skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If anybody is wondering what sort of political viewpoints quantadev is talking about, one example is they posted that The Onion and Alex Jones are the same

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42138285
Doesn't ensuring stuff actually works tangibly lower risk?
Trusting Alex Jones is a bold strategy. And not one for anyone who has any media literacy, but you do you!
> This article is built upon a questionable definition of the placebo effect. Debatably, it’s a straw man argument that sidesteps the complexities of placebo response by using an oversimplification that is easier to dismiss.

> The placebo effect gets much more complicated in the context of mental health. Anti-depressant studies are the classic example, with placebo often performing close to (but not as well) as powerful SSRIs

The article correctly points to distinction between the placebo effect (psychosomatic effects of administering a placebo) and results of placebo-arm in clinical trials (which are just summary of multiple effects, including placebo effect itself, regression to the mean and reporting bias).

Many effects that happen in placebo-arm of clinical trials are unrelated to administering placebo itself and would happen even if no placebo is administered (e.g. regression to the mean). But not administering placebo would break blinding, so it is hard to distinguish these effect.
I live in what would be considered a large house in the UK and it’s marginally larger than that!
> there are really no convincing arguments for or against LCDM because it's highly sensitive to the galaxy formation model that's adopted.

To be fair, that is absolutely not the way ΛCDM would have been described to someone in the pre-Webb days. It was a well-regarded theory and the hope was (a-la the Higgs detection) that new data would just better constrain the edges and get us on to the next phase of the problem.

But instead it's a wreck, and we didn't see what we were expecting at all, and so now we're retreating to "Well, ΛCDM wasn't exactly proven wrong, was it?!"

That doesn't mean it's wrong either, and it for sure doesn't mean MOND is right. But equally for sure this is a Kuhnian paradigm shift moment and I think it's important for the community to be willing to step back and entertain broader ideas.
Does anyone else have issues with the data privacy side of things? I'm not really feeling the "everything is public" aspect of the AT protocol.
They've also been fined for polluting waters with their launchpad deluge system.

https://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/spacex-polluted-...

They also have a history of doing things without waiting for FAA approval.

https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-proposes-633009-civil-penal...

Enron Musk has also mouthed off about NLRB and OSHA stuff before too, which seems like a red flag for a company employing workers to handle hazardous materials and do dangerous things.
That's frigging awesome!! I really admire the thought and attention to detail that went into this. Must've cost a good fortune, but what better way to spend it having fun? Your friends seem like a blast too.

And also, thanks for Cloudflare Workers :) One of my favorite tech tools of all time.
Life without Pihole and a blocker is just grim.

Every so often I get exposed to that world. It’s awful.
> it isn't a major problem anymore

This is not true at all. The hard part isn't cloud vs. on-premise, it's the architecture.

Most sites can either put all their data in a single massive database, or else have an obvious dimension to shard by (e.g. by user ID if users mostly interact with their own data).

But sites where the data is many-to-many and there's a firehose of writes, of which Twitter is a prime example, are a nightmare to scale while remaining performant and reliable. Every single user gets an updated live feed of tweets drawn from every other user -- handling millions of users simultaneously is not easy.
It’s worth noting that the algorithm in question is not any kind of AI or ML as we might know it from the tech industry. Underneath, it is plain old statistical modelling.

The article doesn’t make this clear, and the name of the blog doesn’t help.
There are a few, actually :)

CCBoot is a Windows Server-based diskless solution I mentioned, and they also provide CCDisk, which can do "hybrid" mode — where there is a small SSD in every PC with base OS pre-installed and pre-configured, which then mounts an iSCSI game drive

GGRock is a fantastic product, in my opinion. It is pricy, but where as CCBoot relies heavily on knowing it's inner workings, GGRock is pretty much turnkey solution

There is also CCu Cloud Update, which I have heard of, but didn't try myself, since they sell licenses only in Asia, from what I remember

LANGAME Premium is an addon for LAN centre ERP system, which is basically an ITAAS solution based on TrueNAS. Of all paid offerings that one is my favourite so far — but you have to use their ERP and actually run a business for it to be cost-effective

NetX provides an all-in-one (router, traffic filter and iSCSI target) NUC-like server with pre-configured software on a subscription basis. I am most skeptical of that just on the basis that, from my research, two NVMe drives can't really handle the load from a fully occupied 40+ machines LAN centre. Not for a long time, at least

...and homebrew, of course. I myself am running a homebrew ZFS-based system which I'm extremely happy with

In your case, I'd go with building my own thing too. Does not take a lot of time if you know the inner workings and you have no additional OPEX for your room :)
Past failures do not rule out the possibility of success in future attempts.
Cloud today, edge tomorrow.
I get the feeling that eventually, as the number of simultaneous users increases, these streaming services will start using broadcast channels to show their live events. Anyway, you look at it, open-air broadcasting is the most reliable and cheapest method to broadcast to the masses. Netflix could easily create its own network or buy one. The internet has very good uses but simultaneous broadcasting to the masses is not one of them.
I don't think they're saying the relativistic effects don't exist, just that they're still largely unimportant compared to Newtonian effects.

