skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
HTC software wasn't bad at all IMO, it was among the less bloated Android layers of the time.

I had three HTC flagships back in the glory days and they were amazing machines, their only problem was that most people preferred to buy the likes of Samsung despite being much worse in almost every respect (software, camera, design, durability, etc.). I don't know if due to bad marketing by HTC or just because they bought reviewers less (they used to have a blatant pro-Samsung bias).

Then of course quality actually degraded when they had to make huge personnel cuts due to bad sales.
You can use it with other functions that use iterators. For example, here is code that makes a copy of a map keeping only the even keys.

maps.Collect(xiter.Filter2(func(k, v int) bool { return k%2 == 0 }, maps.All(m)))
LTT is not even worth watching, it’s just sponsored crap now disguises as a informational video
I can manage without correction but still remember the first time I walked in the rain after switching from glasses to contacts, 20 some years ago. I'd only put up with the glasses for a little while at that point.

Nowadays I don't wear a contact in my better eye, so that I can focus to read, just one in the worse eye for distance vision.
What are the side effects from that medicine?
I don't know what you wanted.

If you wanted to ask whether that amount can hold together and become spherical, then just by comparing to Ceres doesn't that make it plenty?

It's not crazy to interpret "hold itself together" as more complex and including vapor escape.
> Show me an example where naturally emergent GROUP phenomena that were constantly emerging from widely distributed natural behavior, were successfully banned.

Sure, if we're ditching mathematical certainty now. The American auto market, where the emergent group phenomenon of making unsafe cars (and millions of consumers purchasing them) despite things like seatbelts being available was addressed very successfully via regulation requiring those safety features.

Or smoking cigarettes, which was largely eradicated in public without even needing an outright ban.
The Art of Digital Empathy – Crafting Conversations That Connect
Even if you are not into Rust, I'd recommend this book if you want to get into low-level and/or embedded programming. It's an exceptionally well written introduction into the most important topics there and ~80% of the book are not specific to Rust (or can be transferred just as well to other languages).
It would stay molten for millions of years.

Not sure if Europa's water would be flung into space, make atmosphere, or make a boiling ocean.
>What I wrote needed to be said, despite evidently containing very little interesting content, precisely because of how severely it provokes certain people who claim not to even disagree with it. The degree of the provocation proves the value of the statement.

The point of science isn't to punk the researchers. So no, what you wrote didn't need to be said.

As I (and others) have repeatedly pointed out, our models are wrong. We know they are wrong. What they are is less wrong than previous models. That doesn't make them "right" or "dogma." Rather it makes them the model that currently provides the best explanation for observed reality.

That neither requires or suggests that research/investigation into modifications of our current models and/or into completely different models is unseemly or inappropriate.

What I (and presumably others, as they've expressed similar thoughts) require, if you want me to accept modified/brand new theories/models is, at a minimum, a logic-based argument as to why a modified/new model describes the universe more completely/accurately than current models. Assuming you can convince me that it's plausible, the next step is to present observational data that supports your logically argued hypothesis -- and that such data is described by your model/theory more completely/accurately than other models. I.e., that your theory/model is less wrong than our extant models which are also wrong, but less wrong than previous models/theories.

And if you can't present such data (e.g., with M-Theory[0]), then it's not science, it's just math, philosophy and/or metaphysics.

That's not to say math/philosophy/metaphysics aren't useful. They absolutely are. However, without data (or the means to collect such data), it's impossible to falsify[1] such hypotheses and, as such, aren't science.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability
Back in my day... never mind.
That's what I meant. Google search expenses become Google cloud revenues.
How are pyramid-building cultures definitely unrelated to mound-building cultures?

Cahokia Mounds:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia :

> Today, the Cahokia Mounds are considered to be the largest and most complex archaeological site north of the great pre-Columbian cities in Mexico.

Chicago was a trading post further north FWIU, but not an archaeological site.

