skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I miss the entire Maker Movement moment. It isn’t actually super complex to make a simple circuit board that does some basic things for you.

It’s cheaper to just outsource making the board, but I even made my own simple boards (etched using hobbyist CNC machines). I even used a bunch of surface mount parts with them.
https://archive.ph/tz5MB
Where I’ve been doing CI 5 minutes was barely enough to warm caches on a cold runner
What’s the hyperbole? This is partly a recruiting tool. If you think the game is not exciting then this is probably not the career for you. Do you have something more substantive than a weak attack?
Out of curiosity, have you checked out these other works?

Design for Prevention (2010) ISBN 978-0-937063-05-7

Friends in High Places (1990) ISBN 937063-06-1

Have Fun at Work (1988) ISBN 0-937063-05-3

The New Plague (1986) ISBN 0-937063-03-7

POSIWID is mentioned in the first three works; engineer William L. Livingston authored the latter three.
BahahahahahhahahhahHAhaa

We wouldn't. Not as a society at least. It would be "fringe conspiracy theories" to say such things to protect big plastic or something.

Potentially.
Highly recommend watching this channel if you're curious about speedruns:

https://www.youtube.com/@SummoningSalt
>How much does diffuse DAC cost?

>Add the price of that on a flight ticket (which we ultimately have to anyway) and we'd be helping address the problem already, before the tech is even deployed.

It's $1000/ton today, which works out to a 70% price increase for a new york to london flight. I disagree that would "address the problem already, before the tech is even deployed", because zero chance anyone would vote for it in the first place. That's where technological advancement comes in. Startups claim they can hit $250-$350/ton by 2030[1], which is a much more manageable 21% increase.

>Finally is that 25% on a production or consumption basis? Offshoring and deindustrialisation are not trends that are likely to continue, again more for political reasons than anything else.

It's around 17% on a trade basis[2], but the point stands. Americans haven't eaten 17% less meat, drove 17% less, or bought 17% less stuff.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climeworks

[2] https://ourworldindata.org/consumption-based-co2
> The question of human climate change's impact on things like wildfires is an interesting, important, and very difficult one

Perhaps it is difficult to prove scientifically, but as humans we can operate on common sense if we choose to, and it's common sense to anyone that has interacted with wood and fires a few times that making a forest drier due to warmer temperatures will increase the flammability of it. I personally don't need scientific proof that climate change makes forest fires more likely. It's f***ing obvious.
Aviation fuel has a trivial replacement in renewable biofuels, and three nontrivial replacements in liquid hydrogen combustion, liquid hydrogen fuel cells, and for short flights in battery power.
> Transportation that is not powered by one's own muscles can never be virtuous.

... unless said transportation puts users in close physical proximity to strangers, some of whom are loud or dangerous. Such transportation is very virtuous: the more numerous, dangerous, or annoying the strangers, the more virtuous the transportation. This exception is not applicable to transportation that flies or floats.
I'd suggest "tax" is probably more accurate than "block" or "stifle", especially if they've not released anything since
To be clear, darcs is neither diff nor snapshot based.
Furthermore, when I've eaten at the sidewalk area of a restaurant near a theater I go to in the summer, the protected bike lane has truly terrifying combinations of traffic outside of cars including what I guess are electric motorcycles. And, because it's a "bike" lane, a ton of users basically just blow through the red lights.
Studies are always good, but it almost trivially follows that the tread loss must go somewhere.
Yes the issue is the species. Billionaires are a product of our species. What you describe is a similar thinking that murderers, drug addicts or queers are somehow dissimilar to the general population. This is not the case. The issue is a product of how a human mind works, and it presents this way because humanity improved thinking faster than how fast ecosystems could adapt. The result is a dominant species that behaves very similarly to how invasive species work.

Yes, what you say is technically true, billionaires have infinite more power than you and I, and they could very well take care of a lot of bad things in the world, if they somehow chose to. And so, this power comes with responsibility as well, or so some think. Maybe we indeed could design a system that takes care that no individual rises to these unnatural heights. But, the incentives are not there. The incentives in the human say that more = better. Not in everyone, and people can certainly grow in character, a LOT - but we are talking a big number of people here, as long as there will be some that are highly functional, and also have a craving for infinite power, there will be such power imbalances in the world.

So again, the issue boils down to species. And if we survive ourselves, I expect this trend to continue.

Let me also bring up another species problem: Look at how much friction giving up straws caused. Fucking straws, man. I don't think it can get any more petty than that.
There’s one currently on the frontpage.

