling" it's just going to be the judges making a call.
I wonder if it’s possible for this to get resubmitted, or given another chance. We often see these “boring” tech write ups, but very rarely applied to something like healthcare.gov.

With hindsight, I’m curious which of the other choices made would have changed the most with a multi page architecture, and have you discovered a cleaner way of avoiding it? Struggling with something similar at the moment.
Absolutely. I have 400 times more control over who my congressman is than who the president is.
Vivid runner here with very low arches.

My question is: do these supershoes work with supporters (that prevent my arches from collapsing)?
Contrary to what a lot of people say, useMemo is more than a performance optimization.

If React decides to create a new instance of a component because it thinks a parameter change happened all the state in that component can get dumped which can have effects like a bunch of selections in a combo box disappearing.
The Apple /// is a master class on what NOT to do when designing a computer. Apple still owes us an 8-bit Apple IV computer as an apology for the ///.

The best feature is the dual speed arrows - press and they’ll auto repeat. Press harder and they’ll repeat faster.
A) This is one of the best pieces of math pedagogy I've seen in ages. A true "explanation" instead of a "reference" -- thanks for sharing.

B) I think we should pass a hacker news law via referendum (that's a thing, right? It should be!) that any article mentioning quaternions must also generalize to Octonions, or at least gesture in that vague direction to pay respect. As the first paper I found on Octonion Differentiation says best:

Each Cayley-Dickson algebra Ar+1 is obtained from the preceding Ar with the help of the so called doubling procedure [1, 14, 17]. This gives the family of embedded algebras: Ar ↪→ Ar+1 ↪→ .... For a unification of notation it is convenient to put: A0 = R for the real field, A1 = C for the complex field, A2 = H denotes the quaternion skew field, A3 = O is the octonion algebra, A4 denotes the sedenion algebra.

The quaternion skew field is associative, but non-commutative. The octonion algebra is the alternative division algebra with the multiplicative norm. The sedenion algebra and Cayley-Dickson algebras of higher order r ≥ 4 are not division algebras and have not any non-trivial multiplicative norm. Each equation of the form ax = b with non-zero octonion a and any octonion b can be resolved in the octonion algebra: x = a−1b, but it may be non-resolvable in Cayley-Dickson algebras of higher order r ≥ 4 because of divisors of zero.

Therefore, in this article differential equations are considered [only] with octonion or quaternion variables for octonion or quaternion valued functions.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1003.2620 FWIW the octonion answer seems to be much more dependent on what kind of analysis you're doing. AKA "it's complicated"
>If anything, they'll need to rely on more expertise now, so they can craft laws that aren't open to interpretation.

Every law is open to interpretation. If tech can barely secure the doors on machines that execute instructions near-flawlessly, you think we can construct flawless frameworks out of inherently ambiguous linguistic building blocks run and understood by deeply human executors? This just plain doesn't work when the rubber meets the road.

Someone's going to make a choice, and SCOTUS just decided unilaterally that it's going to be a body that hasn't been able to decide anything productively for a decade.

This isn't about creating better structures for the analysis of rules; it's about gutting the regulatory capacity of agencies.
The solution to all of these problems is an aggressive buildout of nuclear fission plants to provide baseline power and accelerate the closure of all remaining plants which burn fossil fuel. Subsidized if necessary, as essential infrastructure.
Your quote reminded me of people with strong character: admitting to a mistake when it might cost them their job, urging a friend to return a stolen item, asking fellow church members to get to know a paralyzed man.

Putting aside personal convenience is fundamental to loving God and neighbor at times.
I have a fantasy solution that I know will never be implemented, but in my mind resolves all objections to expanding the court.

Promote all eleven judges in the DC circuit court of appeals to the Supreme Court and leave the appeals court empty. For each vacancy that occurs on the Supreme Court, the president gets to pick one judge for the appeals court, until the Supreme Court justice count is back to 9 and the appeals court judge count is back to 11; at which time things go back to status quo ante.

This would allow the Supreme Court to be rebalanced without the president packing the court with partisan choices. Rather, it respects the record of judicial confirmations for the appeals court going back almost 40 years and several presidential administrations.

It would increase the number of perspectives on the court and make the Justices work harder to find consensus, rather than the majority being able to lazily fall back on pet legal theories that are out of the mainstream.

It would counter and largely nullify the Republican strategy of targeting the Supreme Court with nomination of extremist and underqualified candidates with significant questions about their backgrounds, and confirming the nominees with dubious political maneuvering.

