skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Breaking up farmland

One thing I have wondered was the relative benefits of a concentrated wilderness versus distributed habitat.

The common agricultural policy set-aside distributes payments for the wilderness across many farms (for equity, one supposes), whereas a concentrated wilderness would benefit few (and probably only the landowners).
Dallas area schools are really big on the "zero tolerance". My experience was that they care very little about nuance or judgement, just following the rules strictly
Why should C-level execs pay for what was effectively a Russian think-tank exploiting a vulnerability in their developer platform? Should Tim Cook go to jail because Pegasus exists?

This whole thing has been blown way out of proportion. Facebook is easy to hate and the facts get lost.
With support for Glorytun. Very cool!
> Let's hope butter and bacon from Poland is going to cover our needs.

Pole here - Poland switched form being a pork exporter to an importer over the course of the last few decades.

Top external suppliers are...

Denmark (53kt)

Belgium (50kt)

Germany (44kt)

The Netherlands (24.5kt)

Spain (24.5kt)
(In the absence of grass and small tree devouring animals)
I feel like most — if not all — projects are never done. Knowing when to stop is important
Every 1$ that's extorted from the citizens of developed nations to give to most of the developing nations (India one of them), is going to build the single most productive industry regardless of how dirty it is. Giving money to these nations, only increases the pollution even more.

The system is totally inverted to the level of insanity. We should be rewarding developing nations that are decreasing their pollution levels, not rewarding developing nations that are polluting even more.
I read the Wikipedia article and my best guess is that Ahmed was intentionally attempting to get a reaction out of those around him by showing off a clock he built intentionally to look like a bomb…

I’m a white male but actually had a similar thing happen to me during school. (I brought a water gun to school and people expressed that even bringing a toy gun to school could get you into trouble and to hide it for the rest of the day). So I don’t know how much race was truly a factor.

In my opinion you are being closed-minded to other possibilities.
That's an incredible summary, totally matching my experience
I have a related question: is integer/"((math))" logic really safer (in bash) than "[normal]"?
I usually try hard to use declare -i iMyVar; as many applicable variables as possible. But evaluation of strings is still usually a hellhole... I mean hole hell.
So what do you want India to do? Have de-population programs? Split into 1000 smaller countries so that each country is well below the average developed country in raw environmental impact?

It's more fair to use a per capita metric rather than per country. Not only does the average person in developed countries consume far more, they also use much more goods manufactured from places like India and China. So they're just outsourcing their environmental impact.
Do you like that subsurface scattering is really visible with a darker background? I can clearly see the circles of varying opacity in a step-like gradient, and I can clearly see the light rays static image. Is it something with my browser or how it renders the thing? I really like how it looked more before the "More subsurface scattering" came in.
Is it worth inquiring whether people who acquired PhDs and have spent lifetimes studying this subject, and (I think) years studying these particular objects, would overlook and be fooled by the most obvious issue?
Southern Europe seems to be converting farmland into solar farms. And new forests seem to be all monoculture Eucalyptus, fast growing for commercial reasons, but sadly empty of wildlife.

As much as I'd love for Europe to be reforested, the reduced food security might come back to bite us.
https://archive.is/ASEtv
Trolling Haskell
I took it one step further even earlier using a Flash file as a backdrop which was able to achieve the glass effect while still being in a dynamic moveable frame. Can't recall if it used iframes, would need to dig up the code but considering the era it probably did.
Beeswarm plots are more intuitively interpretable, in my experience
A brother from another mother: https://bastillebsd.org/ Bastille manages jails using shell with many of the same constructs you'd find in docker. I like it over other jail management software in BSD because it has so few dependencies.
I'd be happy with AngelScript or smth. Hard-typed, but interpretable. But not Python[-like]. I'd kill it with SIGFIRE.
Agreed, on mobile I can hardly tell the difference after the second step, if at all.
Not only was he told not to take it out of his backpack, he whipped it out in English class, plugged it into the wall, set the time, and then caused the alarm to go off. he was purposefully seeking attention.

His family filed three lawsuits against various parties, all dismissed, two with prejudice, and they were ordered to pay legal costs in two of the three cases.

His father was an eccentric type who had twice tried to run for president of Sudan.

Sure seems like an intentional ploy to get a reaction from staff that could be labeled Islamophobia, though I would blame the father more than the kid.
The ECMAScript committee really need to address the core issues of JS performance - native integers, structs, linear layouts, stack allocation, SIMD, memory arenas, etc. Javascript should ideally be capable of superb performance for its own tools.
I believe the insistence on being a major agricultural producer in the EU despite having some of the largest population densities in the region has a lot to do with it.

A huge chunk of that output is purely for export.
Journalism needs to pursue facts and produce new information as events take place or new developments emerge. Also, a lot of investigative journalism takes work and fearless collection of sources and other dangerous activities.