Summary via tldw.tube:
The video explores concerns about the integrity and trustworthiness of scientific research, particularly in the field of physics. The speaker shares a confidential email received years prior, wherein a colleague expresses worries about the impact of critical publications on the community, suggesting that some researchers prioritize personal gain over public accountability.
You can say R1-604b to disambiguate, just like we have llama 3 8b/70b etc.
Plumbers and firefighters have stuff to haul and long distances to cover. They need to do 40/50/60mph on the freeway, and 15/20mph on local surface access roads where they're mixed in with light vehicles.

The whole light-vehicle thing is predicated on low speeds and relatively short distances (up to about 15 miles). Most urban areas, even fairly sprawling ones, that's enough to cover a pretty substantial % of trips.

It's about using 1/10th the weight and 1/50th the power to cover a big % of the same tasks. Personally I'd say the bike/scooter/golf-buggy, and then either an owned or shared car for the last 10% of trips where you need to use the freeway is a better optimum than high-speed light vehicles, because as soon as you get to about 25-30mph you need impact protection, and the design constraints quickly escalate to "absolutely no smaller than a Fiat 500".

There's also ofc the option of mass transit for some of the longer distance stuff, at least in cities that are able to build it.
Having one running in the background constantly looking at your home assistant instance might be an interesting use case for a smart home
Wikipedia seems to agree with you:

Koloumpo (Greek: Κολούμπο)
But the word "Kolumbo" is used 11 times in the article about "Kolumpo"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koloumpo
Read the title of this post, and the title of the question in the exchange, I will post it yet again, *sigh*

>What situations in classical physics are non-deterministic?

Is "statistical mechanics" contained within "classical physics"?

Yes or no? No need for a nonsensical philosophical essay.
> In the spring of 2024, Texas’ installation of utility scale solar outpaced California’s, and jumped from 1,900 megawatts in 2019 to over 20,000 megawatts in 2024. As a result, solar met nearly 50 percent of the state’s peak power demand on some days.

That’s impressive. And fairly green-friendly for a state that gets a bad rap for being in bed with oil/gas
Not just the kernel and PID 1, we also tend to refer to the rest of the system as "linux" as well, even though it's not technically correct. It's very close to the same simplification.
> We broke moores law and hardware just kept giving more parallel cores because that’s all they can do.

You get more cores because transistor density didn't stop increasing, software devs/compiler engineers just can't think of anything better to do with the extra real estate!

> Single threaded execution more or less stops at 2 GHz and has remained there.

There are other semiconductor materials that do not have the heat limits of silicon-based FETs and have become shockingly cheap and small (for example, a 200W power supply the size of a wallet that doesn't catch on fire). We're using these materials for power electronics and RF/optics today but they're nowhere close to FinFETs from a few years ago or what they're doing today. That's because all the fabrication technology and practices have yet to be churned out for these new materials (and it's not just UV lasers), but they're getting better, and there will one day be a mcu made from wide bandgap materials that cracks 10GHz in a consumer device.

Total aside, hardware junkies love talking cores and clock speeds, but the real bottlenecks for HPC are memory and i/o bandwidth/latency. That's why the future is optical, but the technology for even designing and experimenting with the hardware is in its infancy.
That’s more a consequence of the absurd micro-hybrid setups modern ICE use to cheat emission measures. The 2015 340i weighed 300kg less
Glad you figured it out! Keep in mind it now has an extra clause that you need to open the GMX Mail app on 10 days every month after a year, not sure how/if they enforce it. Also, don't forget the disable the Datenautomatik in the portal.
Then let AI arrange together the boxes and arrows? Should work.
nice looking page. how are Channels implemented? how do you decide which skeet goes into which channel? right now it looks a little noisy.
I think the root of it is most people coming into the software engineering industry just want a good paying job. They don’t have any real interest in computers or networks or anything else. Whatever keeps the direct deposits coming is what they’ll do. And in their defense, the web dev industry is so large in breadth and depth and the pay/benefits are so generous it’s an attractive career path no matter what your passion is.
Why would I care about responsibility when I waste my time, much less "holistic responsibility?" Sounds like your moral systems are different from others' in this thread.
>trivial replacement in renewable biofuels

That's basically direct air capture with extra steps. All the carbon in those biofuels is coming from somewhere (the air).
Capturing something back is more costly than not emitting in the first place. News at 22.
> One way we can boost Bookshop.org is anytime we cite a book to use their URL instead of Amazon's URL.

There have been various efforts in the past to avoid citing Amazon that way. I thought it was a good idea, but I ran into an odd problem - publishers tend not to have pages for their books at all.
The weights aren’t really that much higher than ICE cars, but I don’t think anyone who has owned an EV would say they don’t go through tires faster. They do. How much due to weight, how much due to better acceleration, I don’t know, but they definitely are harder on tires.
> All you need is napkin maths. We gain energy by turning carbon into carbon dioxide. Now, we need the same energy to reverse it, but with a loss factor.

