skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It was a scandalous story of the first seed bank operators literally starving to death around food to protect their peoples future post war, American attempts to help with corn crops failing (the two politically were already distrustful), and an insane farmer favored politically.... literally putting his critics in front of firing squads.

Science makes "mistakes" most of the time, but documents the process to improve the accuracy of models that represent reality.

It is notable many westerners recognize the first seed bank scientists, and in particular Nikolay Vavilov.

The legal process can't enforce research ethics, but on rare occasion people are stripped of their credentials for egregious behavior.

Despotism is ugly, and it is arrogant to think any one is immune to the phenomena:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaWSqboZr1w

Have a great day, and have faith the smarter Russians will again figure out a path to peace eventually. =3
You always have politics. Managers tend to be political ninjas, so they make it worse. I've been programming professionally for over 25 years at this point, worked at many places, and I couldn't tell you what value a manager brings. I know what they do - which is hold meetings that take time away from real work, and ask people "is it done yet". But I've never seen anything get done faster or better as a result of something a manager did.

I'm genuinely curious to hear from people who have had what they consider effective management, what did the manager do to make your work better?
https://github.com/dpjudas/SurrealEngine/blob/efb4a196ccc856...

Look, I get it: they named their library "dumb" so they felt they just have to be cutesy with the license file, but please don't. If you hate licenses that much, https://spdx.org/licenses/WTFPL.html is probably for you

(the actual project seems to be BSD-3)
We had an AI attempt to make a data-driven story like we do at The Pudding
DOJ sues realpage for algorithmic pricing scheme that harms renters
The worst non-Euclidean geometries should be called Dysclidean. I think Lovecraft missed an opportunity here.
Viewed skeptically rather than apologetically, it seems like the fundamental concepts of society (like "freedom" and its limits) are nebulous and mutable, and the fundamental processes of society (like how ideas become law) are inscrutable and unaccountable.
https://archive.ph/hMVro
Epic could open-source the original engine, like its former primary competitor id Software did with the old idTech engines.
Fundamentally scientific rigor and accuracy is often misaligned with larger societal norms and values - a pharmaceutical corporation with a profit-making pill doesn't want to hear about the 1% of users who suffer catastrophic medical conditions as a result of using their product (e.g. Vioxx with 88,000 heart attacks and 38,000 deaths out of 107,000,000 prescriptions from 1999-2004). Similarly the Soviet Union's Lysenko tailored his research results to align with Stalinist ideology on adaptability, thereby securing his position in the academic structure - behavior that was remarkably similar to that of Anthony Fauci regarding the origins of Sars-CoV2 and the efficacy of the various treatments and vaccines that were so highly profitable to the corporate pharmaceutical sector. Reckless virology research that he supported caused a global pandemic that cost at least $10 trillion in economic damage and took millions of lives - but admitting that opens the door to liability, so no.

I've worked with both ends of the spectrum - fraudulent tenured PIs at leading research universities are not that rare, but highly skilled and reliable PIs are more common. The fundamental difference always seems to be record-keeping - frauds aren't interested in keeping detailed records of their activities that can be used by others to replicate their work (since their work is non-replicable). In contrast, the reputable researcher will want such detailed records for various reasons, including defense against false claims of fraud or incompetence, which is quite common if the research results are not aligned with corporate profit motives in areas like pharmaceuticals, fossil fuels and climate, environmental pollutants, etc.

If the powers that be really wanted to reduce research fraud, the easiest way is to make detailed record-keeping a requirement of federally-funded research, with regular audits of lab notebooks and comparisons to published work. This matters, because the problem is set to get worse with the spread of AI tools that make it possible to generate hard-to-detect fake datasets and images. In the past a great many frauds were caught because their fake data generation was so obvious, often just a copy and paste effort.
I keep thinking a few states could actually do a few things to help this by requiring local production. For example, if $STATE added a regulation that prohibited the import of less than a half-cow carcase into the state, requiring local meat packing and butchery, this could cut into the mega packers and limit the risk of an infection taking out an industry for weeks. Similarly for other products. It would also keep at least some more of that money circulating in the state/country.

I'd also like to see FDA requirements for at least dual-sourcing for all prescription medications and at least 50% domestic production.

While these won't force the large conglomerates to break up, it would allow for at least some opportunities for local and upstart competition. A lot of it makes sense strictly from a defence of supply lines PoV. Which should have been a set of major lessons learned from COVID.

I also do favor heavier tariffs in trade with nations that don't have similar work standards and/or use non-criminal citizens/residents effectively as slaves.

On top of all of that, yeah, the FTC needs to break up some of the massive conglomerates.
> As the they say, “if you don’t have any managers you have politics”.

This reminds me of the classic essay "The Tyranny of Structurelessness"

https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm
First, that is an admirable and important problem to be addressing, so kudos.