For me, news is the "new" things, not some LLM generated regurgiation of old facts. I am really saddened for last few years since the emergence of genAI, because everyone(who do not understand more than hype info) somehow assumes that, genAI can start writing latest news and articles of events or somehow predict(Minority Report is not real!) future events.

But, these LLMs know only as much _as they are trained on_, and by the time they are being trained on latest news, those are no longer news at all.

I see how News can be immune to genAI because of the "new" factor of it, but the greed of automation of money-printing is too much and reality is still not sinking in.

As an alternative, news reporters can have somekind of twitter(X) like channel somewhere, where they can post latest events, bits of investigation and an omnichannel genAI can scrape these live and start combining and summarizing the events into more cohorent report, which could give the news management the greed of plugging genAI and printing money, while reduce the workload of journalists of sitting in and writing up that whole report ... I honestly don't know, why journalism even needs genAI, just because everyone is using it to generate slop does not mean I must jump in.
Is that an insane proposition? Are we now shaming and ridiculing people for not prioritizing convenience over long-term sustainability?

This is exactly what a lifestyle change looks like. I'm sorry, but there are exceedingly few such necessary changes which will introduce more convenience into your life. Most of them will be at an inconvenience.

Our problem was letting ourselves get conditioned into normalizing unsustainable habits. A large amount of plastic waste needs to be eliminated, and if you can't be bothered to bring your own leftover containers to a restaurant, maybe you should be getting smaller portions.
> ... and see a bunch of Chrome-only non-standards

That's one way of putting it. The other perspective is that those are necessary features and that Safari and Firefox are now holding the web back. When IExplorer 6 was the most popular browser, with Firefox being the underdog, I don't remember people complaining that Firefox was implementing non-standard features.

Let's also remember that by standards, we mean W3C standards, that organization that was once deemed so slow and irrelevant that Mozilla, Apple, and Opera decided to just initiate WHATWG (back when Opera still existed and Apple still wanted a better web).

The irony of the backlash against Chrome's Privacy Sandbox is that Firefox has started shipping similar features, too: https://blog.mozilla.org/netpolicy/2024/08/22/ppa-update/

And it's understandable why because the alternative is a web centralized in closed gardens (Facebook), locked behind paywalls, or a dead web.

---

I mean no disrespect, but the people advocating for a slower web progress sound just like the people advocating for degrowth, all being a bunch of nonsense that only a tiny elite minority actually wants.
Using gps to understand a map of 1565?
Re-title the article to be called

“How can I suck up EVEN MORE than I am now”

I understand the wisdom that they are trying to convey. But sucking up to those on higher pay grades like this for the greater good of the company? I think if it’s that dangerous providing feedback to the company then upper management need to put even more effort into determining who makes good leadership material.
"Marxism offers a timeless framework and does not require subscriptions or other grifts."

Just like the bible, a holy work of truth, you just have to believe in?

"Crime would be a fraction of what it is now due to a massive shifting in incentives and societal landscape"

Because as far as I know, all the marxist experiments did not result in less crime, or corruption, rather the opposite. So why should I believe, that the next marxist experiments will work out any better?
Was there a major update recently, that fixed the flaws?

(To clarify, to me the choice is not at all between capitalism and marxism, humans are capable of a bit more flexibility)
It’s like saying a 100% bar chart is also a different chart type.
There's an old quote among lawyers: If you have the facts on your side, hammer on the facts. If you have the law, hammer on the law. If you have neither, hammer on the table.

If I understand you correctly: You have no claim of your own or argument for it, so you are using what you do know, insults.
Haiti cut down all their trees. When a hurricane passes through it moves what little top soil they have into the ocean.[1] Haiti overfished their costal waters. Now they do not have fish to eat and worse can not participate in the single biggest economic driver in the Caribbean, scuba diving.

Planting trees on farms is incredibly important for maintaining and protecting the soil. The Americans learned that the hard way in the 1930s. [2]]

[1] https://www.climatechangenews.com/2022/08/05/us-funded-trees...

[2] https://www.history.com/topics/great-depression/dust-bowl
The very first thing to do, is to not take money from people on developed countries to give to India. A wealth transfer should only go to developing countries that are improving their environmental impact, never to countries like India that are constantly doing worst.