It would be hard for Republicans to escalate; i.e., if a Democratic president added 12 slots to the Supreme court, what's to stop a Republican president and congress adding 20 more at first opportunity, and so on. Republicans could choose to elevate another court's judges to the Supreme Court, but that would tend to further balance the Court and make decisions more unpredictable, rather than produce a clear partisan advantage.

It would take the Supreme Court nomination issue out of presidential politics for a generation.
The Chevron deference case is one of the most cited court cases in the US and this decision threatens to throw Federal regulations into chaos as a bunch of Districts redecide decades of precedent. Since the appeals courts can reach contradictory decisions and keep them in play until the Supreme Court makes a conclusive decision, any company at the national level will have to figure out how to square that circle.

Regardless of where you are on the political spectrum, this is going to cause a practical mess just like the Dobbs decision, except Chevron deference impacts every area of federal regulation.
This seems much different than what Gemini Earn did. Having smart contracts enable swaps is very different from taking people's money and lending it our through micro lending.

I was also interested in Gemini Earn until I read the terms and decided it was almost a guaranteed way to lose all of my money.
As a legal dilettante I have some questions: What does this decision mean for court caseload going forward? If it will increase, how much? Is there budget for that?
Congress already has that power now though..? The congressional review act lets congress review and vote on new regulations issued by government agencies. Lots of people in this thread seem to be missing the fact that congress already approves of these agency rules. If they didn't they would have blocked them under the CRA.
How long as separate but equal a precedent? How many laws were made with that assumption in mind?

Just because something is a precedent doesn't mean it is good or should continue.
For MNIST your model is sufficient. But it’s not structurally complex enough to generate more complex images, even if you scale it up.
Unpopular opinion given all the craze around Elixir these days. I find the syntax extremely verbose and hard to read compared to e.g. Python. I was told great things about it by engineers I really respect. But each time I start reading Elixir code bases to get a good look at what an actual Elixir project looks like, I find the code hard to read and understand. Is it just me?
Are you the author? I am curious about how people write TextMate grammars. I can't really find (good) resources on it and I find it hard to reverse engineer existing grammars to understand them.
There's definitely a lot of people watching CT for anomalies (I'm one of them), but more surveillance of it is also good and something I've been trying to advocate.

It's also why I'm personally against SMIME and think it's a bad idea.
BIMI is a CA racket.
Living organism always mutate. Clone the dog 100 times and you get 100 different dogs.
The constitution very explicitly grants Congress the right to strip jurisdiction from the federal courts.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S2-C2-...
CUPS also works without custom software for the hp printer, but I think cups is only for printing and not for scanning?
I always thought it was one of the many relays under the dash.
A family acquaintance of mine was a consultant with an interesting work/life balance:

- He had no permanent physical residence aka he didn't own a house or rent an apartment (he did have a PO Box in a city just for a legal address)

- Everything he owned was in 4 suitcases

- Other than scheduled PTO, the firm decided where he would go for consulting projects (often on short notice) which could be anywhere in the world

- When he DID have PTO, the firm would pay for ANYTHING he wanted to do. Rent a speedboat? Check! Fly him to Asia to see a friend? Check!

He had a girlfriend (who I was friends with and how I knew him) so I don't think he was totally isolated. That being said, must be tough to put down roots in that situation.
If you are into this I reccomend the book Outwitting History; great read.
https://shop.yiddishbookcenter.org/products/outwitting-histo...
Will it actually reduce the number of infections?
> So agencies will not have any power to actually regulate.

This isn't accurate. Agencies will just need to work with Congress to help them write laws which make sense according to how the agency would like something to regulated.
> The mandates early on were to curb the hospitalizations / deaths that was occurring.

The first vaccine was very efficient against infection by the original variants. So it was not useful only for people with co-morbidities. Then we got Omicron and a loss of efficacy against infection (but still useful to reduce severeness).
Also “$137 million” sounds like pocket change for Google.
> You are correct that the US Constitution is poorly suited to governing a nation of ~1/3 billion people in the modern world.

Which is exactly why this is such a terrible decision.
Garbage collection isn’t the only advantage.

Straight up program correctness is drastically improved thanks to sum types, enumeration, and other features of Rust.

These do come with some upfront cost. Having used Rust for years, I think these costs tend to be overblown. They disproportionately impact newcomers (which in and of itself is a problem!) and particularly those who don’t care about learning to write new languages idiomatically. Still, though, it’s usually at least a little slower to go from zero to fully functional.