"Michoacan, Michigan, Mishigami, Mizugami: Etymological Origins? A Legend."
https://christopherbrianoconnor.medium.com/michoacan-michiga...

Is there evidence of hydrological engineering or stonework?

It's not clear whether the megalithic Sage Wall in MT was man-made, and sort of looks like the northern glacier pass it may have marked.

FWIU there are quarry sites in the southwest that predate most timelines of stonework in the Americas and in Egypt, Sri Lanka / Indonesia, and East Asia; but they're not further north than Cahokia Mounds.

In TN, There are many Clovis sites; but they decided to flood the valley that was home to Sequoyah - who gave written form to Cherokee and other native languages - and also a 9500-year old archaeological site.

This says the Clovis people of Clovis, New Mexico are the oldest around: https://tennesseeencyclopedia.net/entries/paleoindians-in-te...

The Olmecs, Aztecs, and Mayans all worked stone.

From where did stonework like the Osireon originate?
Corridor Digital has always been cringe and weak for me. They try way too hard in everything but VFX skills. Kind of reminds me of really bad acting and writing mixed with passable VFX.
I have a feeling the basic cheap toaster has remained unchanged for decades.

Ah, but your question is what % of toasters is now non-basic...
Curious that you say this, because I had a 6 Pro and while all the rest was amazing, what ended up making me hate the phone was the battery.

My experience in that respect was just the opposite of yours: just barely OK at the beginning, and quick degradation in spite of the adaptive battery. In 2 years it wouldn't even make it to 3 PM in days of heavy usage. Definitely much worse than the batteries in my friends' iPhones, and of course also than all the other Android phones I've had, some of which lasted (or are still lasting) for more than 5 years with battery being a complete non-issue.

I wonder if it's a 6 vs 6 Pro issue or I just got a bad unit (I'm not the only one I know with the complaint, though, so if it's the latter, bad units were rather common).
"We all know long periods of not eating (if you have excess fat) are positive in a ton of dramatic ways"

Sure, and also negative in several significant ways (I am not going to say ton). Some people are able to simply ignore food and get on with their life as thin people. Others can eat whatever they want and remain skinny. Some self medicate with things like nicotine which can induce thinness through appetite suppression and cancer. Many or most in my experience find that they are unable to deal long-term with the noisy, distracting, miserable nature of food cravings and ultimately fall back into their old patterns just to get some relief even if they hate themselves for it.

My favorite metaphor is "how long can you hold your breath?". Sure, you can probably hold your breath for 30 seconds without too much discomfort. Now do it twice. Now hold your breath for 15 seconds every minute. Now 30 seconds for every minute. Uncomfortable? Keep it up. What's the matter, no willpower?

So yes, food and society have been engineered to be profitable at the expense of us consumers but it is exploiting a weakness that not all of us have. Let's just think of these chemicals as eyeglasses for your metabolism and take back some control.
I did a lot of analysis for the problem of "build a solar sail factory on a carbonaceous chondrite asteroid that makes sunshades to deploy at the L1 point", particularly from a chemical engineering point of view.

One interesting thing was that a lot of the chemistry involved was similar to the chemistry of decarbonization and carbon capture, particularly when you get CO2 as a waste product it is too precious to vent so you are going to feed it back into your "petrochemical" line.

Objects like Ceres are the norm once you get out to the outer solar system, the difference is that Ceres is close enough to the sun for solar energy to be a good power source. Centaur objects, the moons of outer planets, and Kuiper belt objects like Pluto are similar but when you get far from the Sun you need to use a different power source such as D-D fusion.

If a species became independent of sunlight it could take advantage of very generic objects that exist throughout interstellar space (comets, rouge planets, etc.) and make the journey in hops of (say) 100 years from one object to another. At that rate it would be possible to visit another star system in 10,000 years with a comfortable lifestyle. People like that might as well keep comet hopping but if they came across a star system I'd imagine they start some project like a Ceres megastructure because it is generic you can find some object like that and be able to establish a huge industrial base and population larger than the Earth with the same head end you've used all this time and same comfortable lifestyle.

