skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Israel gets most of its water from desalination.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_...

California is discussing rationing water.

Nevada is a dry empty expanse, Arizona is pulling the dregs out of their aquifer.

Cheap energy + desalination is the answer, but we need more energy. Nuclear and other renewables are the obvious answer.
> not sure how we can prevent organizations from being 'bribed' like this

Statute that makes it fraud for a doctor (or anyone with medical certification) to make unsubstantiated health claims or strong claims based on weak science.
One word: Discourse.
Related:

Saturated fat: the making and unmaking of a scientific consensus - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33942840 - Dec 2022 (6 comments)
>> There are also people who disguise their value disagreement as a definition disagreement.

> Or maybe even more to the point: they are twisting their definitions to support their values. I think we can agree on this.

I take it you're insinuating I'm one of these people here?

Hasn't group membership been the defining security boundary in Windows for over two decades?
That post has nothing about names. Serge works for Baikal Electronics who produces electronics for the Russian military and is explicitly sanctioned.
And that is for a flyby.

We’re not getting to 550 AU with chemical rockets alone. Nuclear, ion and/or solar sails will be needed.
The only trendy food advice I'll ever follow is Michael Pollan's: eat food, not too much, mostly plants.
one wild card is the warming of the deep ocean
suficient to cause the physical expansion of that water,driving sea level rise
this is happening now,and is causing localised sea level rise,in the gulf of mexico
something not fully accounted for is that the ice
in the arctic is bieng formed from an increasingly
fresh water top layer,it freezes fast.....and works as an insulative layer,locking in heat
a more complicated source of heat is bieng generated in the greenland ice cap,where the surface melt water creates enough frictional heat as it falls through the miles of ice,to melteven more water,this is basic physics...as described by
Mr Watt,james
there are now enough positive inputs pushing sea level rise,that we now have multiple non zero chances at an ultra extream event,toggling the whole world ocean into different paterns
the thing is that there are NO negative inputs
and the full list of positive inputs is long,and all of those inputs are growing at an accelerating pace
I remember carrying keys, but I don’t miss it.
> i thought there can't be any such example because javascript is the only way. the difference is between code written in javascript which is fast of course and accessing js functions from WASM

That doesn't have to be true.

Eventually WASM will get direct access to the full browser API, without going through JavaScript.

The browser exposes a browser API to the JavaScript VM it hosts, so things like the DOM are available.

Those things aren't available in other JavaScript VMs, like Node. (There's no DOM to interact with.)

And they're not yet available in the WASM VM in the browser, either.

The reason is that the WASM APIs/ABIs have not stabilised. It takes time to make right, but there is progress.
I don't see what scale has to do with it. The concentration of drug residues in manure is independent of the quantity.
I disagree. The point is kinda spot on. Their end goal is to have their team perform the best possible in order to sell out tickets/stadiums/merch and have high ratings from viewership and syndication.

It's about as American as you can get.
Only problem is that certain things update constantly (VSCode)
There is a very good essay in the first comment by "Roger" dated Jan-2023, reproduced below. Skip the primary essay and work from this:

"I really appreciated this piece, as designing good metrics is a problem I think about in my day job a lot. My approach to thinking about this is similar in a lot of ways, but my thought process for getting there is different enough that I wanted to throw it out there as food for thought.

One school of thought 9https://www.simplilearn.com/tutorials/itil-tutorial/measurem...) I have trained in is that metrics are useful to people in 4 ways:

1. Direct activities to achieve goals
2. Intervene in trends that are having negative impacts
3. Justify that a particular course of action is warranted
4. Validate that a decision that was made was warranted

My interpretation of Goodhart’s Law has always centered more around duration of metrics for these purposes. The chief warning is that regardless of the metric used, sooner or later it will become useless as a decision aid. I often work with people who think about metrics as a “do it right the first time, so you won’t have to ever worry about it again”. This is the wrong mentality, and Goodhart’s Law is a useful way to reach many folks with this mindset.

The implication is that the goal is not to find the “right” metrics, but to instead find the most useful metrics to support the decisions that are most critical at the moment. After all, once you pick a metric, 1 of 3 things will happen:

1. The metric will improve until it reaches a point where you are not improving it anymore, at which point it provides no more new information.
2. The metric doesn’t improve at all, which means you’ve picked something you aren’t capable of influencing and is therefore useless.
3. The metric gets worse, which means there is feedback that swamps whatever you are doing to improve it.

Thus, if we are using metrics to improve decision making, we’re always going to need to replace metrics with new ones relevant to our goals. If we are going to have to do that anyway, we might as well be regularly assessing our metrics for ones that serve our purposes more effectively. Thus, a regular cadence of reviewing the metrics used, deprecating ones that are no longer useful, and introducing new metrics that are relevant to the decisions now at hand, is crucial for ongoing success.

