skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>The fact that a civil agency enforcing securities laws is the enforcer in your model should be the hint.

IRS is a civil agency, referring anything more than fines to the DOJ.

However, that actually illustrates your point even more.

Since money is speech, and freedom of association is a right, it is not really possible to 'legally' enforce (nor practically, in-theory) others to not value some representation as valuable.

That right is only inalienable when it affects 'interstate' commerce / national interests - offering this proactively as a mediated service, or becoming a sizable portion of a nation's GDP - which boils semantically back down to... what does it mean to be "illegal"

> the difference between issuing a currency de novo, which is pretty much unregulated, and issuing something that's linked to U.S. dollars, which is highly regulated.

This is also the other grey part. If it has value and was traded - or not traded, it impacts "interstate commerce", and therefore is regulated as a good, it must have a tax levied on it.

Which just re-enforces the Le Laissez Faire' attitude projection the US tries to impose.

We don't need actual laws, just taxes. No wars, just foreign policy.

You are correct tho - "de novo", legal. Practically, its nearly treasonous - literally.
Query-language docs are a great example of this, especially proprietary ones. 3000 examples, many with blog post baggage and other distracting discussion, and when you try to find a description of the grammar, crickets.
There is no compelling reason to fly to Bali from the Hague each year. Except the weather ofc. People just like it. Because the weather. Did I complain about the weather in Holland already? No? It was raining again. The summer is gone.
Surely a 1.21-GW datacenter would suffice!
This is cool. One way of solving spam problems might to only show links of people you explicitly follow / trust in some way, although that means associating identity to the posts. You could have a setting to toggle between only showing links from people you trust or from everyone, to get around the bootstrapping problem at first.
Well, I'd argue the net negative effects are people who enjoy responsible sports gambling aren't able to do it anymore.

The state can of course, claim that no one should be gambling on sports anyways, so its not a problem that people lose access, just as it can with any other vice. People who have no interest in sports gambling would of course, not care either way.

If there is no value assigned to having the freedom, in and of itself, then of course, banning anything becomes trivial.

I think under this criteria, as long as we can have an "effective" ban (ie: no black markets are created) on anything that is not healthy for people to participate in, it would be worth banning.

So basically, anything that is unhealthy, but not yet banned, is only allowed because the state cannot yet find an effective way to ban it.
They are funded by NGOs controlled by billionaires, so in the end there is a number of things they cannot investigate if they want to maintain the NGO money.
I disagree with the downvotes here. C language "layers" are tricky to get right, source of footguns and a backdoor potential (especially the trigram that started this comment chain), and overall a bandaid invented when there were no better solutions (like modules, or Unicode). Trigrams are a weird archaic quirk of the C language (and no other modern language), and I'm glad to see them gone.

And since we're thinking about layers, character encoding hacks should be entirely outside of a programming language responsibility. Now that would be a proper layering.
> because selfish people make up the largest bloc (though still a minority) of humanity.

The noise a small group can make is not to be underestimated. Even though I have no idea what a largest bloc that is a minority means. Either they are the largest group or not. This I think is even more confused than minority majority which is absolutely an arrogant/racist way of thinking.
> In a few months US will have an anti-islamic version of Putin

With 45% probability, assuming he isn't assassinated.

The tie with Musk would make your hypothetical very convenient for Iran as an empty threat though, so there's that.

> Nobody dies

Loads of people die from communication failures.

More importantly, this would only even be a threat if it could actually cause a kessler cascade, because there's too many Starlink satellites to target directly even if you own SpaceX.

This matters because such a cascade will also mess up everything else in close orbits regardless of nationality.

It's like hypothesising someone might use CFCs as a chemical weapon: sure, if they want to make enemies with basically everyone all at the same time.
>> Humans learn from examples, not from “core concepts”

So true. Humans are great at building mental models from raw data. Only after we learn our mental model is wrong we RTFM (unless your role is very specialized of course).
I think it's pretty easy to define, actually. Were they paid in some way to do those things? If yes, then it was advertising.
The whole point is to highlight, for the lay consumer, the periodicity of their purchase, regardless of the periodicity of payments. And hopefully create market pressure for sellers to sell things rather than rent them.
Which card do you mean that has more cores/computing performance than 4090 and costs 4-5k?
> I fear it's going to fall far short of the mark because I think it's a combination of ingredients, supply chain, and employee processes and practices

Same here as well.