No, we don't.

CO2 in the atmosphere is not the lowest-energy state in the system. If CO2 stopped being added to the atmosphere, it would eventually all be consumed out by chemical weathering of silicate rocks into carbonates, because that's an exothermic reaction that consumes CO2.

All the actually promising carbon capture proposals are essentially ways to speed up chemical weathering. The limiting factor here is surface area; the process is naturally very slow, and only occurs at an appreciable rate on the exposed surfaces of rocks in shallow water. None of them are cost-effective *yet* (and might never be), but there is not some one-sentence gotcha answer that prevents them from eventually being successful. They are not fighting against physics.
I wouldn't be that pessimistic. Just like Stephen Curry discovered the value of the three-point shot, someone will come along and spot an opportunity by going against the grain of today's paradigm. Perhaps an AlphaGo for basketball will help to find it.
Ted Tso is an american, living in America. He was born in California and had worked in the us for most or all of his career.

I find it highly unlikely that he isn't aware of what meanings that idiom carries with it. It's possible but I'd need some serious convincing to believe he didn't.
HNDD: Hacker News Driven Development
> depending on the outcome of whatever court cases happen

do you not mean the bribery of patent agents?
I'm talking only about content that is considered legal in liberal democracies below.

Removing access for the residents of the country that makes the demand is standard and can't be avoided. Removing access to the same content in other countries should not be normal. Chinese or Russian demands in EU should not be followed and Gulf of America bullshit should not be visible in the EU.

currently:

Apple maps in EU: "Gulf of Mexico".

Google maps in EU: "Gulf of Mexico (Gulf of America)".
Next resignation:

Me stepping down as a nouveau kernel maintainer – https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/nouveau/2025-February...
On the other hand, your use of descriptors such as “American indoctrination camps” and “zombies spouting left-wing talking points” does not make it seem like you’re particularly open or receptive to “spirited debate”. These are not “civil” terms used by someone who is seriously interested in having his or her ideas challenged.

From my perspective, it sounds like your friends were exposed to ideas that would have been previously unavailable to them, and having had their horizons expanded, came to modify their views on certain things they had been effectively taught as dogma until that point. Then, when they came back and tried to communicate those newfound viewpoints, they were dismissed as brainwashed zombies who weren’t using their intelligence. I certainly would not consider it worth my time to argue with someone who believes me to be indoctrinated beyond hope and dismisses my intellectual capability simply because he or she disagrees with me.
Many of these kinds of formations also house natural hydrogen for geologic time periods.
The natural gas situation is still sketchy because the incentive to build more capacity is very low, but the natural gas alongside coal electricity generation is know as baseband power. Very reliable inertial generators (turbines) smooth over the unstable electrical from wind turbines or solar.

As far as battery capacity goes, that's also sketchy because ERCOT is allowing dangerous risky lithium packs to be installed in a tightly packed together industrial space optimized way that could result in disaster when one unit catches fire, spreading to the whole site. Better would be magnetically suspended flywheels in a hard vacuum buried under ground. These are more ecological and have the same baseband quality as a turbine constant spin generator, and require very little energy to up-keep. I would say a hybrid way of having these flywheels in large numbers with on-site lithium batteries to provide site power, and line-leveling as the relays switch over to the flywheels, similar to how batteries in a data center last just long enough to let the diesel gen spin up...

The problem is if all these renewable eco friendly sources crowd out the dirty more reliable sources, then there will eventually not be any reliable sources. It's a nasty paradox.
That was a pleasure to watch :) thank you for sharing.
Blog makes some good points with limited application of this knowledge problem. Sometimes it is a a knowledge problem like not having the knowledge (read: experience) or critical skills to make the time to research or do a trade study on the right approach. Even if given the time, the wrong decision or action might still be taken. But then you have the knowledge for next time.
https://archive.is/72BDy
> So, yes, while correlation does not equal causation, these are fairly alarming signs. Yet we live in a country that believes wholeheartedly that we just keep doing what we are doing while we figure it all out.

Yes, I believe this wholeheartedly. I agree it's an important area to research, and I support regulations to try and minimize the amount of stuff that ends up in the environment and our bodies. It's pretty likely our great-grandchildren will learn about the bad old days when consumer goods were just shedding microplastics everywhere.

But I don't think it's worth giving up the benefits of widespread plastic usage while we figure out better alternatives, and I've never seen an argument that it is beyond the kind of vague gestures towards the naturalistic fallacy the source article presents. "Imagine 2.5 teaspoons of sugar. Now sub in plastic. Gross." - neither of these seem particularly gross to me.
Could you just answer the question in turn?