Feedback:

1- Show HN posts can be hit or miss traffic-wise, based on the time of day, if everyone was busy, etc. So, don't take small response to mean much. (Some great projects that have gone on to be strong got less initial Show HN feedback that yours.)

2- Personally, I think your landing page could benefit from a video near the top that shows how you use it. The high level concept is pretty clear, so I won't restate what you are doing here. But more visual communication (either detailed series of screenshots, or, more likely, a video) showing "how do I set this up and use the output of the product" might go a long way to letting people know what it is you have in mind to share with them. This would strengthen the "show" part of the Show HN, IMHO.

3- It's not really clear there's any proof that it works, or that the AI doesn't just do a poor job of summarizing/aggregating/etc. (which people are polarized about--some find it amazing, some find it quite poor). Does this tool achieve the stated goal? Even if we're not sure, how could the we find out for themselves? This part seems unclear, reading the page, before trying to Sign Up. So much so, that it seems kind of like a landing page to gauge interest before anything was built. Is that the case? It's honestly hard to tell. Again, to address this, show an end to end example as a 2 to 10 minute video.

4- If the first Show HN was a trial balloon, next time maybe write a Blog Post detailing more about your product, and submit that as an Article. Then keep doing that whenever there is major News to share. .02. Eventually one of your submissions might pop off.
RAG Chat with Unstructured Data
why was it kept secret?
More like "The anatomy of a calm and collected response while facing a dire situation thanks to years of expertise, eminem and my sweet wife."
Implementing like gevent did is also preferable, where you can patch some or all as arguments to the patch call.
Hopefully, someone will write a replacement for it. The Setting app is a pain in the butt.
Annoyance is okay if there is value in it. This provides no value since 98% of users have no idea they are being asked. And I’ll bet 98% of the rest don’t know off the top of their head which mobile browser is best.

The confusion in signing up for Netflix, Spotify etc is just as bad or worse, I agree! It’s bad for consumers to have confusing interfaces.

If I’m trying to use my phone for the first time and I have to choose from a list of software I’ve never heard of, with no information about the impact of the decision, then if you aren’t stressed, you don’t realize the meaning of the choice, back to the confusion.

I don’t think it’s anti-user to have a built-in web browser. Let’s regulate what the platforms can do with the data, sure, and force them to allow other options, yes. If it’s so valuable to own the default web browser in an OS then we are far too loose with what web browser vendors are allowed to do.
Seems like an over sight that there is not a photo of the actual diamond. This article has a photo.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/22/world/africa/large-diamon...
The consumer (background thread) only polls; there is no need to wake up the consumer.

At steady state, the consume is either blocked on I/O or is scanning the producer buffers. When all producer buffers are empty, it can just sleep for a short time.
Many of these alternatives failed because they were forced onto users who had already paid over $60 for a game, and they were incredibly slow and clunky. They might have improved over time, but people still remember how bad these stores were at launch.
Over time you'd see a socially dictated (or even regulation dictated) amount of money go up for bonding if this became regular practice. I don't think adding more of a worry around "can we afford this" would create a positive impact in a world where a) scientists and academics routinely spend more time filling out requests for money (grants/funding/etc.) and justifying their use of said money than they spend actually doing research, and b) there is already a paucity of replication.
This is an enormous footgun that makes AI absolutely impossible to use in Godot. You get a ton of Godot 3 code output which really doesn’t resemble Godot 4 code at all, despite having the same name.
Most stock ISP routers in Germany I've seen allow you to set custom DNS in a straightforward manner.

And even if they don't, for a few years now there is a law that guarantees you the right to choose your own router (because previously we had quite bad bundling that forced you to rent the ISPs router), so ISPs can't lock you in like that.
> They are stringing words together using copied data.

Which is what we will eventually realize is what humans are doing too.
The OS decides whether or not to expose it.
I've commonly seen a kick the can down the road type of solution to issues like these, especially in vehicle systems where a monotonic clock is always used but a entry is included that gives a mapping between wall clock and monotonic if it's available.
I never really understood this mentality, especially when on the console side people seem just fine with the idea of buying multiple consoles for exclusives. (not that I am agreeing with that either).

There isn't a cost to having multiple stores, you don't even need to keep them running at all time. I get the concerns over the Epic app, but Heroic exists.

Personally I have games on Steam, Xbox (cross buy between xbox and PC), Epic, and EA. Plus Game Pass.

The only annoying part is when I go to install or buy a game, finding where I have it or making sure I don't already own it somewhere. But there are launchers like Playnite to address that.

But it does feel like I am in the minority with this opinion.
Historic begins with a hard h consonant sound. The h isn't silent. "A historic" is correct.

