skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> What is the empirical evidence that a specialist is more fulfilled in life than a frontier settler who needed to be all of the things you mentioned?

The evidence is that a specialist can live to do the things they like about frontier living. The lone frontier settler is doomed to die early. If you're dead, nothing matters. This is the same problem with the libertarian obsession with "freedom." Yes, you can be free to shoot your machine guns and explode your bombs and pollute the air, and your neighbor can be free to shoot their machine guns and explode their bombs and pollute the air, but now neither of you will be able to do these things as long as if you came to an agreement to restrict where and when these are allowed.

> One of the assumptions I avoided arguing in the "mountain of assumptions" is that we could measure the human condition in such a way as to say something is better than another, or that something that is better for one is better for all.

Each individual can measure this themselves by understanding how long they'll live to do the things they want to do. It is not necessary that something that is better for one is better for all, but individuals will make social pacts that ensure their own benefit, and there is nothing you can do to stop it by making definitions of "justice" divorced from the reality of each person seeking their benefit, only to participate in it in a logical way.

> Hmm, I'm having a hard time working through this argument

Perhaps the last sentence of my previous paragraph is clearer. Striving for "justice" is unworkable, and definitions of justice that prevent others from making rules for you are especially so. Each person is working for their own benefit, and the only reasonable thing to do is to work with society under that assumption to make sure you benefit too. This means making governments that prevent others from crushing you under their boot, that help others in society gain abilities that you can benefit from, etc.; not dismantling governments that do that.
The discussion started from art inside a house (not like a public statue). Lots of art in houses is meant to be pretty (think of painting on a wall with a city you love, a portrait of some family, an abstract set of colors on a canvas, a statue of some Greek hero, etc.). The sale process is before you look at it in your home (as opposed to social media, where the sale is after you look at it).

Some contemporary artists can try to shock and can engage in "political" statements, but I never saw personally any such thing in a home. And, anyhow when you talk with such artists the points their trying to make are so convoluted you need to know all (art) history to get what they are trying to say... (which I didn't so they had to explain it)
It's the messiah, but for billionaires who hate having to pay people to do stuff.
I still see it used commonly for VMs.
> "Formerly, when religion was strong and science weak, men mistook magic for medicine; now, when science is strong and religion weak, men mistake medicine for magic."

— Thomas Szasz
I knew someone who got his PhD at EPFL. He earned almost triple what I did in the US.
Funny idea... but it's way too slow to react. (saying this as ham radio operator doing CW, so pretty biased, but I guess actual telegraph operators were much faster than I am...)
Hollywood probably can't make one (and most recent US war movies are unwatchable outside US due to all over the top pathos that just looks ridiculous), but deeper topics and inconvenient stances are often better explored ie in European or other cinema.

Do you feel ie recent All Quiet on the Eastern Front glorified war, or people involved? That book is even more powerful.
Don't worry, there will be people inside!

Oh, wait, hrm...
Humans - and the mostly empty space they require - up top.

Fuel, engines, and water will be at the bottom.

(For practical examples, look at the F9 first stage, or the Starship prototypes they've already tested.)
The Karens seem to perish in the backcountry. I have seen multiple elementary age children operating dirt bikes and heavy construction equipment on desert dirt roads.
We are in the middle of a thread about public health professionals. Which "scientists and administrators" do you think I'm talking about?
Before 3.13: https://thejenkinscomic.net/?id=52
I definitely see it's value as a very naive recommendation to avoid someone literally relying on an algorithmic or low entropy secret. Literally something you may learn on your first class on security.

However on more advanced levels, a more common error is to ignore the risks of open source and being public. If you don't publish your source code, you are massively safer, period.

I guess your view on the subject depends on whether you think you are ahead of the curve by taking the naive interpretation. It's like investing in the stock market based on your knowledge of supply and demand.
There was sports betting going on far far before Jesus showed up. The Romans allowed it and the Holy Roman Empire and the catholics let it carry on.

Also dice games were popular for private betting.
It's probably not hard to guess that the D&L people are in on the scam and that this Stefanski guy is giving them a cut of the profits, but a newspaper can't write such speculations down.

But hey, welcome to the new reality, this is probably fine in the corrupt nation of Elonistan. Relevant: https://www.azquotes.com/quote/1062178
From my understanding, it seems that's the direction Ukraine's European allies are heading. I'm possibly wrong. I'm just saying that's where I draw the line for me, personally.
Wanna hear my theory? The FSB employs trolls to try undermine anyone who is critical of the great Russian regime by posting stupid conspiracy theories online. They often have to create new accounts, because old ones get banned quickly and frequently.