Earth would be priority two if that for those people. Grabby aliens might have disrupted Ceres but left the dinosaurs alone. But Ceres is here, so they were not. Ceres is such an attractive target that it should be a SETI goal to look for hardware left behind. Would be hilarious if they stole the Deuterium.
This is the sort of thing I'd love to see NIH have many parallel research tracks on this stuff, given backing & support to make the research happen & to release the work.

Precision medicine has so much potential, feels so in line for some really wild breakthroughs, with its ability to make so many exact & small operations.

I wonder where the Obama Precision Medicine (2015) work has gotten to so far. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/0...
I have heard that people who lose weight quickly will typically look older due to the development of wrinkles and the development of harder features. Skin simply doesn't have time to keep up with the weight loss. I don't know if this is true but the theory could have some merit as far as our perception of people. The real question is: does something like ozempic change the biological age of someone?
Reminds me of an issue I had with the Nexus 6P: when I wanted to get it fixed (I think it was an issue with the ambiental microphone) Huawei said it was a software issue and Google said it was a HW issue.

In the end, none of the two companies fixed the problem, and my 6P eventually died randomly one day.

So, this Google software and X hardware story is very similar to yours w/ HTC, except that if they don't buy the company it's better for them as they can just throw the problem over the fence to the other company. What a clown show
Wait, what?

The author sees this code and realizes it's unnecessarily serial:

save('userData', userData)
.then(() => save('session', sessionPrefences))
.then(() => ({ userData, sessionPrefences })

But doesn't see that the async/await version is serial, even though it's arguably even _more_ obvious?

await save('userData', userData);
await save('session', sessionPrefences);
return { userData, sessionPrefences }

The transform to being parallel is pretty easy to read too:

await Promise.all([
save('userData', userData),
save('session', sessionPrefences)
]);
return { userData, sessionPrefences }

On top of that, the try/catch section is out of date. try/catch does not deoptimize the block in modern engines, and async/await absolutely integrates better with try/catch for much more bulletproof error handling.
https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images-archive-re...

Everything up to and including the mantle is either iron or has a lot of iron. But to your point the mantle also has a lot of silica. So I guess it depends on your definition of "mostly".
The Brandenburg court did this pretty explicitly, no?
You have just very eloquently expressed why I left a career in biochemistry behind after undergrad. Realistically I had no business doing that degree in the first place: I simply don't have the patience for the lab work grind.
Ask HN: What do you monitor on your servers?
We've been developing the BlueWave Uptime Manager [1] for the past 5 months with a team of 7 developers and 3 external contributors, and till today we always went under the radar.

As we move towards expanding from basic uptime tracking to a comprehensive monitoring solution, we're interested in getting insights from the community.

For those of you managing server infrastructure,

- What are the key assets you monitor beyond the basics like CPU, RAM, and disk usage?

- Do you also keep tabs on network performance, processes, services, or other metrics?

Additionally, we're debating whether to build a custom monitoring agent or leverage existing solutions like OpenTelemetry or Fluentd.

- What’s your take—would you trust a simple, bespoke agent, or would you feel more secure with a well-established solution?

- Lastly, what’s your preference for data collection—do you prefer an agent that pulls data or one that pushes it to the monitoring system?

[1] https://github.com/bluewave-labs/bluewave-uptime
Now what does it have to say as a rebuttal to that criticism?
> They are intellectually secure in the center of a vast mob; their wisdom was received, not crafted. It doesn’t need to be crafted, because it is already known, established, beyond question (but demonstrably wrong).

Fwiw I wouldn't do it either... But I guess if there's a valid reason, it's good to know the risk is apparently (as this article says...) exaggerated..
Yeah, I think the LLM for everything crazy is stupid, but I do wish there were a little more of it in the Google Assistant. Then I could finally say "Text Bob 'Home in 5'" and not have it reply "Sorry, I don't have a 'Home' number for Bob."
> strange how there is almost never a shortcut to anything. Like a universal law

There are win-win tradeoffs. Vitamins, for instance. If you're running a vitamin deficiency, there isn't a downside to increasing your intake of that vitamin. (Curing acute dehydration via IV is another shortcut that just works.)