However in my experience Rust programs require far less ongoing maintenance which is where the vast majority of time in software is spent. New features tend to be added more easily and entire categories of bugs (more than just memory safety) are completely prevented by the type system. Even large refactors are usually relatively easy and once it compiles, it probably passes the tests too.

In some cases every additional day you’re late to launch is disastrous. But when it’s not, the time savings you get from not chasing down runtime errors, nil dereferences, unhandled exceptions, issues stemming from new and partially-handled enum variants, etc. end up recouping the upfront costs tenfold.

The upfront costs do make Rust less competitive in areas that have quickly-changing requirements. And that’s totally reasonable, no language is perfect at everything. But the further you get away from sales-driven users and the closer you get toward slower-moving core infrastructure, the more the reduced maintenance costs start paying off.
The whole point of the judgement is that the status quo continues.

Congress passes laws, the agencies implement them, if you disagree you go to court. All it's saying is that you don't have to go to the Supremes to get your disagreement to win.

Imagine a patent system where the judge could never throw out a patent, because the experts at the agency (patent office) had granted it, so it must be valid.
This is just throwing out the baby with the bath water. You really think the proportion of "frauds" is the same among doctors and among holistic healers?
If you don't trust professionals or experts in their field then there's no reason to have a discussion on this.

Let's just replace the government with a Magic 8 Ball.
On the flip side-- congress often will pass regulation with the very intent to allow ambiguity so that the regulatory agency will have extreme latitude often against the will of the people.

Or a regulatory agency will grossly stretch their mandate to overstep what they are effectively allowed to regulate and interpret.

Since there effectively minimal judicial checks and balances against that behavior that's also not desirable either. Just look at the farcical interpretations from the ATF in recent years that have sent innocent folks to prison for having a completely non-functional design of a gun part on a business card to prison. Or classifying a shoe string as a machine gun. These folks have had little to no recourse in court due to the ATF's broad unchecked discretion.
Hooks solve the problem of composing lifecycle effects. How would you do it without a hook-like pattern?
> You can sue them for not going through a rulemaking process that includes publishing proposed rules and reviewing public comment, or for a rule that "was arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion."

Or you can remember that the Executive Branch's job is to enforce the laws, not write them.
Wip
Wip
Wip
...
We Chunk – turning PDF's into hierarchical structure for RAG
Xerox PARC operated on a budget of $12m/year in today's money. Out of that we got the laser printer, Ethernet, the GUI, much of the innovation behind object-oriented programming, etc. Just one of those innovations (laser printer) paid for the entire lab's operations 200 times over.

Today's startups need twice that to ship a fucking terminal emulator: https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/05/warp-raises-23m-to-build-a...
That's a great library! Looking forward to use it in some personal project.

In a React-based project, I managed to use RxJS through react-rxjs[0] to manage events and state. Thanks to it, I was able to fully streamline state management in that project.

[0] https://react-rxjs.org/
Additional commentary from nature/landscape photographer Ansel Adams (who often placed the horizon one or two thirds up from the bottom of the frame, e.g. Moonrise, but also used many other approaches):

> "Are you tired of hearing about the rules of composition? So was Ansel Adams. ‘The so-called rules of photographic composition are, in my opinion, invalid, irrelevant, immaterial,’ he said. Rules of composition, such as the rule of thirds and golden ratio, are stale, predictable and boring. While they can certainly serve to create visually pleasing images, they can also stand to get in the way of creativity."

https://www.photocrowd.com/blog/197-how-shoot-ansel-adams/
> Are there any checks against this?

Yes, packing the court.
People on this thread are talking as if this decision stops Congress delegating powers to the executive, or the executive drafting laws for Congress to pass. It clearly does neither.

It's actually constitutionally entirely reasonable to demand that lawmakers are the people who make law, because there's no specific reason to assume that the volume of laws should naturally drown the people responsible for them. But even if you do assume that, nothing in this judgement would restrict the volume of laws passed in any way. It's just not about that at all.
I used them a lot for fonts. The Take-1 Programmer’s Toolkit was used extensively for animations in educational software back then.
It won't affect caseload so much as it will affect the balance of power in settlement negotiations. Source: I used to be a lawyer who worked in a heavily regulated field.
They start with the ruling they want, and then work backwards to find the most reasonable path to get there.
Release their own phone? Really? That is not really better then apple, is it?
Increasing the size of the court isn’t a slippery slope to somehow making justices elected by states/districts. It’s not like as soon as you get too many justices it turns into a legislature.