3 people, 2 of whom have accounts created just today for this thread, post something negatve towards Bellingcat without any proof. Crazy coincidence.
I feel like the natural occurring property makes it more likely a supplement company will bring it to market without FDA requirements. The path to market should be simpler from my understanding of this space, please correct me if that’s incorrect
https://www.lung.org/research/trends-in-lung-disease/tobacco...

> Long term, smoking rates have fallen 73% among adults, from 42.6% in 1965 to 11.6% in 2022.

> Long term, smoking rates have fallen 86% among youth, from 36.4% in 1997 to 3.8% in 2021.

I'd say that's better off, not just in childhood but with long term effects.
OK - I guess we'll see!
Yes, true, ideally it isn't a positive thing but in fact, from the business side, it's excellent because that way they have the majority of the market, made up of old clients and new ones who will use that standard. The important thing is that the antitrust acts in case Broadcom "expands itself" too much with acquisitions on other markets.

Now I think that most of the network hardware in server farms around the world is produced or managed by Broadcom. So from their point of view, it's not bad, obviously it has all the limitations of super-large companies, but I am comparing it to Nvidia or TSMC, that are even more "big + bad".
Those of us who were actually there at the time were running Xenix, System V, SunOS and Novell Netware requiring 386 features in the late 80s, much less the 90s.
A better analogy is that algorithms are designed to be feedback loops that trigger extremely positive or negative emotions in people. Meaning, they are addiction machines.

Allowing minors access to addiction machines is like allowing them access to tobacco.

Generally, we say “fuck it” when it comes to addiction in adults. Personal choice or whatever - never mind the very definition of addiction undermines choice.

But with children, we at least try to shield them from things that they will be hooked on indefinitely. Try, I say, because we don’t do a great job. Just look at food.

I’m not in favor of child censorship type legislation because it’s almost always a poor excuse at authoritarianism and censorship. But, reframing algorithmic feeds as slot machines or cigs makes the position much more understandable.
IMO the problem isn't ID-based age verification specifically, it's that such verification is usually impelemnted in a way where the service in question gets a lot more data than they need, with no real control over how that data is kept and processed.

It would absolutely be possible to implement that stuff in a fully privacy-preserving way, with nothing but basic cryptography, and the government could absolutely enforce that implementation.

Nobody is actually interested in promoting that though, the anti-big-tech crowd just wants verification no matter what, and the pro-privacy crowd just wants something to get angry about. Nobody is looking for a reasonable compromise here.
I fundamentally disagree. I regularly interface with people that have more than 5 years and are entirely unequipped to code their way out of a paper bag, let alone work unsupervised, lead a team, understand the overall system that's being designed, and more. They have little knowledge outside whatever pet language they've sunk all of their time into, and even then, little knowledge outside of a narrow set of tools/practices.

That's not "Senior". That's someone getting their feet wet in an ever-changing industry that requires a certain level of thirst for knowledge and continued learning.

There's always exceptions - and some people are stellar in every way. But on average, 5 years of experience is still training wheels for a great deal of people.

> Linus Torvalds was 21 when the first version of Linux was released.

This is like pointing to Bill Gates or Michael Jordan and saying everyone can do that... Linus is the fabled 10X Rockstar of programming.
You can't make more visible public executions than throwing people out of windows in centers of cities. Modern public guillotine, gets a lot of press too. Message is clear to all, the goal is to be shocking and not subtle.
he designed the Pentium Pro

So he earned forgiveness. :-)
Just surfing... a slide deck[1]; someone's blog post translated[2]; a merely-in-the-same-field paper[3].

[1] random copy of a 2023 NVIDIA slide deck (not NVIDIA's 2024 "login to see the PDF" deck) https://static.rainfocus.com/nvidia/gtcspring2023/sess/16758...
[2] https://zhuanlan-zhihu-com.translate.goog/p/617817214?_x_tr_...
[3] https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/3/1111
Can it detect medical disorders, similar to how (according to popular belief) dogs can smell cancer?
> Sounds like you just want scientists and researchers to share your ideological biases.

Not at all. My dad worked in public health, and I grew up around extremely liberal northeastern white people who worked in Africa and Asia while adapting themselves to the moral environment of wherever they happened to be working. You'd never know from their work they had any beliefs other than "vaccines are good" and "pregnant women should get sufficient folate."

> Who would be the arbiter of neutrality?

The public as a whole. Either they perceive you as neutral or they don't.

> "Wipe out"? Absolutely abhorrent and authoritarian take.

Public health as a field needs people who prioritize institutional values to the exclusion of everything else, because that's the only way you can build trust across the whole population. People who "bring their whole selves to work" endanger lives by destroying confidence in the public health system. If they can't do what the job requires they must leave.
How the hell did you 1up my very particular historical tidbit?
Wouldn't the crash make a vibration in the lunar soil?