One other important point to make is that for many people, the purpose of metrics is not to make things better. It is instead to show that they are doing a good job and that to persuade others to do what they want. Metrics that show this are useful, and those that don’t are not. In this case, of course, a metric may indeed be useful “forever” if it serves these ends. The implication is that some level of psychological safety is needed for metric use to be more aligned with supporting the mission and less aligned with making people look good."
But it's not as if security concerns are specific to the Web. Look at the vulnerabilities found in CPUs over the last decade or so. Security is necessary no matter what the delivery medium, so I don't see why this is a rationale for reinventing the wheel.
That is one thing that could be a killer feature and I like Zig for it, but I can see myself using a language without that level of interoperability if it has a good enough killer feature set
Effortlessly Monitor and Manage Concurrent Python Functions with Functionmonitor
Well, CEO said there is none, get on it engineering :)
So I assume you edit markdown locally and then commit the files to Git which automatically builds into a static website?

I'm doing certain things with the Ghost API that I don't think I can really replace with that.
>People expect a programming language and compiler to be free

Yes, they should both be free.
You know, this is actually an interesting approach, but I will wait to see how you are going to respond to what I am about to say.

Chomsky sometimes argued that you simply do not get to certain levels of corporate media unless you are already so steeped in propaganda that you simply are not able to articulate an opposing view. In other words, the argument is, our Ruth would not even be allowed to have an interview as 'fascist' expert if she said anything nice about Trump. To simplify, her mere presence on MSNBC suggests that she was selected for 'pre-appproved' thoughts that the public may be allowed to digest ( ie. hate Trump ).

Rebuttal?
Any reason that Apple just doesn’t buy the company outright? Market cap is only 7.5B.
Pretty sure that everyone in this thread agrees on what evolution is and how it works.

I have a pet peeve, which I’m clearly not articulating well, which is that journalistic coverage of this topic relies on two false metaphors: 1) the products of chance can be described as intentional or directed to a positive destination, and 2) a species over time can be anthropomorphized into an individual who has that intent. “How The Rhine Got His Hide,” that sort of thing. Journalists need a story with protagonists and that’s what happens.

That’s my pet peeve, I don’t expect it to bother everyone the same amount, but that’s what my original post was about.
Genuinely curious: do you actually include "what is" in your searches, or was that paraphrasing?
See if your area has any local
makerspaces/hackerspaces or regional conferences like BSides.
Or it would encourage suppressed populations to arm themselves to exploit the now relatively weakened condition of the elites.
VOIP <-> GSM gateway?

https://www.voip-info.org/voip-gsm-gateways/
you should read a textbook
100% agree. We don't expect human developers to be perfect, why should we expect AI assistants. Code going to production should go through review.

I do think that LLMs will increase the volume of bad code though. I use Cursor a lot, and occasionally it will produce perfect code, but often I need to direct and refine, and sometimes throw away. But I'm sure many devs will get lazy and just push once they've got the thing working...
Brand new ones are periodically inspected by the local government throughout the inspection process, and then a final time before anyone is allowed to live there. Potential buyers can also commission their own independent inspection.
Big one is whether someone higher up decides to take a look at code being pushed, and nit picks every little thing to prove they are maintaining quality software
Just following up! Yeah that's really interesting, I read both of your links. Again thank you for sharing. To be clear my reaction was just to the "made of scary components" thing, I was not dismissing your suggestion that harmful chemicals may leach from the final product.
I haven't owned a keychain for many years now. After renovating our house, we installed a Yale Doorman. It's the best $300 investment I've done that I can think of:
- Don't have to carry a keychain at all anymore
- I can give strangers (think AirBnb, or cleaners) time-bound access codes
- I can remotely unlock/lock the door for someone if they need immediate access
- Kids can get home without a key - Kids losing their key not a worry anymore
- Work office is keyless too (xlock)
- We always keep a small 9V battery outside in case the battery goes flat

It was after a painful deadlock situation that we initially retro-fitted an electronic lock into the old front door which we carried over to the new door once we renovated the entire floor.
The home ice cream market is perhaps far more developed than you realize.

You can make a harder scooped ice cream style with compressor-equipped machines from brands like Whynter.

You can make soft serve, milkshakes, concretes, and gelato with the Ninja CREAMi. I've heard it even does a decent job of making a knockoff of what you get out of a Pacojet [1] at Michelin-starred restaurants.

And of course there are a number of insulated bowl-style ice cream makers like the KitchenAid ice cream maker, which is the one I use and enjoy. I don't find that I would describe the end product as soft serve-like.

