skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The price of renewables scale down as demand rises, and the capacity we have building them is growing at an exponential rate at least somewhat capped by demand. It follows that if you want to displace existing power sources, you're probably better off driving demand up, because that lowers their price and makes replacement more economically attractive.

As long as you're not driving demand up faster than the industry is able to increase its rate of scaling (which doesn't yet seem the case with AI, though that's not to say it couldn't be at some point), this should help a renewable transition.

Another effect is that you push issues that arise in transition earlier. For example, the sooner you have a lot of solar on the grid, the sooner grid-scale batteries are incentivized, and the sooner battery production scales. This feeds back into the feasibility and profitability of replacing existing nonrenewable sources.

A simple example where this effect is very clear is synthetic fuels. Synthetics don't compete on a dollar-for-dollar basis yet, but from an energy basis they're getting close. There's an obvious demand phase change once you hit that price point, and the sooner you hit it the better. If you believe the scaling trends, and I think you broadly should, more solar brings that point forward and so is clearly environmentally beneficial.
> black holes remain a mostly theoretical phenomena

The fact that there are compact objects in our universe that, from the outside, look like the black holes that GR predicts, is not "theoretical", it's observation.

The theoretical question is whether these objects really are classical GR black holes "all the way down", so to speak, or whether there is some new physics that comes into play deep inside them (which many physicists think will involve some form of quantum gravity) that changes things. Even if the latter is the case, the objects might still look like classical GR black holes from the outside for a very, very long time, on the order of the Hawking evaporation time (10^67 years for a one solar mass hole, and the time goes up as the cube of the mass). So for all practical purposes, treating them as classical GR black holes works fine now and for the foreseeable future.
> The scale of federal governance is literally impossible […]

I think that's the whole point of the Federalist Society's libertarian, small government (except for the military) philosophy.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Society#Role_in_pre...
> Prisoners cost ~ $40k a year annually in taxes.

The racket is that many prisions are private for-profit companies. So this is a way to funnel taxpayer money into those corporations. Who in turn are friends and campaign contributors of the politicians who push for more people into prisions. So it all feeds itself and the cost doesn't matter. The more cost, the better (to them).
Indeed. They have a particular responsibility.-

> Safety regulations, particularly in the military are frequently written in the blood of the fallen

... as one of the comments would put it, tellingly.-

PS. Also, see Boeing ...
People screw up escaping. Don't escape.

CSV needs escaping, so don't do CSV.
People dying in the streets isn't something that should be up for debate or popular vote :)
I read the post as saying: Zurich, if cost of living is not an condideration at all.

I don't known if anything in Munich can compete with a nice lakefront pad in Zurich.

If cost is a consideration, Munich definately. The range of great and cheap nature options near Munich is countless. It's Austria's backyard, and hanging out in the Austrian Alps and lakes is a fraction of the price of the Swiss alternative.
I have seen this, but I find it fairly hard to use.

Our goal is to focus on datasets and make it very easy to create and manage data.

In our next release, we will be launching a way to do this using a UI.
I believe "cruel and unusual" is obviously context dependent and intended to prohibit the government from applying punishments that are technically permissible under the law but which society considers completely unreasonable under the circumstances. The argument that fining a homeless person is not cruel because fining a rich person is not cruel and thus fines can not be cruel is absurd.
Yeah maybe I didn’t follow exactly, I meant this as a common example of when the hook dependencies rules must be ignored.
This is a complete disaster. The ramifications will be felt for decades. Now businesses must factor in the uncertainty of any random person launching a lawsuit that causes a local court to reverse a federal agency policy. Huge potential impacts to product / revenue, not just legal fees to fight everything. And immeasurable impacts of cowing all bold business decisions to avoid the ire of any person or group, no matter how niche or extreme.

Even if a new supreme court reverts this decision, now people are going to be concerned about the unpredictability of the Supreme Court.
Do you realize we are discussing people who own no property at all?
Nothing in this decision prevents regulatory agency rulemaking.

Nothing in this decision "guts" the agencies.
Is he wrong? That is an equivalent of weeknight drinking for us (remote) office workers.

Showing up to work with a hangover is not a great thing to do.
Interpol Arrests Thousands in Crackdown on International Online Scams
A blog post that says a lot of words without really saying anything at all.

The whole post boils down to "The founders of Reform have multiple companies."
> as more and more municipalities ban homeless camps
if that's a possible endgame, the law should have been to ban being homeless
My bad.