Part of the charm of konbinis (and Japan to an extent) is the friendly atmosphere. Foods are fresh (delivered daily and inventory churn is consumer friendly) and people working at these places (despite being not high-paying) have higher level of care of how customers are treated. 7-11 here by comparison are... definitely not that.
There is a limit, though. Language has become worse with the popularization of social media. Now, thinking will because most people will be content with letting machines think for them. The brain requires stimulation in the areas it wants to excel in, and this expertise informs both action and taste in those areas. If you lose one, you lose both.
Not currently on Netflix, for anyone else wondering. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/the_americans For Amazon Prime it says "subs" which I take to mean it's included in the subscription; everywhere else it says you can only buy it
While I occasionally have the pleasure of creating or working with a test suite that's interesting and creative relative to the code under test, the vast majority of unit tests by volume are slop. Does it call the mock? Does it use the return value? Does "if err != nil { return err }" in fact stop and return the error?

This stuff is a perfect candidate for LLM generation.
Are they thought?

Guess that is part of the meme, anybody can say "well correlation isn't causation" and sound kind of smart. Then the onus is on the other to go prove they aren't correlated, when they are not obviously correlated to begin with, so then need to devolve into a deep dive showing percentages of correlation. It's part of the 'easy to produce BS' type argument.

I'd push back and say. Ok, then show how 7 of 9 are highly correlated. Just saying 7 of 9 are obviously correlated so boom, who cares. Is just as invalid as someone saying there is no correlation.

You have to prove it either way. And there is no clear proof. And these aren't obvious.

Just everything going bad at once doesn't mean they are highly correlated thus we really don't have to care about any single item.
I'd love a tool like this for PCB design/layout
Are diplomats actually a meaningful fraction of air travel? I would assume leisure travel accounts for magnitudes more travelers and airplanes
>Why would it be dead?

Because it's dumb.

>You'd be a fucking fool to ignore it. But then again maybe you are.

Chill out a bit.
These sorts of articles raise so many thoughts and emotions in me. I was trained as a computational biologist with a little lab work and ran gels from time to time. Personally, I hated gels- they're finicky, messy, ugly, and don't really tell you very much. But molecular biology as a field runs on gels- it's the priimary source of results for almost everything in molbio. I have seen more talks and papers that rested entirely a single image of a gel which is really just some dark bands.

At the same time, I was a failed scientist: my gels weren't as interesting, or convincing compared to the ones done by the folks who went on to be more successful. At the time (20+ years ago) it didn't occur to me that anybody would intentionally modify images of gels to promote the results they claimed, although I did assume that folks didn't do a good job of organizing their data, and occasionally published papers that were wrong simply because they confused two images.

Would I have been more successful if fewer people (and I now believe this is a common occurrence) published fraudulent images of gels? Maybe, maybe not. But the more important thing is that everybody just went along with this. I participated in many journal clubs where folks would just flip to Figure 3, assume the gel was what the authors claimed, and proceed to agree with (or disagree with) the results and conclusions uncritically. Whereas I would spend a lot of time trying to understand what experiment was actually run, and what th e data showed.
Prop 65 notices are a useless warning because they are slapped on anything and everything, just like this new law will result in a useless checkbox that people click without thinking.
I agree with everything you said. My only question is why aren't we holding Automattic to the same standard we are scrutinising WP Engine? By the same argument, Matt claims Automattic contributes 3915 hours a week, but this is all behind a single flip switch - the plugins repository which they can turn on and off for people they like and don't.

Ok, let's leave the plugin argument aside, why are we brushing over the fact that Automattic is a competitor to WP Engine and Wordpress.org is the open source project which has nothing to do with either of them (business wise), for Matt to use the open source platform to settle his feud with a competitor is downright a low blow. That's an abuse of his power over the project which is supposedly "open source". Is it really open source if a for-profit entity comes in and turn the lights off for another for-profit entity, without consulting other contributors of the said project, simply for using the project in the same spirit in which it is intended to be used?
I was watching wulffden's stream last night and it popped up and got him killed in the game he was playing. Pretty nuts.
How does your product differentiate from Google Apps Script? I see you can execute JS within a cell, but why is that a better UX than keeping the code separated like Apps Script does?
Why aren’t they using this technique to design better transformer architectures or completely novel machine learning architectures in general? Are plain or mostly plain transformers really peak? I find that hard to believe.
Going to need some citations here since the texts that I'm familiar with from that time period are "A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism" by Maxwell (mid-late 1800s) and "A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity" by E. T. Whittaker, neither of which mentions anything of the sort. I suspect you are choosing from texts that at the time likely would not have been considered academic or standard.
May have something to do with who the supplier of natural gas to Europe used to be.
Endurance exercise without weight loss may reduce body fat
The problem with putting the onus on the journals is there is no incentive for them to reward replications. Journals don't make money on replicated results. Customers don't buy the replication paper they just read the abstract to see if it worked or not.

I do like the idea of institutions giving tenure to people with results that have stood the test of time, but again, there is no incentive to do so. Institutions want superstar faculty, they care less about whether the results are true.