The Ozempic story, for me, has been more about how we almost seem to be reflexively against the idea of a win-win. A lot of people want there to be a tragic downside to the drug for reasons that aren't entirely clear to me.
Dumas has a pretty intense fan base, though clearly not universal. I found his novels way too pulpy, but I can see why they were a sensation in the 19th century, when most literature was deadly slow by our standards.
"4x4 tensor" is not a useful notion. A (4, 4)-rank tensor would make more sense...
"On '5G availability,' T-Mobile resembles an Usain Bolt alongside the decrepit fun runners of AT&T and Verizon, scoring 67.9%. AT&T limps over the line below 12%, while Verizon collapses on it at 7.7%." -- what a quote!

I'm disappointed, but not especially surprised.
You'd have to use the volume of earth, not the mass. Google tells me that lava is ~3x denser than water.
What about people who are naturally thin?
This post and its sequel are infuriating. I'm not even mad at React. At work our whole product is a big Vue SPA. What's infuriating is the idea that those in charge of providing public services are so little beholden to the outcomes for their users.

From a footnote to part 2:

"There's a lot to say about BenefitsCal's CloudFront configuration debacle.

First, and most obviously: WTF, Amazon?

It's great that these options are single-configuration and easy to find when customers go looking for them, but they should not have to go looking for them. The default for egress-oriented projects should be to enable this and then alert on easily detected double-compression attempts.

Second: WTF, Deloitte?

What sort of C-team are you stringing CalSAWS along with? Y'all should be ashamed. And the taxpayers of California should be looking to claw back funds for obscenely poor service.

Lastly: this is on you, CalSAWS.

As the procurer and approver of delivered work items, the failure to maintain a minimum level of in-house technical skill necessary to call BS on vendors is inexcusable.

New and more appropriate metrics for user success should be integrated into public reporting. That conversation could consume an entire blog post; the current reports are little more than vanity metrics. The state should also redirect money it is spending with vendors to enhance in-house skills in building and maintaining these systems directly.

It's an embarrassment that this site is as broken as it was when I began tracing it three years ago. It's a scandal that good money is being tossed after bad. Do better."
Google is taking hostile actions against adblockers (and has attempted to do so for years now). Chrome using too much memory is a meme among normies at this point. It's hard to say whether Chrome is less secure than competitors or if its exploits just get more publicity; clearly it was better than the competition at its inception, and clearly it could be better today.

At what point is replacement the right answer?

There are some promising browser engines in development right now: Servo / Verso, and Ladybird. Some discussions from the past few days:

Verso – Web browser built on top of the Servo web engine | 806 points | 319 comments | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41215727

Ladybird browser to start using Swift language this fall | 200 points | 196 comments | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41208836
Coffee being the only exception.
I'm sometimes reminded of a parable of an old lady who swallowed a fly...
For me it’s uncomfortably dry skin on my cheeks.
Chrome has the most vulnerabilities because it's the largest browser by market share by a mile, and so has the greatest number of eyes on it. You also can't extrapolate "it was never really secure" from that: practically all software has bugs, especially multi-million line codebases like Chrome. Relative to the average C++ program Chrome is exceedingly secure, and likewise Chrome has been constantly on the cutting edge of introducing new security mitigations. "Is it secure" is not a binary property.
Those things are digital snake oil. If you turn on the web application firewall (WAF) features your app breaks. If you “tune” it to fix that, you let the attackers back through.

You can’t use a dumb appliance to fix developer stupidity.
I don’t know, I think that might be a bias of some kind. The free shortcuts are obvious and so the alternative sounds ridiculous. No one claims to be a genius when they save time by driving instead of walking. But at the margin, of course everything has a trade off.
It's not that clear. The article is specifically about this, is it just the speed or something else.