The regulation stems from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Stevens_Fishe..., which says things like:

> United States observers required under subsection
(h) be permitted to be stationed aboard any such vessel
and that all of the costs incurred incident to such sta-
tioning, including the costs of data editing and entry and
observer monitoring, be paid for, in accordance with such
subsection, by the owner or operator of the vessel
There's no great answer here, unfortunately. Let's say the Supreme Court had ruled the other way and said "You cannot ban camping on public spaces if you don't have adequate shelter."

The effect would be that smaller towns with limited budgets would face a potential influx of homeless people, since they don't have the resources to build shelters and therefore cannot ban public camping.

Also, the proposed shelter constraint on the law is pretty dubious. Say a town builds a shelter and then it bans public camping. Does that law get nullified if a tornado destroys the shelter space? What if the shelter has 5 beds, but the homeless population grows to 100? At what point does that law become voided?
> At least on Facebook Marketplace, I can see who the person is, do they have a rating, do they know anyone I know etc etc.

Yet it doesn't stop scammer at all.
I would be surprised if courts had not already heard and decided cases on the meaning of all those terms. But if they haven’t, then sure I guess they should. But precedent means they would only have to be decided once, not repeatedly litigated over and over as you seem to suggest.
In my opinion the people who are responsible for MCAS need to be prosecuted. They knew it was faulty especially after the first crash but they did nothing to stop the second crash from happening.
The objects we have detected look like classical GR black holes, yes.

The problem is that, theoretically, there are other possible objects that look like classical GR black holes from the outside for a very, very long time, but still aren't classical GR black holes. We have no direct way of telling from observation whether the objects we have detected really are classical GR black holes, or whether they are one of the other possibilities.
By 2024 standards, saying that a man cannot be pregnant, or that illegally coming into a country is... well, illegal, is enough to be "far-right".
How are these externalities not borne by drivers? People with cars in nyc presumably park them on their local street that is clogged up with other neighbors cars. They drive them on nearby roads like the various expressways that cut up their own boroughs. They are very much bearing these external costs and taking advantage of their affordances. Its not like bronx drivers are protesting the various expressways that cut up their bronx neighborhood, parking cars to block the ramps or cut off access, no, they use those expressways all the same as any other driver and do benefit from the convenience and job access they bring.
A comment on the issue linked from the PR references https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#url-serializing as a rationale for why itms-services would normally not have the "//" and therefore needs the exception. However that standard says non-null, not non-empty¹, so it sounds like python's URL library is actually just wrong here in that it's treating an empty host the same as null.

¹Also I checked, that standard does actually define an empty host (https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#empty-host) as a distinct concept from a null host.
I always thought the concept of a singularity here was just to make the math slightly simpler. That is to say that a black hole is still a spherical body with a set diameter. We just can't see it so there's no way to verify other than the fact that we can see the border of the event horizon.
>The only matter being decided on is who gets to resolve ambiguities - is it the agencies or is it the courts.

I think we are agreeing here. I think the distinction is that I'm claiming the courts would need (yet don't have) the expertise to clear up ambiguities in such domains. Where do I get this claim? From the justices themselves.[1] There is evidence they are overly confident in their understanding when "doing their own research" on a domain outside their expertise.[2]

So given that context, it's probably a bad idea to have justices decide on ambiguities. But if that power resides in them now, it means the only way to have effective laws is to avoid ambiguities in the first place. That's why I stated that is now on Congress. However, the court is also acknowledging that isn't possible. That's why I originally said it reads like they created a deliberate stalemate. From the court we have the following:

1) Congress cannot be expected to create unambiguous laws.

2) It is the court's job to resolve ambiguities.

3) The court lacks domain expertise.

I'm claiming those set up a natural conflict because expertise is necessary to effectively resolve ambiguity.

The most generous interpretation is that the justices don't need to know the details of the domain expertise, but rather just need to know how it interfaces with people and the law.[3] I'm pretty skeptical of that leading to good outcomes in complex, nuanced situations. I don't think we can pretend law is abstractly disconnected from the complex systems it regulates. As society progresses, most things get more complex so I expect the problem to get worse, not better.

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-google-tech-so...

[2] https://www.propublica.org/article/supreme-court-errors-are-...

[3] https://www.vox.com/2014/4/23/5644154/the-supreme-courts-tec...
NixOS with its nixpkgs [0] and cache [1] would also not work if compilers weren't reproducible. Though they won't use something like PGO or some specific optimization flags as these would very likely lead to unreproducible builds. For example most distros ship a PGO optimized build of Python while nixos does not.

[0] https://github.com/nixos/nixpkgs

[1] https://cache.nixos.org/
Now now, that would require the suburbanites who are eager to tut-tut and scold city-dwellers to put their money where their mouth is.
An empty home in a town with no jobs and no services doesn't help anybody.