[1] https://www.seriouseats.com/the-scoop-on-paco-jets
This is not true. CIL could be an excellent compilation target for C++ and was quite literally made with that in mind. C# was inspired as much by C++ as it was by Java. And CLR back then was made with consideration of C++/CLI, which exists even today. You can't effectively express C++ code with JVM bytecode, you absolutely can with CIL. You can even express most of Rust's generics with CIL nowadays, retaining monomorphization, save for zero-sized structs and other edge cases.
Key your locks alike, then you only need one key! I actually had to find something to put on my house-keyring because it felt so empty being a single key.

The downside to this is if your locks are cheapo pin tumbler locks then if an attacker steals the lock itself it is trivial for them to take your lock apart and reverse engineer a key that works in all your other locks (think crazy ex or wacko, rather than burglar.)

If you key your mailbox padlock and your front door alike and the wacko steals the padlock, they can take it home and figure out the code to your house.

My home has three entry points, one with a porch, and all four doors have keyed alike locks. It’s great!
This is an annoyingly good argument. Yet my gut says a bunch of floating point numbers isn't open source code.

I think it goes to show how hard it is to make analogies between thw two fields.

Maybe it is just not source at all. Open or closed.

It is data. Like a csv of addresses and coordinates that were collated from different sources that say are no longer available.

It is a very philosophical topic. What if machines got faster and you could train Llama in 5 minutes, and an SSD could hold all the training data. Then it would feel like a compiled artifact more than data. Not releasing the training data would then feel like hiding something.
I would say that the complacency part is identifying good test with good coverage. I agree that writing test is one of the best use cases for LLMs, and it definitely saves engineers a lot of time. But if you follow them to blindly it is easy to get carried away by how easy it is to write tests that focus on coverage instead of actually testing more quality things. Which is what the previous comment was pointing at:

> which turns things that COULD be missed by a skilled tester into things that are GUARANTEED to be missed.
Two Students Created Face Recognition Glasses. It Wasn't Hard.
Mine are ordered by direction of entry secondarily, after order of physical key size. You can't be having a humpy keyring: it must be a smooth curve, if possible.

All facing the same direction is just ... I mean ... if anyone here doesn't do that ... I don't even ... I gotta wash my hands ...
And I fully realize that...but someone with a half a million dollars has the capital to start at least 5 small businesses.
Wow. That is an extremely cool idea - new to me.

Do you have enough KPIs that you can be sure that these targets also serve as useful metrics for the org as a whole? Do you randomize the assignment every quarter?

As I talk through this ... have you considered keeping some "hidden KPIs"?
Have you actually driven one? The only thing I use the touch screen for on a near daily basis is the defroster in the winter and that is before I start driving. Everything else I need regularly does have physical controls, e.g. wipers and blower speed.

I do have a model that still has the stalks though, haven’t driven the stalkless type enough to comment.
Before anyone gets too excited, best to remember that Nina is regarded as something of a joke in nutrition science circles, and tends to take poetic license with the truth.

If you’d like to take a look at a critical review of her other work on this topic, I’d highly recommend this damning analysis of her “Big Fat Surprise” book: https://thescienceofnutrition.wordpress.com/2014/08/10/the-b...
Betteridge's Law would say, "no"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...
Ok let me try again.

Long positions have a completely different risk profile than a short position. One has unlimited upside and a capped downside. One has unlimited downside and a capped upside.

Saying "put your money where your mouth is and short" is asinine because they have completely different risk profiles.

Did that help?

> Can you stop and think for a minute?

Depends who you ask tbh.

> Selling puts and profiting from TSLA is not a vindication of your view that the company is trash.

Selling puts is a long position -- a bullish position -- not a short position. You would only sell puts if you were optimistic about the company. The fact that you don't know that tells me you're not ready to trade options and vindicates my statement that you don't fundamentally understand stock trading. So maybe stop going around and telling people to "put their money where their mouth is by shorting."
Britcoin Will Not Replace Cash, BOE Governor Bailey Says
Nina Teicholz is a bit of a controversial figure in the nutrition world so I'd advise people to take this with a grain of salt...
See also:

https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/news/2024/9/discover-th...

He got the record for "largest number of wacky cars in a museum = 57".
Thank you. This was a good exchange for me.
Nods in Emacs.
> What do you do with the fact that no one (including the companies who do the initial training) modifies the training data when they want to modify the work?