The only real incentive that I think can be targeted is still grant money, but I would love to be proved wrong.
Because we know what the 250,000,000 people exposed to these chemicals are dying of and it's obesity.

250M plus people take these chemicals and the leaders in mortality and are all obesity related causes.

No mystery here. No deep research is needed.
https://www.nasa.gov/nexis/robotic-external-leak-locator/

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20070022572/downloads/20...
The point isn't whether or not it's a good deal. If I agree to license a game for 12 hours in exchange for $70, great. Like you say, I make deals like that sometimes. But that's not what we're talking about here, the licensor is misrepresenting it as a perpetual license and that should just be considered fraud.
Sketch the things of interest / your representations of them on a paper. It will improve your ability to keep larger structures in your head, also later without the paper.
Accelerating hamster wheel
Uh, there is not any car that the manufacturer can take away from you at-will, only in-car "services".
Shell ads are quite common in the Netherlands. Usually it's shell trying to greenwash itself.
Everyone seems to acknowledge this is a problem, but refuse to believe it actually affects anything when it comes time to "trust the science". Yes, science is corrupted, but all the results can be trusted, and the correct answer is always reached in the end. So, is it really a problem? Or not?
Like all things in life that have risks of fraud, negligence or potential failure, insurance could be the answer.

Want to publish in a peer reviewed paper? Well then your institution or you should take out a bond or insurance policy that guarantees your work is accurate. The insurance amount would fluctuate based on how big of impact this study could have. Is it a drug that will be consumed by millions? Big insurance policy. Is it a behavioral study without much risk... small insurance policy.

Is a a person in an institution found caught committing fraud, well now then all papers from that institution now have higher premiums.

Did you sign off on a peer reviewed paper that was fraud? Well now your premiums are going up also.

Insurance costs too high to publish? Well then keep doing research until the underwriters are satisfied that your work isn't fraud and adjust the premiums down.

It adds a direct near-term economic incentive to publish honestly and punishes those that abuse the system.
OpenAI with so many open positions including CEO, if Sam Altman also leaves following the trend.
it's called monero
We use EM radiation for illnesses and doctors apply them. It's one of the most important diagnostic and treatment options we have. I think what you're referring to is invalid therapies ("woo" or snake oil or just plain ignorance/greed) but it's hard to distinguish those from legitimate therapies at times.
Drivers under the influence isn't necessarily reckless, but is banned due to a strong association with reckless action.

The crime of DUI is not contingent on the actual facts, risk, and danger presented in a given situation.

The association with realized harm is probabilistic in nature.
Valve probably has enough leverage to hold it off for a while, but rightholders seem to be trying to close that loophole. A store I previously bought FLACs from emailed me this week that a new Terms of Service comes into force on October 1 where the change is the service can remove downloads when the rightholder removes the music from sale and requests downloads to be removed as well. A few hours later I got a notification that a number of albums in purchase history will be removed from my available downloads on October 1st.
Sellers are smarter than that, they already go as far as they think buyers will let them. It is the buyers who need elucidation.
It's currently available for streaming on Hulu.
We've got about 6 billion adults. I think we can be concerned with and address multiple threats at the same time. It's not a zero sum game of risk avoidance.
Of course, but increasing the difficulty of committing fraud is still good. Fraudsters learn to bypass captchas as well, but they still block a ton of bad traffic.
You should be able to build an entire career out of replications: hired at the best universities, published in the top journals, social prestige and respect. To the point where every novel study is replicated and published at least once. Until we get to that point, there will be far fewer replications than needed for a healthy scientific system.
Did they also get the old DEC t-shirt trademark: "The Network Is The Network and The Computer Is The Computer. We regret the confusion."

IBM mocked Sun with: "When they put the dot into dot-com, they forgot how they were going to connect the dots," after sassily rolling out Eclipse just to cast a dark shadow on Java. Badoom psssh!

https://www.itbusiness.ca/news/ibm-brings-on-demand-computin...
I believe that tech and finance also have a drug problem. Those that sell expensive drugs like cocaine go after rich clients. You work in Hollywood, but have you been attending wild private parties? I've worked in academia and I was in the thick of it, I've experienced first hand the fraud I'm talking about, and it was a large part of my experience, not some side note. Perhaps it's an uncomfortable truth that academia is in the state it is in, but again, it is of utmost importance to warn younger people to its perils. (Act as if you're at a poker table at all times.) In any case, how do you know that it isn't your biases that prevent you from considering what I describe? What is so surprising with the claim that people who are very incentivized to steal and commit fraud do so if they are not punished for it?