If you look at the places that people actually want to live in the US, there are housing shortages in every major US metro area (https://www.fanniemae.com/research-and-insights/perspectives...).
The already extremely powerful judiciary continually increasing their power and removing the power of the legislative and executive branches is not exactly something that encourages power balance checks.

As for whether or not the person you are replying to is from a certain region of the planet - what are you trying to imply here? I'm from the USA - does that mean that I agree with everything Trump or Biden says? This is a weird, and IMO, distasteful, way to make an argument.
It drastically impairs their effectiveness.
My guess about NYC is the large proportion of 1 way streets.
Burning a man alive with a stubbed toe: "He was already injured!".

Yes. Lobbying is already a huge problem. This ruling exclusively makes it worse.
If there was a good way to type of display them, then normal people would be typing them every day (say, pasting them into comment forms or whatever), and then we would need to have some standard for quoting them.
It looks like the Court may inadvertently cause substantial delays in implementing projects due to the fear it might instill in bureaucrats.
Like I said, he's a hero
Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10830501
Voting for a reasonable human for president is probably the important check to keep in mind for the next few months
I think the C example is meaningfully different. \0 in C is a string terminator. There is no more string after it, so you can just read the string "while (c != 0)", and there is never any need to escape it, because by definition strings cannot contain that character.

From a purely linguistic standpoint, the choice is sound. Obviously it's objectively a disaster but for unrelated reasons.
French mapping administration's new app
Yeah man. Punishing someone for being is poor and living outside of society by making them poorer and pushing them further outside society is cruel and unusual.

The majority’s justification that it is fair because it applies to those whom it will never apply to is particularly craven.
> Plenty of physicists are still "resistant" to the idea of black holes having a real singularity.

That's because most physicists expect that new physics, probably some form of quantum gravity, will come into play before the singularity is reached, so that there won't actually be one. Which is a perfectly reasonable expectation.

> The recent Kerr paper [0] only adds fuel to this resistance with its hilarious statement "Faith, not science!" about singularity proponents.

Kerr misrepresents the actual opinion of most physicists in that paper. The simplest way to see this is to realize that Kerr's statement that if a theory predicts singularities, the theory is wrong, is something that virtually all physicists who work in GR agree with! Practically nobody believes that there are actual curvature singularities; they believe that GR is not correct in that regime, and some kind of new physics is involved, as I noted above. So in the sense Kerr uses the term, there are practically no "singularity proponents" at all. He is attacking a straw man.
> Presumably a very generalized model would be good at even doing the inverse: given some assembly, write code that will produce the given assembly.

ChatGPT does this, unreliably.
> There is no law on the books that gives the FTC authorization to ban non-competes.

Sure there is; it's the Federal Trade Commission Act, which says "Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful."

They, through the regulatory process, correctly determined that non-competes are unfair methods of competition.

> But prior to Obama’s administration, it was really rare the agencies would enforce policies with no basis in the law whatsoever.

Obama's administration changed the makeup of the court with his loss of Scalia's seat, failure to pressure RBG to resign, and Trump's subsequent picks; that's what changed. The regulatory setup long predates his presidency. Chevron fell because the court got extra conservative members, nothing more.
Copying from my other comment. My comment points out the failure of the "just build more homes" idea as a solution for homelessness.

"My comment on this is that the statement "just build more homes" is not an effective solution to this problem. We have enough homes. The issue is that as homes are viewed as an investment, rather than as a necessity to live a decent life, they must maintain scarcity. If there is not a scarcity, then it will be created.
Interest rates have tripled, which should have dropped house prices. Construction is faster than it was before the 2007 Housing Crisis. Both of these factors should have drastically reduced housing costs, however, prices are still 40% higher than they were in 2020.

I'm not saying to confiscate homes. I'm not saying to force people to rent out their homes to homeless people.

>A large chunk of homeless people are drug addicts with serious mental health problems.

Only 26% of homeless people abuse drugs. A vast amount of homeless people are veterans who have complex mental health problems from their service in the military, elderly people who are trying to survive off of insufficient SSI payments, or LGBTQ youth who were kicked out of their homes.

This isn't a problem that can be solved with some witty one-sentence solution. This is a problem that takes layers of support systems ranging from health services, to public transportation, to subsidized housing, to job placement programs."
What makes you think the federalist society isnt organized by educated elites?
libjpeg 6 is pretty good. It's oldschool C so it's pretty spartan, but it's easy enough to read it and follow what it's doing if you have a basic understanding of the concepts. (Discrete cosine transform, Huffman coding, etc)

And it's only had a couple of vulnerabilities, in nearly 30 years of being on the Internet. That's not quite like DJB code, but it's darn close.