People do take and modify training data sets for new models, it's not as common for modifications to foundation models where you aren't also changing the architecture, because it's not necessary for efficient additive changes, which are the most common kinds of changes, and because training datasets for foundation models are rarely shared. It is commonly used by first parties when the change involves changing the architecture as well (so you can't do an additive to change to the existing trained model, and need to train from scratch but also want to address issues -- either expanding the scope, improving quality, etc. -- with the training data but don't want to start from scratch with training data.) Meanwhile, there is research on fine tuning for subtractive changing (removing concepts from a trained model) because, at least for third parties, while fine-tuning is available, altering the training data and retraining a foundation model from scratch usually isn't an option.

Certainly, people doing derivatives of non-foundation models (LoRA, finetunes, etc.) often reuse and modify training sets used by earlier non-foundation models of the same type, and model sharing sites with an open-source preference facilitate dataset sharing to support this.
This is a serious problem. How can we trust institutions that are suppose to provide evidence based advice to the general public? To me this is a crime so large that those involved should be held accountable for a percentage of all heart attacks. Furthermore it erodes trust in government, experts, and science. Right now it seems like the American public is actively feed extremely harmful food and lied to about the health consequences.

Is it possible to create a Reddit style voting system where votes are weighed more depending on a level of trust/expertise to review scientific papers. The voting could be on multiple factors, such as on the different types of validity, the overall impact, how transparent they are with methods and data, how well it fits with other literature, etc. The end result could be a paper titled “A survey of saturated fat’s impact on cardiovascular health” where experts very publicly discuss the papers merits and common people interested in their health can review and understand where the science is. Decentralized informational authority.
This story broke my rss reader.
Seattle Annual Beerio Cart Tournament
Live on twitch today
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evie_Magazine
I once got criticised by the scrum coach(master?) that she had numerous complaints about me being not well suited to the team and was probably out of league and would fit a far more junior level. This of course gave me a very bad day and left a mark for almost 6 months.

Needless to say, I later found out from my manager that, the scrum coach thought I was spending too much time on particular tickets and causing bad jira metrics for the whole team, but he later explained to the scrum coach that the tasks were large architectural changes or research duties, hence could not be comparable to regular 10LOC bug fixes or bug triage tickets and some stuff can't always be broken down into smaller tasks either, as research topics need more investigation before figuring out what needs to be done.

From then on, I have learned to safely(with caution) ignore criticism from non-technical people and improved my day quality.
Closed loop feedback is the key to high robot accuracy with cheap parts. The big trick is the position detector, and this person figured that out.

Kudos!
Free-beer foundations as well I imagine.
> Most businesses are started to earn money.

I thought tech startups were started to con people into thinking they might earn money.
What kind of monster doesn't orient their keys the same way? Personally I just put them biggest to smallest, though. I think it's more important to have some order than a particular order.
> Or so it seemed

The term 'capitalism' is often used as a smear by the adherents of 'opposing' ideologies like socialism and communism so let's agree on a definition using Britannica Money's example [1]: capitalism, economic system, dominant in the Western world since the breakup of feudalism, in which most means of production are privately owned and production is guided and income distributed largely through the operation of markets..

Given this definition and weighing the positives and negatives it still seems to be the best system, something which I do not see changing as long as humans remain in control of society.

Do you have any examples which show where another system has been proven to be superior at a large scale? That - scale - is an important factor here since there is a direct relation between the scale of the group and the applicability of economic systems.

[1] https://www.britannica.com/money/capitalism
By far the most realistic engine for deep space travel is the Orion project [1]. You load a large rocket with lots of nukes, and detonate one at a time behind a pusher plate.

Of course, humanity being what it is, we'll never trust each other with the idea of building thousands of nuclear bombs with the "firm promise" that they'll only be used for space travel.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propuls...
Apple doesn't allow much beyond static web pages on iOS.
What an absolute goldmine of a website. So many varied topics. Just amazing.
> It’s also worth pointing out that it could be you who has blind spots, not the contributors. And if you’re certain they are wrong you can always try to correct them, or create a competing topic?

No, it's not me who has the blind spots in the cases I have seen, sorry. Also, they are not worth the work to correct, since the overlord of the niche is usually someone with far too much time on their hands to argue, even when presented with incontrovertible proof. They also often have "Wikipedia editing" as a hobby, and know all the nitpicking rules of the site that they will use against you if you encroach on their domain. And yes, I tried this once for an obvious error in a math article (with no citation in the original article, mind you).

> So it’s a good source for topics with the largest audience.

Also not for topics of any political bent, but sure, if your target audience is at a high school level or below and you can separate out the facts from the editorialization, it's not bad.

At this point, I want Encyclopedia Britannica back. I would take it any day of the week over Wikipedia. The golden age of Wikipedia, when that was reversed, seems to be over.
I actually like UAC.

Specially when it asks me if I should allow HP printer driver to download new updates. No thanks I'll keep the minimal driver Mr. HP.