I know it's actually quite dry, thin, and dusty, but half the density of common Earth rock (~1.6 v. ~2.7g/cm³) should still conduct some sound. If you put your ear (or more likely, a microphone) on the ground...
Why would they ask for less?
I don't think most native English speakers know that, either. I only learned about it by hearing people explain it as an aspect of English to non-native speakers; it was not something anyone taught me in school, it's not something I've ever heard anyone mention in the context of proofreading or writing advice, and I couldn't actually tell you how it works - though I'm sure I must be using it instinctively.
Before that I tried to get to the moon. I climbed the nearest tree. Good progress at first ...
> There was just as much nationalist on renren then weibo who thought this was US interference.

But nobody ever took them seriously. The man on the street in China could just go outside and look at the air. And whether he liked what he saw or not, he still had to breathe it, so interest in the topic was very high.

Here's a conversation I had with a friend who worked in the Shanghai office of a major international conglomerate:

-----

[me] What do Chinese people think of America? [美国 = the United States]

[friend] Different people have different opinions.

[friend] Some people see it as the promised land.

[friend] Some people are very negative.

[friend] Where I work, there's one guy who is really down on America and never misses an opportunity to point out how it sucks.

[friend] But even that guy says there's one thing for which America deserves our thanks, the air quality numbers.
I don’t make comments based on what I want to happen

An entire federal agency was deleted and thousands of non profits and other organizations were using the funding source as their only client and are also deleted now

Just because this one is publicly traded we should expect a different outcome?

I love prediction markets because now there is another outlet for perceiving politics than just debating. I take your money in a zero sum game if my worldview is more accurate, love that. I would almost say it rewards having a contrarian view of the world, but there are some psychology studies that show even ideologues like you will make accurate predictions if there is a payout of basically any amount. So I doubt it’s actually a contrarian view given that you have the same information.
> there are people all over this board who buy their kids macbooks for christmas

Kids? I bought a MacBook Air for an internet friend of around 2 months because I was so offended by the fact that they didn't own a good computer.

My performance standards are higher for myself of course, but the goal was just to get them any form of macOS.

(They did in fact end up liking it a lot better than Windows)
Very suspicious. (Dare I say "Concerning"? :p)

For others who prefer text over video, I've patched together some excerpts from another source [0]:

> Tesla’s Canadian stores are company-owned and directly controlled by the company. [...] Four Tesla stores in Canada each sold an average of 30 cars per hour, amounting to 120 cars per hour across all four locations—essentially one car every minute, 24 hours a day… for three straight days. And yes, this includes hours when the stores were closed.

> Tesla’s $43.1 million in rebates took up more than half of the cash left allotted for EV subsidies remaining. That meant that by the time some other dealers attempted to get their own subsidies, the money had run out. [...] 226 [non-Tesla] dealerships submitted rebate claims for 2,295 electric vehicles but still haven’t been reimbursed, leaving them collectively out by C$10 million.

[0] https://www.carscoops.com/2025/03/tesla-accused-of-gaming-ca...
I am deep blue, but if you accept the premise that the government is spending money inefficiently, which is a rational thing to think (after all, the government doesn't pass audits which means no one really knows how DoD money is spent at minimum), then it stands to reason that inspector generals were doing a poor job and therefore their removal is a good thing because they were complicit in the inefficiency.

Firing the policemen so you can commit crime is what's happening, but your argument isn't a convincing one, neither is the age one. We can do better than that, and by focusing on those as the problem, we disempower ourselves and our message.

"There will be a revolution, and it will be bloodless if the left allows it to be." We are going through a revolution.

DOGE is the revolutionary force purging the old government, just like every other revolution. Just like Stalin, just like the bolsheviks, just like Mao. The only reason it's not violent like those yet is because power was peacefully transferred to them, and FBI agents, generals, US marshals, and other agents of enforcing the law aren't completely replaced with loyalists yet.

There's a reason historians are freaking out.
SOS

Save Our Socket
When I explicitly ask o1-pro for a long-form report, it provides tons of citations to both academic and commercial sources. Yes, those are (presumably) the result of searches but meh, whatever, it works. Even if they could associate results with original sources like CC they probably wouldn't dare expose that capability, given how many copyright suits they're already dealing with.

4o can link to sources to some extent, but it sounds like it doesn't do "research-y" things at all unless you have a paid account. It works for me -- note how it cites the manufacturer's literature here: https://i.imgur.com/lRkH948.png -- but when I ask it the same thing in a private window it doesn't cite any sources: https://i.imgur.com/Kc6Y0IR.png .