For precession of perihelion of Mercury we mostly noticed because any error is cumulative over time and we could integrate over an arbitrarily wide timebase. The relativistic effects are <10^-8 of the total, around 1/10th of the change imparted by Newtonian gravity of planets much, much further away. The BepiColombo orbiter should allow us to correct for the relativistic effects of other planets' pull on Mercury, but it's expected to be a change of <10^-12.

So I guess "many, many decimal places" is in the ballpark of 6-12.
Stop making me memorize the borrow checker
Every time a big company screws up, there are two highly informed sets of people who are guaranteed to be lurking, but rarely post, in a thread like this:

1) those directly involved with the incident, or employees of the same company. They have too much to lose by circumventing the PR machine.

2) people at similar companies who operate similar systems with similar scale and risks. Those people know how hard this is and aren’t likely to publicly flog someone doing their same job based on uninformed speculation. They know their own systems are Byzantine and don’t look like what random onlookers think it would look like.

So that leaves the rest, who offer insights based on how stuff works at a small scale, or better yet, pronouncements rooted in “first principles.”
yeah - I think 'old' being someone older then yourself is basically the dictionary definition of it :-P
Yeah, boring old trope.
I had the impression that "shitting on general relativity" was exactly what MOND was about. That is, it starts from the position that Einstein is wrong, and searches for ways to support that.
https://archive.ph/Lb88G
I didn't say that, because I didn't mean that.

In this case, it was a newscaster on CNN. Couldn't tell you who.

The question, specifically, had been whether a politician had or had not authorized a change to a law. My primary sources were the law before he changed it and the law after he changed it, which had different text. It wasn't even a situation that required interpretation. My brother wasn't arguing that the change was meaningless. He was arguing that the law had not changed.

I appreciate that there are nuanced situations where interpretation matters a great deal, but newscasters are not experts on the things they report. That's not their job. Their saying something did or didn't happen when they don't even pretend to have been there, read the documents, or informed themselves about the situation isn't authoritative.
Was this necessary? The comment was on a tech forum about the tech issues, do we really need to reprosecute the argument that it wasn’t real boxing here too? There are plenty of other places for those so painfully inclined to do so
Which is why we started calling it M$ in the 2000s, emphasizing its overriding goal of making ca$h off its users
Does this work on all birds or just the mechanical replicas?

(I know, a trick question, none of them are real….)
dumbing it down a bit: Imagine if anyone in your neighborhood could broadcast video and take up %N of the bandwidth to all of the routers in the neighborhood. Imagine this on your campus or at your office. This works for cable tv, as there's only 200 channels. You're just going to slurp up all of the bandwidth instead and maybe no one is watching the tv.

Sure you get these black swan events that everyone wants to watch, but they're just that, really infrequent. So instead you have to provision capacity if on the interent to do big events like this. The upside is that you have a billion people able to point to point to another billion people instead of 30 companies who can send to everyone.
Sufficiently advanced prognosticators are indistinguishable from priests.
https://www.theverge.com/2024/10/24/24278666/bluesky-working...
The entire data stream is public. Personally, I've encountered zero bots or spam so far and am finding hoards of real people in my field joining so it seems real from my tiny tiny corner of the data stream.
The right book for the right problem. SICP isn't meant to teach you how to tackle fault-tolerance in a complex distributed system. Here is a textbook that talks about distributed systems (van Steen and Tannenbaum):

https://www.amazon.ca/Distributed-Systems-Maarten-van-Steen/...
> GitHub still doesn't know how to show the difference between the original version and a force-pushed one when reviewing

They kinda do now, there's a "Compare" link next to the "<user> force-pushed branch <branch> from X to Y" event.

The UX is a bit hidden and the diffs don't always look right to me, but it's there.
This is a misrepresentation of what I am saying. By no means am I casting an aspersion on JWST. I am casting an aspersion on this particular observation as a test of MOND and LCDM. Also I highly disagree about your comments on my line of reasoning. The fact that you can obtain a huge range of possible galaxy properties in the context of LCDM indicates that in general, tests of LCDM and MOND that rely on galaxy formation model are in usually not strong tests. This is the key issue with using the abundance of high-z galaxies (or even their masses -- despite the fact that these aren't measured) as a test. In the context of LCDM, you need haloes to form galaxies but it has been shown many times that there are enough haloes to solve the problem (see the paper linked) by a huge amount.
I've been designing chips for almost 30 years.

We have a bunch of AI initiatives in my company but most of them are about using Copilot to help write scripts to automate the design flow. Our physical design flow are thousands of lines of Tcl and Python code.