edit: and it's not things I've heard, instead it is direct experiences, i.e. people stole my work, and things like that. As a graduate student to watch professors come to you with problem X, take what you've said (an actual solution) and publish a paper without attribute, that sort of thing; to report it and have nothing be done about it, et cetera, and on it goes, it's just instance after instance of such behavior, or the million ways in which they are careful to trick you into working on their problems without receiving attribute. One such trick for example, that again happened to me, is that after a conference talk I got into an e-mail discussion where I explained my approach; I was told that "they already have these results" (the trick here was to divulge less in the talk than what was currently known in order to be able to avoid "significant progress by another person" in the case another person does share new progress that they have already established, and hence not having to share attribution.) It turned out that our discussion was enough for them to go from n=3,4 to a general formula involving primes, because I pointed out a certain property they had not noticed. This is just a single example of the sorts of tricks, aside from total fraud, that happen, and one of the milder incidents I had happen to me.
Sounds like you might have viruses TBH
Your phrasing is a bit confusing. Multicharacter litersl being big endian (as you've defined it) means that it'll actually end up little-endian in memory (in little endian architectures, like x86). So 'ABCD' will end up as 'DCBA' in memory.

Really interesting to hear about the escaping quirk, I need to test it.
Is there a better word for this sort of transaction (non-resellable, arbitrary cancellation of service at some unknown point in time by some entities)?

“License” seems too legal, and implies either a lifetime license or fixed term license, which is different than a “we’ll shut down game servers whenever we feel like it”

“Rent” already has a different meaning that is commonly understood.

Is there any suitable existing word? Maybe the awkward phrase “revocable at any time license”?
I wouldn't say so, because the cars are not at all autonomous in our understanding of autonomous.

The cars aren't making all their decisions in real-time like a human driver. They, Waymo, meticulously mapped and continue to map every inch of the traversable city. They don't know how to drive, they know how to drive THERE.

It would be like if I went to the DMV to take a driving test. I would fail immediately, because the parking lot is not one I've seen and analyzed before.

"true" self driving is not possible with our current implementation of automobiles. You cannot safely mix automobiles that self-drive with human drivers. And the best solution is to converge towards known routes. We don't even necessarily how to program the routes - we can instead encode them in the road itself.

It might occur to you that I'm speaking about rail. The reality is it's trivial to automate rail systems, but the variables of free-form driving can't be automated.
> That's why it's all hush-hush within the industry.

I think a much more simple answer is that syndication has always been hush-hush because branding and brand trust is a key part of media marketing. Your local newspaper in the 90s had a ton of syndicated stories too but it was all published under your local paper's hometown moniker.
I worked for a company that built equipment using the AMD 2901 4-bit slice chips. Follow-on products used the Motorola 6800 and then 68000, though.
CO2 was at that level with an entire planet covered in a healthy ecosystem. If that happened now, we would probably witness the entire global collapse of the ecology. It took hundreds of millions of years to cool down that much, and we’ve turned it back up in a century. Animals (humans included) do not have the time to adapt.

Have you ever been in a stuffy meeting where brain fog sets in or you start to feel tired? That’s around 2k ppm where that sets in. Humans don’t like that much co2. No offense, but your argument doesn’t seem thought through.
My bad; I'd forgotten about Salvatore's role. Steve Bennett is the one I saw present about it at the Tcl Conference some years back.
> What if alternatives are worse? Slower? More expensive?

You're talking as if air travel isn't the slowest and/or most expensive option in some cases. See for example high-speed rail for travel distances under 800km.
I can't manage to be really surprised. We already know many people will cheat when the incentives are right. And when the law of the land is “publish or perish”, then some will publish by any means necessary. Thinking “this subsegment of society is so honorable, they won't cheat” would be incredibly naive.
The ez80 is nice, but it's not 'orders of magnitude' more powerful than a regular z80, especially clocked at 20Mhz (the CMOS Z80C was available up to 20MHz).

(The ez80 is capable of 50MHz, I'm not entirely sure why they limited it to 20Mhz in the Agon Light).
I can agree that I wouldn't want to see this type of content take over HN... and I don't think it would. But a little sprinkled in seems fine.
I wonder if a more effective tool for battling air emissions would be to only allow ads for airlines that address contrails. Contrails are something like 2% of global warming power and when addressed effectively could actually cool the planet (as some stop gap efforts while we figure out the rest of emissions, hydrocarbons in planes don't seem like they're going away any times soon).

There's a neat map and some contrail science at https://contrails.org
A nice 300% tax on air travel and suddenly you don't need to go to New Zeeland for a weekend anymore. And ad and tax-exemption for air travel is the opposite of it.
A while ago I was at our patio table with my 4 year old, we were building a house/castle thing out of scrap cardboard. At one point while painting it she pauses and looks over at the garden/woods. I asked her what she saw, she smiled at me and said, "I'm just... happy." I'll never forget it :-)