My understanding is that it was written by a very small number of people who were experts in the field, as part of the standards process way back in the early 90s.
A very simplified idea is that the denser you get, the slower time flows (for an "outside" observer). So while for an "inner" observer density rises "fast" to the point of singularity, for an "outside" observer time just freezes inside the forming black hole. Finally, if there is a way for black holes to "evaporate" (e.g. Hawking radiation), the "inner" observer will be able to observe shrinking black hole.
The best thing about Armageddon for me are open flames in vacuum.
I have no idea about literature, but off the cuff I would say:

> 1. Rational thought takes place in an irrational environment. As much as we try to control for biases, fallacies, heuristics, effects, etc, our evaluation of a scenario is dependent upon our personal history.

a) rational thought (usually) isn't what it seems to be

b) this is sloppy/inappropriate/dangerous language for this topic

> Rationality is a great tool for breaking things into small parts and describing acting in small steps; but a fundamental error occurs when we 'zoom out' to a system and use those small parts to say something definitive about the whole.

Statistically/probabilistically, yes (take this comment section, on a high-IQ platform (see also: /r/SlateStarCodex), as a prime example), but not necessarily. Doing it wrong will produce wrong results, like most anything else. An important distinction though in some domains: it is not possible to realize when you are wrong. And sometimes, it isn't even possible to wonder if you are wrong[1].

Consider the complexity involved (and the historic journey behind) manufacturing modern day top end CPU's - and this is but one of the many feats of genius humanity has pulled off, and we now take much of it for granted. Why can we do that, but not certain classes of other cognitively complicated tasks? What is the distinction between the domains that guarantees (so far) failure? (A hint: consider how we answer such questions.)

> #2 may benefit from AI, but the people using it will still have great difficulty.

What is the meaning of the symbol "great" in this context? Is it related to the probability of us Accomplishing The Goal?

------------------

[1] A classic "extraordinary claim", typically invoking this (and then after that, something else....but discussing those sorts of things isn't something you do in polite company, which HN most certainly is[2]):

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

A knockout punch if I've ever seen one!

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
What horrific things a power plant can be used for?
Just saw one of these in the lab: https://www.beckman.com/liquid-handlers/echo-525 it costs half a mil
Appreciate the insight here. It's not an obvious way to think about this to me, but it does make a lot of sense, especially as you think about the trend over time.
I'm fine with gas plants available on standby. If they run 1% of the time, then they are no longer a significant contributor to climate change.

Even if they have to run 10% of the time, we've still taken an enormous cut out of greenhouse gases. We would turn our attention to many other sources of greenhouse gas (agriculture, concrete, transportation, etc.)
Nil for Matrix
If you go to LIGO Hanford don't miss the B reactor tour near by. It's the first full scale nuclear reactor.
Could this be internet-enabled flight bias? Now that we have more and more WiFi enabled flights, more people posting about it on socials...so public awareness grows but as indicated before only incident-related stats are being recorded. One can extrapolate if incidents including damage or injury are not increasing per capita of flights it's probably not a trend.
> At least on Facebook Marketplace, I can see who the person is, do they have a rating, do they know anyone I know etc etc.

I don't want that when I sell random stuff out of my house. I want to meet a random dude at a gas station, exchange cash, and never know anything about each other again.
I’d like to tell you about the new Glőrbl character that I invented.

You can use it for referring to the new Glőrbl character that I invented.
Timeseries Indexing at Scale
Maybe add a haptics test?

Edit: doesn't appear to be working at all with a Bluetooth-connected Amazon Luna controller on Linux (openSUSE Tumbleweed, using Brave browser).
I feel like I can't really trust anything on Craigslist now, so I don't really use it. I did post my furniture for free pickup on there last year, but that's been about it in the past ten years. I remembered it being pretty much dead from then, but I just checked it again and it seems to still be getting quite a few posts, so I guess that was just a false memory.

I also used to check it for software jobs way back in the day, and got a couple interviews from it, but that seems totally dead now. I see 5 postings in the software jobs section, and none of them are anywhere close to Chicago.
OWNERS files rarely get in the way - you can always send a code change to an OWNER. They are also good for finding points of contact quickly, for files where the history is in the far past and changes haven't been made recently.

Readability really does help new engineers get up to speed on the style guide, and learn of common libraries they might not have known before. It can be annoying - hell, I'll have to get on the Go queue soon - but that's ok.
> On property they own or property they have been granted permission to occupy.

By definition, the homeless don't have that.
Hey, you can have this position. Just realize that you've lost your future right to complain about project 2025 when that passes and every agency has all their civil servants replaced.