The article mentions High Level Synthesis. I've been reading about this since my first job in the 1990's. I've worked on at least 80 chips and I've never seen any chip use one of these tools except for some tiny section that was written by some academics who didn't want to learn Verilog for reasons.
> And then once they switch on advertising will be printing tens of billions a year.

I’ve seen this said before, and I guess it might be true, but I don’t really get why people would use Threads once there’s advertising on it — isn’t it being a better experience their main value proposition? And they’ve just spent the last few years teaching people how easy it is to migrate between these basically-interchangeable services…
I know we're on Hacker News, but still, that's how I interpreted it
The flaw is that the bully can pick their moment and thus avoid being observed. The victim doesn’t get to choose the moment and means by which they have to defend themselves. And the school will enforce zero tolerance only against what their staff witnessed, not the original bullying that is (from their perspective) only alleged.

The key rule about fighting back that is never taught is: don’t get caught.
Mangle looks very interesting, thanks for the share. In particular I love your GRPC demo, because it shows a prototype of something I've been thinking about for a long time: what if we did GraphQL, but with Datalog! Maybe we could call it LogiQL :)

In particular many people talk a lot about concerns like optimizations across GraphQL plans and how they are expected to behave on underlying tables, but this is something that I think has seen a lot of research in the Datalog realm. And to top it off, even ignoring that, Datalog just feels much more natural to write and read after a bit of practice, I think. (Obviously you need to be in the pure fragment of datalog without recursion, but even then it might be feasible to add those features with termination criteria even if it's just "decrement an internal counter and if it hits zero throw a big error")

What do you think the plans for the Rust implementation will be? That's probably the most likely place I'd use it, as I don't really use Go that much.
something tells me 4chan will survive the birth and death of many social media platforms. lessons to be learned but everyone keeps repeating the same mistakes
Open https://bsky.app/ in incognito mode and you get to see the front page.

Currently the top post on the latest refresh is:

>I'm honestly surprised he hasn't started selling stool samples. His followers have been buying his BS for years, so it seems like a natural next step...

https://bsky.app/profile/calltoactivism.bsky.social/post/3lb...

This is not a network I want to join if this is the popular content. We've been told to curate our own garden for reddit, twitter, mastodon, etc. It never works because people who see that and like it join by the millions and those who don't don't.
In this case, it was a CNN newscaster, which is about as "mainstream media" as it gets, but I would extend the same criticism to anybody else who doesn't even pretend they have any background knowledge or research supporting their claims, just a teleprompter to read it from.

The comparison was between source material and commentary, specifically commentary by people who don't even claim to understand the topic in any depth.
As to the main point of contention -- I think a fair description of the consensus view of the situation, among people who have the temerity to disagree with you, goes about like this:

"Of course NATO enlargement was something of an annoyance to Russia. Specifically it can be taken as a signal that NATO might confront Russia's own moves for influence in say, the Balkans, North Africa or the Middle East -- places that, last we checked, are not Russia. It may even choose to involve itself in direct conflict with Russia's allies, such as Serbia, for good reasons or bad. One could also argue that it threatens Russia's 'brand' and prestige in softer ways; and one could even argue that the very existence of NATO is kind of an insult to Russia."

"But every rational actor knows that NATO was never going to actually attack Russia, itself, without cause. Or even threaten to do so. Certainly not in the sense of an all-out, tanks-across-the-steppes assault, or a pre-emptive nuclear strike that Russia pretends to believe is the ultimate goal of its expansion."

"Nor is there any long-range plan in the works to station forces of any kind on Russia's borders that could potentially threaten or signal the capability for such an invasion, in for extortion purposes (in essence), as Russia's current regime also pretends to believe. You simply will not find a shred of evidence for any line of thinking in support of such a plan."

"All that pretense is just that -- pretense and propaganda. It's just a foil that its various incarnations of its regime have used, over decade, first to justify its continued occupation of the Warsaw Pact countries, and now, to distract from its actual reasons for its invading Ukraine (and manacing other countries). And to get its people to sign up for the endless meat-grinder war it managed to create for them there, once its delusional expectations of a quick, decisive victory evaporated on first contact with reality."

So if people say things like "NATO's expansion is benign to Russia's security concerns", that's the framing in which that sentiment is most likely meant. They may be oversimplifying slightly, but not by much.
Could DOGE cut $2T? The legal and practical reality of government reform
Good solution. Problem is they have chosen a 'default instance' in the app which goes against the idea to encourage federation of the platform and instead accelerates centralization and there was backlash over that change. [0]

mastodon.social will only get more centralized and is the only one that is benefitting from that change.

[0] https://mstdn.social/@feditips/110233282251253677
> I find such a statement to be as lacking in evidence as those that claim humanity has some soul or similar that cannot be replicated.