Then, to look at CO2 emissions per land area. Which should be the fairest way of measuring the countries that are actually doing good, instead of rewarding high birthrates that only make the environmental problem worst.
There’s quite a lot of expensive stuff happening in between filling a tank of milk at the farm, and a consumer purchasing a single bottle at a store near them.
Rihanna "Had number one singles in five consecutive years in the UK" 2007-2011. "As of September 2018, Rihanna has sold over 250 million records worldwide, making her one of the best-selling music artists ever." Her son's name is RZA Athelaston Mayers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rihanna
In the US that would be a bunch of only invasive species for a long time.
Writing Around an AI Taboo
If you scroll down to the image carousel/gallery and click on an image, it directs you to a page where you can download a high-res jpeg (~100mb for the ultraviolet one).
Several thoughts:

1. It takes 4 of the 9 Justices to vote to take up a case. Given the current 6-3 split this likely means the conservative supermajrority voted to take the case. Why they then chose to dismiss it we can only speculate about;

2. The Supreme Court consistently sides with big business and this has likely been the case since its inception. This isn't strictly true but tends to be a good predictor of what cases the court takes and how it will rule;

3. SCOTUS is and always has been political. Supreme Court justices are political operatives;

4. This court will be inclined to side against Big Tech in general and social media in paritcular because of the war on the (implied right of) privacy and the pervasive myth that conservative voices are somehow being censored or silenced, despite lots of evidence that conservative rage-bait gets disproprotionately more distribution on recommendation algorithms.

One final piece of context regards the consequences of misuse of user data by the likes of Cambridge Analytica. Coming up soon is the potential ban of Tiktok. One argument for this is the influence of the Chinese government.

What you don't hear--from either party--is pushing for comprehensive user data protection legislation. So don't let any politican (of either party) tell you data privacy and protection is important to them. It is not. Or they would've done something about it.
How about IMO rather than FYI ? We can make up our own minds.

'ignores scientific consensus'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_superseded_scientific_...

'promotes speculative theories without empirical evidence'.
Haven't Peter Woit and Lee Smolin pointed out how String Theory does exactly that? Have their criticisms been made redundant by more recent research? I have no idea but maybe a physicist would care to comment.
It’s cool in a way. I know I was opening all of my toys at that age and making modifications to them.
Because it’s becoming increasingly obviously dumb to be paying farmers money to pretend like they are farming their land. What I mean is that if we removed the subsidies the farmers wouldn’t farm their land, the market just doesn’t work to support their production. So we are essentially saying “if you pretend to farm your land we’ll make sure you profit” but even at that they of cause need to try to keep the pretend farming profitable enough that the entire charade pays off, but that means dumping a ton of fertilizer on the land, which tends to run off and ruin streams and seeps into the ground water. Most recently this has led to the agricultural industry competeley and likely semi permanently destroying the fishing industry around one of the major pars of Denmark. So at this point the farmers have to stop.

There’s a natural way of doing that, which is to cut subsidies and let the market handle it. But the farmers have political power because they have a lot of money because of the policies they’ve set up back when they had political power because they had a lot of money… Anyways, so what is actually happening is that the farmers have decided that if their land is unprofitable then the government needs to pay a hefty price to them for it.

The government could just cut the subsidies which means we would use less money, then buy the land in bankruptcies, likely just with the money we spend less. Instead we’ll see a lot of additional spending to buy the land, and then down the line subsidies will increase to “make up” for all the land they “lost”.
I interpreted it to mean that he was still Captain and part of his job was to keep up morale and model positive attitude. Even hypothetically, he was not going to gripe to his troops, and as far as they are concerned, he believes it is a worthy mission. He was jokingly modeling the proper, positive attitude. All this was understood by his men.
Getting to whine about it from the comfort of your keyboard is a privilege, yes.

Any of us who have the wealth to buy a computer, put food on our tables, pay all of our bills, and have spare time to wax poetic on an internet forum are certainly privileged.

Privilege is not an accusation, it's a lens to understand how people experience the world from different perspectives.
Have you seen examples of such codes of conduct in the IRC context before? Closest thing I can think of maybe is SDF’s or other shared systems’, but such rules seem somewhat quaint compared to norms on IRC.

Speaking of SDF, here’s their bot policy:

https://sdf.org/?faq?CHAT?01

> [01] CAN I RUN AN IRC BOT HERE??

> IRC BOTs are pretty intensive and most systems and networks ban them.

> In an experiment conducted in 1996 on this system, we allowed users to compile and run their bots. The result was hundreds of megs of disk space became occupied because each user insisted on having their own version of eggdrop uncompressed and untarred in their home directory. All physical memory was in use as ~45 eggdrop processes were running concurrently. The system was basically USELESS and it took 1.5 hours to login if you were patient enough (even from the system console).

> The ARPA members called a vote on the issue and the result was almost a resounding unanimous NO.

> However, there are times when running a bot is useful, for instance keeping a channel open, providing information or just logging a channel. Basically the bot policy here is a bit relaxed for MetaARPA members. Common sense is the rule. As long as you aren't running a harmful process, such as a hijack bot, warez bot or connecting to a server that does not allow bots, then you may run a bot process.