The interesting differences between the legislative and judicial branch is not the number of people (moreover, the Supreme Court is not exactly the entirety of the federal judicial branch).
Err, we've seen what happened when the Bad Guys (TM) won the election. They pack the Supreme Court with their friendly Bad Guys (TM) so that the Court can make decisions in their favor. (If you object, feel free to switch Good/Bad guys, and it will be still true.)

So "Please consider that supreme courts may also limit the power of the Bad Guys" is clearly false, because when the Team X has power, they will make sure Team X is in every branch of the government, and their justices will decide whatever the executive branch is doing is very kosher and constitutional, as long as it's their team.

In the end, the system can only hold as long as even "Bad Guys" are good enough that they're not willing to break the system from inside. You keep electing the Real Bad Guys, the system will fail. Checks and balances aren't magic.
how about instead of telling people to read more, you just tell us what point you're trying to make.
Thanks for sharing, looks interesting, but the standard/spec wasn't that easy to fully understand as the remotestorage standard
I felt the same way at first coming mostly from JS. I think it's different enough that you need it to become familiar before it feels as comfortable.

That said, I don't think it's as easy to read as Python, but the perceived verbosity and reading difficulty definitely goes down with familiarity.
Have there been any reports of true severe clear air turbulence (where the pilot cannot control the plane) or are all of these cases not technically severe because the pilots were in control the entire time and it was just a bumpy ride?

Another question I have is what do you do in that scenario if you can't control it? Just ride it out and hope for the best?
If a driver is replaced by a cab passenger it is 1-to-1 replacement of personal vehicle with taxi, no impact on congestion.

If you see demand for cabs increasing + congestion pricing revenue of $1.5bln that means more traffic and more paying drivers
Why is it always people who haven't used React (or frontend dev in general) recently that feel the need to talk about how it's making "the most esoteric and unhinged choices possible?" All of the changes are solving problems that actual users of these frameworks run into.
Bitsening raises $25M for its high-resolution radar in autonomous driving
You're citing an Executive-branch regulation, not a law from Congress.
What??? Slavery was ended by crushing the south in the civil war.
When your opponents are lying, cheating, and breaking their own made up rules (no supreme court nominees during the lame duck session unless nominated by a Republican) your characterization is uncalled for.
> They believe that Congress makes the laws, the Executive branch enforces them, and the Judicial branch interprets them.

This process that you just described is what produced Chevron deference.
I’m discussing tech, while you’re discussing anthropology. Should people use an inferior tool to achieve a higher social status/paycheck? I don't know, that's your opinion.

Do I recommend someone learn React to develop a web app nowadays? No, it's not worth it.

I'm not preaching to you, but to the juniors reading the thread. React contributes significantly to current JavaScript fatigue, and supporting it so juniors can get a job isn't in my or their best interest.
This won't "make" Congress do anything. They'll continue sitting on their asses because they face no consequences for their (in)actions.
Is this k8s for LLMs?
My beef with it is that it's written in Javascript whereas what it does is so simple that they should just code it up in Rust or Go and be done with it, particularly when it could be packed up as a tiny binary that doesn't require you to install Node, Python, the JVM or any other runtime or library.
This sounds very similar to the development of my project. Basically every word of that could apply to https://mutraction.dev/
Cooking involves boiling. Liquids bubbling.

Baking is more of a evaporation.

And the german definition of cooking in the narrow sense is defined like this, but in a broader sense apparently usable for everything with preparing meals.

And I never used a rice cooker, so no idea how to classify that ..
But they apparently haven't done so, unless you know of a law that supercedes the APA the court is citing?
Cyber criminals are usually not wanted by companies. It's not so hard to guess why.
Having worked a bit in Ruby, Python, and Elixir I think a lot of the difficulty comes from the minor differences. There aren't any objects or classes so the structure is naturally different and there is a tendency to have a lot of small functions so it must be read differently. If you're seeing tons of deeply nested Enum.map type calls, that's probably just bad code.
I imagine this is table setting to give the Trump stacked courts more range for when he wins.
There's one more detail along the lines of theme changes in other tabs and theme preference changes from the OS/browser: activating the correct theme following history navigation. When I navigate to another page of the author's site, change the theme from light to dark, and then use my browser's back button, I get the light theme again. On my own site I use the `pageshow` event to fix this (https://github.com/meribold/meribold.org/blob/afe6885/_inclu...).

The extra effort is only needed on Firefox and Safari, though. Chromium already handles this somehow.
He also finds himself impressive. I believe his actual quote was “they’re trying to create me”.