It doesn't need evidence; it is the null hypothesis.

Brains clearly compute, and it appears that computation is sufficient to produce the observed behaviour of brains. All our experience of the universe and physics suggests that there is no magic or metaphysics or souls or whatever.

So the onus is on you to show that there's something more going on. It isn't a 50:50 "is it heads or tails", it's more like "I claim that the tooth fairy exists" vs "I'm pretty sure it's your mum".
Are people in Austin more concerned about fluoride?
But the fact they still have this perception of confusing sign-up means they were too late.
If it is an influence operation, the people who want to wield influence pay the bills. Already the point of X/Twitter (large Saudi funding, likely to help prevent another Arab spring type event in their country), and the point of the hundreds of millions SBF spread around. Bluesky's Series A was Blockchain Capital; seems like part of this year's significant movement of crypto influencers into politics. If so, they don't need it to turn a profit, they'll profit off the influence. Just like the corporations who normally jettison any money-losing department, but buy and keep permanently loss-making news departments for the influence they can create.
Related ongoing thread:

We’re receiving about 3,000 reports/hour - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42159454 - Nov 2024 (62 comments)

Also:

Bluesky is currently gaining more than 1M users a day - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42159713 - Nov 2024 (153 comments)

The Bluesky Bubble: This is a relapse, not a fix - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42156907 - Nov 2024 (48 comments)

Consuming the Bluesky firehose for less than $2.50/mo - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42152362 - Nov 2024 (58 comments)

Maybe Bluesky has "won" - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42150278 - Nov 2024 (743 comments)

Watch Bluesky's explosive user growth in real time - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42147497 - Nov 2024 (11 comments)

How to migrate from X to Bluesky without losing your followers - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42147430 - Nov 2024 (50 comments)

1M people have joined Bluesky in the last day - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42144340 - Nov 2024 (124 comments)

Ask HN: Bluesky is #1 in the U.S. App Store. Is this a first for open source? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42129768 - Nov 2024 (44 comments)

Ask HN: Will Bluesky become more popular than Twitter? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42129171 - Nov 2024 (13 comments)

Visualizing 13M Bluesky users - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42118180 - Nov 2024 (236 comments)

Bluesky adds 700k new users in a week - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42112432 - Nov 2024 (168 comments)

How to self-host all of Bluesky except the AppView (for now) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42086596 - Nov 2024 (79 comments)

Bluesky's AT Protocol: Pros and Cons for Developers - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42080326 - Nov 2024 (60 comments)

Bluesky Is Not Decentralized - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41952994 - Oct 2024 (194 comments)

Bluesky Reaches 10M Accounts - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41550053 - Sept 2024 (115 comments)
Related ongoing thread:

Bluesky is currently gaining more than 1M users a day - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42159713 - Nov 2024 (154 comments)

Also recent and related:

Bluesky is currently gaining more than 1M users a day - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42159713 - Nov 2024 (153 comments)

The Bluesky Bubble: This is a relapse, not a fix - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42156907 - Nov 2024 (48 comments)

Consuming the Bluesky firehose for less than $2.50/mo - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42152362 - Nov 2024 (58 comments)

Maybe Bluesky has "won" - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42150278 - Nov 2024 (743 comments)

Watch Bluesky's explosive user growth in real time - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42147497 - Nov 2024 (11 comments)

How to migrate from X to Bluesky without losing your followers - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42147430 - Nov 2024 (50 comments)

1M people have joined Bluesky in the last day - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42144340 - Nov 2024 (124 comments)

Ask HN: Bluesky is #1 in the U.S. App Store. Is this a first for open source? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42129768 - Nov 2024 (44 comments)

Ask HN: Will Bluesky become more popular than Twitter? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42129171 - Nov 2024 (13 comments)

Visualizing 13M Bluesky users - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42118180 - Nov 2024 (236 comments)

Bluesky adds 700k new users in a week - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42112432 - Nov 2024 (168 comments)

How to self-host all of Bluesky except the AppView (for now) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42086596 - Nov 2024 (79 comments)

Bluesky's AT Protocol: Pros and Cons for Developers - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42080326 - Nov 2024 (60 comments)

Bluesky Is Not Decentralized - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41952994 - Oct 2024 (194 comments)

Bluesky Reaches 10M Accounts - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41550053 - Sept 2024 (115 comments)
"With this fundraise, we will continue supporting and growing Bluesky’s community, investing in Trust and Safety, and supporting the ATmosphere developer ecosystem. In addition, we will begin developing a subscription model for features like higher quality video uploads or profile customizations like colors and avatar frames. Bluesky will always be free to use — we believe that information and conversation should be easily accessible, not locked down. We won’t uprank accounts simply because they’re subscribing to a paid tier."

https://bsky.social/about/blog/10-24-2024-series-a