Not a different question, not an essay, not hand-waving, just focus on that very concrete question.
Trickle-down my a*.
This continues to be hoover-up economics.
Simple collaborative filtering in pure PostgreSQL
Good question.

I wonder if the Romans knew they were getting dumber from sweetening their food with lead.
It still doesn't say why reason can't be predicted. As it stands it is just begging the question.
Oh, I'm not denying climate change, I'm just saying that we can't say for certain whether or not we passed the Paris Agreement threshold, even though it's likely that we did.
Did you mean to post a specific article from EFF? I think most people on HN are aware of the EFF
Blog post from same author explaining https://b4rtaz.medium.com/how-to-run-llama-3-405b-on-home-de...
This obviously is not viable for X, Y, etc. reasons but I would like to know them. We select some fast growing woody plant that thrives on terrain useless for agriculture, we grow it at industrial scale and convert it to charcoal (using the energy generated for the process itself or the grid), we grind the charcoal and mix it with sea water and pump the slurry into some mine.

Creating charcoal and taking out of the cycle isn't actually net negative? We don't have enough space for growing or in mineshafts? I'm making Centralia 2.0? It's obviously non economic, but everything carbon capture is like that.
> This is just not true. Plenty of regressions have coefficients that arent statistically distinct from zero.

Sure. But you are responding to something I didn't claim, or at least didn't intend to claim. If you throw in a spurious piece of data that happens to exhibit the same trend, it's going to end up a non-zero coefficient. But that doesn't mean there is a causal relationship.

[ https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations ]

> There are plenty of statistically appropriate ways to estimate causality.

I didn't claim otherwise, but that doesn't help for an extremely underpowered analysis which not only didn't even consider causality but didn't consider alternative hypothesis. (In particular, it didn't even consider the null hypothesis except perhaps in some p-hack sense that they may not have published at all if the none of their coefficients had significance according to R's GLM or whatever package they used). That wasn't it's goal, I'm not even accusing the authors of bad science (at a minimum it passed the bar to get published)-- but the conclusions the media were drawing from it couldn't be supported by the work. It's an easy error to make because there is a gap between what we want to know and what we have the data to tell us.
> has any law actually be violated?

Any revelation of classified information to uncleared people violates the law; if DOGE staff were cleared it was illegal for them to reveal it, if they weren't it was illegal for them to be given access to it in the first place (which they must have had in order to reveal it).

Additionally, there are crimes for gathering and revealing sensitive national security information irrespective of having clearance, these are found in the Espionage Act. Julian Assange’s crime didn't involve him having clearance.
No. The advantage of Git (and Darcs, Hg, and others) over SVN/TFS is twofold:

1. A much better merging strategy which remembers previous conflict resolutions. This is possible in both diff and snapshot VCS's.

2. Distributed repositories. Instead of storing history in one centralized server, which is prone to several kinds of failure, Git/Darcs/Hg/Fossil etc. all replicate history to each client by default. This makes it very difficult to actually lose code or history, which definitely happened in older centralized systems.
> Graham, a top ally of President Donald Trump, was also asked to address concerns about mixed messages coming from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Vice President JD Vance this week on whether Ukraine should join NATO.

>"It doesn't matter what Pete says, it doesn't matter how many phone calls are made,” Graham said. “What matters is how it ends, if it ends in a way to deter future aggression and if they've stabilized the continent of Europe, [Trump will] get his fair share of the credit."

I don’t know how congress can do its job if they’re sincerely this gullible.
kids really don't care
There are EV's which have drum-brakes. That's only possible because the regenerative braking takes most of the load. Also, there are stories of brake-discs rusting out on EV's. Both point to less (friction)-brake use on an EV compared to an ICE.
Handspring Trio had a web browser by (before?) 2003 with a touchscreen. I loved mine!
The fine article is also just one guy's opinion. Notably someone who sues people who disagree with him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Z._Jacobson#Critiques_of_...
(Patent attorney) The patents in question are continuation patents. Essentially, Nintendo filed a patent application before Palworld was released that disclosed the mechanics Nintendo is patenting now. That original application only included claims covering a subset of the mechanics described in the application. They can continue filing additional applications with new claims that cover the mechanics described entirely in the original application and get the benefit of having the priority date of the original application so long as they meet certain requirements about the timing.

Original application: I invented A, B, C, D, E, and F and want A protected; here’s some $. Follow-up application 1: I want invention B protected, here’s some more $. Follow up application 2: I want C protected, here’s some more $.

Part of the idea behind it is that you don’t have to waste money protecting parts of what you invented that don’t pan out (additional claims cost additional money beyond a certain number of claims). It’s not particularly fair, since you can watch what a competitor does (as Nintendo has done here), and essentially backdate a patent as though you had filed for it before the competitor did their thing.