> "We’re still waiting to find out," says Dr. Few. "I don't think anybody can tell you definitively that there's not an inherent change to the skin."
According to the keynote, it notifies the other party that you're using it, which makes sense, but also makes things awkward.
> you lose that muscle because you're also losing the fat you needed the extra muscle for

That may be part of the cause, but it's also true that whenever you lose weight, you always lose some muscle. Even bodybuilders who are following the most aggressive protocol to minimize muscle loss (extremely high protein intake compared to other macros, along with intense strength training) will experience some amount of muscle loss along with fat loss when slimming down for competition.
That is planned per channel but not a priority at the moment: https://github.com/ajayyy/SponsorBlock/issues/435
> GPT-2 level

You must not have ever used GPT-2 if you think it is comparable to any commonly used chatbot today
Somebody is buying though. Advertising absolutely works.
Speaking of mystical abbreviations — CAR, CADR, CDR !
Quote from one of the authors:

“A microwave is not a pure, pristine place,” Porcar says. It’s also not a pathogenic reservoir to be feared, he says. But he does recommend cleaning your kitchen microwave often — just as often as you would scrub your kitchen surfaces to eliminate potential bacteria. [1]

So I would not worry too much.

[1] from here: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-02553-9

[edit: added source link]
I think the issue might be the loss of pvp games that you used to be able to play against bots?

Like dota 1, you could always play offline 5v5 as the only human among bots.

Oh i guess there was also LAN in wciii tft.
Harder to gain weight. Getting called skinny, etc.
The beginning item about if-else returns isn't go-specific and is low impact, and immediately turned me off / led me to dismiss the article as a waste of time.

After trudging through more of the list, you've collected a lot of good nuggets! Maybe move the if-else to the end, as it's not particularly insightful compared to the rest.

Also the shadowing, it's fine but much less interesting and unlikely to hook in your target audience up front.

Good luck!
There are diminishing returns with cheaper warships. The LCS cost $400 million each but Burke destroyer, $2 billion, could sink a dozen of them. Aircraft carrier, $13 billion plus planes, could sink all of them. More importantly, the destroyer could protect the carrier from attack.

Small warships are useful for low-intensity conflict but Red Sea conflict shows that they need more defense and offense.
They're minimal; retinol is usually mixed with a carrier oil or cream in various concentrations and applied topically. I would be surprised if it has an impact on the superficial musculoaponeurotic system (SMAS) referred to in the article, however.
> Isn't that flow control of a different form?

Eh, maybe if you generalize the term flow control beyond useful meaning. The author has specific ideas (Backpressure, TTL, and Tail Drop) all of which might be narrowly tailored to his/her specific scenario but aren't things people generally need, as per the title of TFA.
Most capacitors are drained heavily just by being unplugged for a short period of time, as the other poster mentioned.

The other thing is that the capacitor would need to somehow be shorted to a component it wasn’t supposed to… instead of just itself. Shorting to itself is relatively safe (although might result in a pop and some arcing).

For something like a toaster (especially the old school ones with just a dial to control toast degree) they’re all mechanical contrivances. No electronics to speak of.
I throw my watch on the charger when I go to sleep, so I don’t really seen the benefit. I’d rather have a more powerful device as a tradeoff.

If that matters to you then great but I take issue with putting all of these watches in the same bucket and pretending that they’re all the same except for battery life. It’s just not true.
There is https://github.com/clojure/clojure-clr

(I cannot testify for usability, the project is alive but it seems to need more contributors to really get going)
That was my point. The Earth isn't flat, but its surface is very smooth.

You give the average ocean depth at 3.7km, but the Earth's diameter is about 12,742km, making those bumps pretty insignificant. If you cover your countertop in sandpaper and spill water on it, the difference in coverage going to be almost negligible.
Interesting that holding down the power button will now launch AI... On my pixel 6 that currently opens up the emergency/power menu.