With that said, I don't personally have a problem with "an historic." I recognize it as a convention adopted by people whose dialect favors the silent h historic.
The Riot in Toronto
Yes, we really need to make scientific publishing even more expensive and bureaucratic./s

I appreciate your creativity but the real solution is to fund replication studies and improve statistics education in the sciences.
Book Review: The Complete Rhyming Dictionary and Poet's Craft Book
But it is not like that. The research was a fraud. It didn’t kill anyone. Once it was recommended by European Medical Guidelines, it started killing people. I would argue negligence on their part.

It’s like this: If a factory somewhere knowingly provides subpar nuts and bolts. And then Boeing puts them in all their planes without proper testing. If a plane crashes, who is liable? There’s definitely wrongdoing on the factory’s part, but who would you as a victim sue first?
Looks as though this Comcast “security feature” can be disabled via your account settings.

Also, DNSSec?
Thank you for your interest in the FOSD project! You're right that the examples directory currently contains just a basic debug print statement. We're still in the early stages of development, and the project is evolving as we work to build out more features.

At this point, FOSD supports the development of a basic 32-bit loader and a 64-bit kernel on the Intel x86 architecture. Although the framework is still limited, we've successfully implemented a simple print system as a starting point. We're actively working on integrating an interrupt system to support standard I/O operations, which will lay the groundwork for more complex functionality, such as a file system interface and task management.

We're excited about the potential of FOSD to make operating system development more accessible, and we appreciate your feedback and interest in the project! Stay tuned as we continue to build out these features.
Show HN is for something you've made.

https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html
is there a web framework that managed to significantly iterate on knockout or is it all needless fluff to spout more buzzwords every week?
This article sort of just glosses over any reasons why existing laws aren't enough. It states that existing scientific fraud is rarely prosecuted (e.g. under fraud statutes), so it seems to me the right course of action should be to prosecute it!

In the US at least, it's nearly impossible to commit this kind of malfeasance without committing federal wire fraud - faked research would nearly always be part of a grant application, at least eventually, for example.

Plus, I'm surprised some enterprising lawyers haven't at least tried some massive class action lawsuits. The actual researcher may not have much to go after, but surely their institutions would. If you can get huge class action payouts for the dubious connection of talc in baby powder to cancer, why can't you get a payout here where (a) the malfeasance was intentional from the get go and (b) the harms are unambiguously clear from follow-up meta-analysis studies.

I guess I would like to understand if there is some fundamental reason that existing statutes aren't enough before adding laws.
Show HN: Bachelier – A Webapp for Creating and Sharing Financial Models
Create and share financial models, using Python and markdown. Save the models in "boxes", abstracting the implementation code to the user, they just input parameters. Share this boxes or save them in your local storage. It's 100% free to use and open source.
I wish they'd focus on getting rid of whatever is still blocking Chrome, Firefox etc from actually porting their web engines to full browser alternatives. Installing WebKit with a different coat on is not what I want. I want alternatives to the WebKit monopoly.
> Steam would be completely enshittified by now.

Has it not already been shit for like 15 years? It's 2003 shitware with an electron skin on top of it, with a predatory skin marketplace that you can't withdraw funds from and lootbox mechanics included in all their live service games (of which that is all valve has made in the last 15 years excluding HLA).

Valve was never a good company. I would argue their early business model directly lead to the death of game modding in the first place because in their first few years they straight up stole the IPs of successful mods to turn into second rate games internally, usually not giving original developers any cuts of the proceeds beyond a normal position at the company.
Independent replication is the cornerstone of Karl Popper's formulation of the scientific method. If we were really holding to philosophical basis for how science is supposed to work, then we'd be careful to consider results that have only been demonstrated by one laboratory to be tentative at best, and be cautious about making policy decisions based on it until there has been truly independent replication.

Physicists seem to be really good about this, and many other aspects of implementing the scientific method too.

I wish the other sciences would get on board. It would eliminate almost all the chronic problems that plague biological and social sciences: falsification, p-hacking, failing to notice honest methodological mistakes, outright fraud, etc.

I fear that the problem is, we can't get there from here for social reasons. The people at the top of these fields - the ones who drive culture in academic institutions, set publication standards for journals, influence where grant money is allocated, etc. - all got there by using sloppy methods and getting lucky. I think that, on some level, many of them know it, and know that fixing the rotten core of their field inevitably involves subjecting their own work - and, by extension, reputations - to a level of scrutiny that it is unlikely to survive.
> What happens if the growth rate outpaces our natural evolution?

Just look at the news.
(Gaza, Ukraine, Syria, Libia, Yemen, a good part of Africa and so on) /s
> But rarely does a surgeon force upon someone a surgery they don't want.