So that does seem kind of lame. They will offer source citations in the free model the minute they realize they can deliver ads that way, I'm sure...
And the dog?
Are you referring to 2020 attempt or the 2024 murder? He was a lot more than just nuisance in 2020 and could have become the gravity center for future anti-war sentiments. In 2024 Putin murdered him just because he wanted to and there was no downside.
With regular blood checks its not an issue. You can catch it before the kidneys take damage. Antipsychotics are literally neurotoxic (first gen atleast).
I wonder if there's any chance of technology like Verifiable Credentials[0] getting any adoption because of these laws. I think there are legitimate use cases where you would want to say, "hey, some third-party authority can vouch for me that ____", and not reveal to the third party who's asking for verification and not reveal to the party requiring verification any other claim besides the specific one that they need (say, age in this case).

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verifiable_credentials
Can we not map regular domain names to onion links? DNS except instead of regular DNS mappings of URLS -> IP Addresses it's URLS -> Onion URLs?

Or maybe we return to using bookmarks? Not sure exactly.
All of my PCs except an old MacBook Pro have a BIOS, not UEFI.

Two are from 2010, one from 2008, one from 1996.
> There is a prominent subset of the tech crowd who are ladder climbers - ruthlessly pursuing what is rewarded with pay/title/prestige without regard to actually making good stuff.

I think the hiring and reward practices of the organizations & the industry as a whole also encourages this sort of behavior.

When you reward people who are switching too often or only when moving internally/externally, switching becomes the primary goal and not the product. If you know beforehand that you are not going to stay long to see it through, you tend to take more shortcuts and risks that becomes the responsibility of maintainers later.

We have a couple of job hoppers in our org where the number of jobs they held is almost equal to their years of experience and their role is similar to those with twice the experience! One can easily guess what their best skill is.
Most of the people who use Go and Rust do it for pragmatic reasons. That doesn't influence the culture of the zealots in each community.

You should search for headlines on HN that say "written in Go" or "written in Rust" and then compare that to the number of headlines that say "written in JavaScript" or "written in Kotlin."
What if a site doesn't comply or lies? Who is enforcing this
Some discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43294281
Cybersecurity Burnout: 60% Want Out Despite High Salaries
There is no way that some computer or smartphone app can replace optometrist equipment. I have different prescriptions for reading glasses and occupational glasses, the distance difference is about 20" and it does call for different lens.

Furthermore an assessment by an optometrist should also check for glaucoma and macular issues.
This is weird. What am I supposed to do, ride my electric scooter on the sidewalk? It has a top speed of 45mph.

I obey traffic lights just like everyone else, I don't just get in front of people randomly. Though of course, that doesn't stop people from deciding to shove the side of their vehicle into me.
When the Internet was built there was an expectation of anonymity. But anonymity and privacy are not quite the same.

And in fact, the Internet is not anonymous or private, as there are multiple ways to track and surveil members of the general public.

IMO the next step in the Internet's evolution needs to be the authenticated internet. An Authenticated Internet pretty much removes all the security issues, since every connection is authenticated. And authentication doesn't necessarily mean you're not anonymous.

Right now the Internet has become the worst of both worlds - not private, not anonymous, and all the problems associated with that (insecure, spoonable, etc).

That's what the EFF has wrong: the Internet is already a backdoor to surveillance. They're trying to stick their finger in the dyke. But what needs to happen is to rebuild the whole thing.
A lot of the pushback I'm seeing is that people are assuming that you always want to make things more secure. That security is a number that needs to go up, like income or profit, as opposed to numbers that need to go down, like cost and taxes.

The possibility that I'm adding this feature to something that would otherwise have been published on a public domain does not cross people's mind, so it is not thought of an additional security measure, but a removal of a security feature.

Similarly it is assumed that there's an unauthenticated or authentication mechanism behind the subdomain. There may be a simple idempotent server running, such that there is no concern for abuse, but it may be desirable to reduce the code executed by random spearfishing scanners that only have an IP.

This brings me again to the competitive economic take on the subject, that people believe that this wisdom nugget they hold "that security by obscurity" is a valuable tennet, and they bet on it and desperately try to find someone to use it on. You can tell when a meme is overvalued because they try to use it on you even if it doesn't fit, it means they are dying to actually apply it.

My bet is that "Security through obscurity" is undervalued, not as a rule or law, or a definite thing, but as a basic correlation: keep a low profile, and you'll be safer. If you want to get more sales, you will need to be a bit more open and transparent and that will expose you to more risk, same if you want transparency for ethical or regulation reasons. You will be less obscure and you will need to compensate with additional security mechanisms.

But it seems evident to me that if you don't publish your shit, you are going to have much less risk, and need to implement less security mechanisms for the same risks as compared to voicing your infrastructure and your business, duh.
So basically functions vs objects that provide methods that operate on opaque data types, except this was written at a time when programming languages that offered modules, such as Modula-2, had yet to appear, although one could then, as now, implement them yourself in C.

To modern ears, the title of the article seems to falsely promise that it's about system design - criteria for decomposing a system into modules rather than on the benefit of information-hiding modules over collections of functions.