More info about SDF for those who are curious:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SDF_Public_Access_Unix_System
I wonder if we'll see a return to cloud technologies in 10 years when prices drop? Maybe DHH himself could come out again saying "cloud is cool" to support the hype around Ruby on Rails
This sounds like someone standing on a sinking ship asking why everyone onboard needs to be given their share of available tools to help plug the leaks, when those tools could be used to create surplus for those having tools.
Thanks for the good-faith answer. For more information: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/neoclassical.asp

Investopedia seems to agree with you: "Neoclassical economics theories underlie modern-day economics, along with the tenets of Keynesian economics. Although the neoclassical approach is the most widely taught theory of economics, it has its detractors."

This surprises me, as I thought Keynesian economics was the main view nowadays ("The central belief of Keynesian economics is that government intervention can stabilize the economy" https://www.investopedia.com/terms/k/keynesianeconomics.asp#...).

According to https://www.reddit.com/r/AskEconomics/comments/5wdup7/are_ec..., however: "The vast majority of all economists today work in the New neoclassical synthesis. This paradigm is essentially a combination of the best ideas from the New Keynesian and neoclassical trains of thought. The idea of separate schools isn't nearly as relevant as it used to be - these days ideas that work get added to the synthesis regardless of where they come from."
Flohmarkt Accessibility Check
The point of using a standard is that it is a standard, two uuidv7 libraries should not be incompatible outside of maybe things like clock resolution
The Indian government is doing a lot, and there have been serious reductions in pollution. They have also pivoted massively into renewable energy and have some of the biggest solar farms in the world which is more directly applicable to climate change. There are nine new nuclear reactors currently slated to be completed by 2027. It’s just such a large country with so many people without basic civic sense that it’s going to take a long time to make changes. On the bright side, it’s a very community based system as opposed to an individualistic one like the West so when those changes are eventually picked up, the cultural adherence is going to be very high.
I’d normally be inclined to agree except they went to the effort of getting my video evidence, which gives me hope this did actually end up getting fed back.
The capability model is different from the one discussed in a recent video I saw about Fil-C. I wonder why the earlier two models were discarded?
I mean, this is one example which fits the discussion. Also one that I cherrypicked because I was actually right. I’ve had plenty of managers who were good at listening, however, I think most have been great. I have also worked management a few years myself and taken education in that direction before figuring out it wasn’t for me, so I certainly understand the financial and political parts of management and that you as an employee never have the full picture.

That being said, I have also had managers that I’ve played board games with on our free time who I haven’t actually given my opinion on certain issues with because they weren’t very good at taking that advice. Sometimes I’ve also not done it because I knew managers of my manager wouldn’t take it well if it made I up the chain. I view this more as an issue between me and the organisation I work for. If I’m not invested I’m not going to help it beyond what they pay me to do because it rarely comes back to me in a positive way.

There are many aspect to it. I’ve also had a manager who was a total waste of space as a manager, only caring about the “good story” whether it was true or not to push their own career. Who was also rather cold in regards to management employee duties since they really didn’t like the negative sides of it. Who was then the warmest nicest person in their personal life.

So it’s a very complex situation as you pointed out, but it’s also one where it’s perfectly reasonable to not try to lead upwards if you don’t want the hassle. At least in my opinion.
> Things like pensions are frequently refusing to invest in weapons manufacturers, because of the harm their products do, but why? At least they are honest about what they do and they can justify it.

Not to mention, their justifications are much more legitimate than anything advertising industry could come up with, and yet, marketing is a respectable occupation these days for some reason, and ad industry funds everything.
Yes, the least productive 10% of land represents a much smaller percentage of food production. This is often land in areas that are most environmentally sensitive.

In the UK we pay farmers to raise lamb on marginal land yet they still aren't competitive with lamb shipped from the other side of the world. I'm not sure why we should be subsidising that, especially when there is a lot of environmental damaged associated with it.
> Broadly speaking, our post-War system of laws puts consumers at the top. Right below them, investors. Way below them, workers

> If you engage the legal and regulatory system properly as a consumer, you can move mountains. Even without a lawyer.

I have never heard someone claim that (which doesn't make it false). Almost everyone I interact with says the large investors and executives have far more power - and now far more power than ever. Companies trample on consumers and treat them like crap all the time - I don't know anyone who thinks consumers are powerful.

Use the legal system and you can end up buried in paperwork, discovery, and an unaffordable lawsuit that consumes many years of your life with no reliable outcome. Most people have to settle cases rather than fight deep-pocketed parties. Often you can't even get to court because of arbitration agreements, etc.

Who has done the things you claim? Is there some measure of how many?
The angle I can think of is to preserve the legacy of a dwindling operation and share the value that was created at the peak.