Depending on your definition. ER surgeons regularly force surgery on someone who is unconscious and thus we cannot ask if they want it or not. The law specifically says if someone cannot answer then the answer is automatically assumed to be they want it (at least in most places).
We'd spend more time, but it's difficult to loiter 10m underwater. The residual gas from a dive takes about a day to release, and this impacts both follow-up dives and flights. Treatment options are different as well: an airlift (or just diving again and surfacing slower) vs diverting a whole flight.
> In 2024 suddenly everyone is grown up and corporate and has never done anything wrong.

Trying to be considerate of others, even when they are different from ourselves, is indeed kind and good and does come with maturity. You needn't be corporate or have never done wrong to be considerate.
I used to work as a design engineer for a pressure vessel manufacturer - we used explosion bonding all the time to bond more expensive corrosion resistant layers to carbon steel backing parts.

Example: In a shell and tube heat exchanger, the tubes might have some really reactive stuff in it so you might make the tube side out of indium , titanium, nickel, or even an expensive stainless steel like S32205/S31803. The shell side might just have river water for cooling, and can just be painted and have a sacrificial anode somewhere inside.

The bulkhead where all the tubes penetrate (the "tubesheet") might be 6' (180cm) in diameter and 4-8 inches (10-20cm) thick - an extraordinarily expensive hunk of material (or possibly not even available in the thickness needed) when made 100% of the more exotic materials; easily in the 6 figure range.

Sometimes this problem is solved by having a welder coat the entire surface with weld metal that's good enough to withstand the corrosion characteristics of the process stream, but with larger parts this can take _days_; with some metallurgies (e.g. brass) it's not even possible.

Instead, the practice was to explosion bond a "thin" layer (1/4" (6mm) or so) of the expensive stuff to a more standard carbon steel forging. The tubes are usually very thin walled and welded/brazed to the cladding.

What's cool is the interface layer between the two metals looks like when two liquids meet with swirls and whorls of the two materials interleaving, but frozen solid.
zff hasn't been posted though
I'm a bit afraid that LLMs will make it harder for new frameworks and tools, as they have far fewer examples to learn from. And if that will make it so that the established frameworks remain status quo.
This is a little bit out there from a rationalist point of view, but I think there are domains in which not all of the requisite concepts for the scientific method actually exist. An example that comes to mind is the nature of conscious experience - having spoken to a lot of meditators, for instance, I'm convinced that there really are commonalities to it that you can experience yourself by sitting down and paying attention. But I don't think there's anything to really falsify here, because there's nothing to measure!

You can't tell someone "here's this totally objective way you can pick apart your conscious experience into a bunch of statistics, and when you do change X I predict you'll see the statistics vary like Y". You can kinda just point their brain in a direction and hope that they experience it for themselves.

Another example, I think, is domains that are under optimisation pressure or control of some kind (like an ecosystem, or much more simply a thermometer). There was a post on HN a few days ago about causality, and how the standard statistical methodologies for determining causality kinda break down when you start measuring systems like this. Correlation is not causation, but in these systems causation no longer necessitates correlation either! Perhaps a different kind of epistemology would be useful here too.

Anyway, not sure this is making sense. Would be curious to hear your thoughts.
Yeah I bet this is exactly why they didn't publish the list :)
>> reshaping by the top individual

> MBAs only hire MBAs

Maybe the CEO in such cases often is an MBA and you are a bit talking about the same thing, just from different perspectives? (Looking at the one person, vs the people, at the top?)

https://fortune.com/education/articles/how-valuable-is-an-mb...

> MBA grads made up nearly 40% of C-suite executives on the 2022 Fortune 1000 list

Wow so many (I think), but maybe they aren't CEOs.

Here's 43% from Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/MBA/comments/u26w7r/from_mba_to_for...

> I have compiled the following for the 2021 Fortune 500 US companies (the last global one I've seen is from FT in 2015 https://ig.ft.com/sites/mba-to-ceo/):

> 43% of CEOs have an MBA

Anyway,what happens if the CEO is an engineer, and everyone reporting to him/her is an MBA :-)
But that’s true for all medical trials. If someone discovered a new drug that works, why wait for multiple rounds of human trials and then approvals from the proper authorities?
I guess I don't feel super locked in to doppler either; everything takes creds via env vars these days, so it's not even that locked in. But there would be a bit of work to migrate thing, etc, like with everything.

Good value is probably the most important thing; the value could be speed or efficiency or whatever, but that's obviously the first bar.

Open source is not high up on the list of questions.
I'm not having much success with this beyond very basic components. I think I'd have more success iteratively working with ChatGPT or Claude directly, and then pasting the code into jsfiddle, pastebin, or replit to see the results and iterate.
> Because the only reason I can think of is whining about not being the default.

That is exactly the reason.

The charitable reason is so that the browser, upon launch, can ask the user if they want to make it the default.

The problem is that the only incentive browser vendors have to not ask repeatedly is the frequency threshold past which the user will not use the browser.