lake_vincent

Yup, can confirm Hinge free is rather excellent. YMMV, but I got plenty of dates (and even a girlfriend for a while) thanks to Hinge.

It's not perfect, but if you work it, it can work for you.

Yes, it's a casino game, but learn the rules and you might just win ;)

I used to work for a big name scientific publisher, and we published a lot of super-niche research monographs that didn't sell many copies. What a lot of people don't understand was that our bread and butter came from university libraries. We published a lot of books not because they sold individually, but libraries wanted them. They like collections!

My 2c: I think the point is that types themselves are just syntax. It's all bits at the lowest level, so there's really no such thing as a 'type' on a Turing Machine tape. It can be expressed syntactically on the tape, but that's the point.

Well, that's what I want to find out! Very rarely does autofill work for me on Bitwarden mobile - 80% of the time I have to open the app, copy, and paste my info. Not good password field recognition, and it's a regular friction point for me.

For me it's the features I mentioned above - having a CLI on desktop, and both ios and android apps is so huge because I have devices in all three ecosystems! One password manager that works seamlessly across devices is very appealing to me. The Bitwarden mobile experience needs a lot of polish, if Enpass is better I would switch.

I appreciate this perspective.

Closed source I can deal with, as long as a strong audit has been performed.

Found this: https://www.enpass.io/security-audit-report/

I'm not a security expert, so not sure if those audits are trustworthy.

Wow, okay, yeah, I'm actually sold. There's a CLI for desktop, and it's on both ios and android. Damn. Will gleefully fork over $80 for a lifetime license if it's as good as it seems.

Why have I never heard of Enpass before? Anyone have any reason to not switch from Bitwarden to Enpass right now?

Ah, well said, that is a good way to look at it. Very true!

Agree with your edit too. The logical and natural order of skill progression has somehow become offensive to many people. It's the "I got my karate black belt in 6 months!" mentality. It's denying the very nature of expertise.

The thing I kept thinking when reading this was, what about the hikers' agency in deciding whom they hike with?

I'm an athletic guy, and a fast hiker. I go up climbs like an escalator. If someone agrees to hike with me, there's a tacit understanding of what to expect, so if you agree to go, then don't complain when you get exactly what was advertised. I will tell you suck it up, hydrate, and eat a Clif Bar. Furthermore, I won't even agree to take you if there is reason to believe you are overestimating your fitness, and/or underestimating the trail.

Conversely, if they make it clear they want a leisurely hike, and I agree to it, then it is on me to dial down the intensity.

All that has to happen is an honest conversation about the desired intensity from the get-go, and then it's clear who's being a dick because it's whomever is going back on the agreement.

Can't we all just be mature adults about such things? I've never personally had an issue with this in almost two decades of hiking. Maybe it's because I usually avoid random group hikes with strangers?

Ah, I see! That makes a lot of sense, thank you for explaining.

If I understand correctly, that means type-checking python as you described was an open problem before, and this paper effectively proves it will never happen (ideally). They do this by establishing Turing completeness of type-hints, which are the main mechanisms for type-checking.

Can you please explain why this is useful? I'm an intermediate python programmer with some undergrad level knowledge of complexity theory, so this is mostly over my head, but it's interesting. I have no idea what one would actually use the results of this paper for - is it just a curiosity?

Oh that sounds interesting, I like the idea of money as a desire accumulator. That makes intuitive sense to me. Could you please expand on the implications of this perspective?

You're exactly right, but that's kinda my point.

I think my definition is quite fundamental, and holds true all the way back to the beginnings of finance. We used to just trade directly - trading horses for maize, etc.

But then humans realized that having anything be money is inefficient, so we invented currency as a locally acceptable surrogate for whatever humans value. But it's still rooted in humans exchanging goods and services they find valuable, for whatever reasons.

I am trying to have this make sense in my head, but I agree with the other commenter that "money is debt" doesn't feel right.

I think more fundamentally, money is simply the capacity for goods and services to be exchanged between humans. Anything that facilitates a trade can be considered money. Just like how in physics, the best general definition we have of "energy" is simply the innate capacity for change in the universe.

If I stumble upon a gold bar in the forest, that's not a debt. It does, however, have the potential to get me what I want. I could, in theory, turn it into a debt, or I could just spend it immediately on a bunch of cows.

"While the duration and temperature alone aren’t records, the simultaneous achievement of heat and stability brings us a step closer to a viable fusion reactor – as long as the technique used can be scaled up."

Half of the engineers on HN right now:

[...as long as the technique used can be scaled up...](PTSD_Chihuahua.jpg)

Yes, exactly! There are two problems here:

1. What's the most efficient way to boil water?

2. How do we generate electricity on a population scale without having to boil water?

Question 1 is, apparently, much more tractable. We are still pretty much building the world's most sophisticated tea kettle.

What are the reasons why not? What are the obstacles/drawbacks to the FLAC approach?

I have no domain knowledge here, just curious

If you like the combination of math, hacking, and madness, check out Pi (1998). It's a bit disturbing, but sounds like it might be up your alley. It's a filmmaking masterpiece.

Of course! It's the NumPhy Air75. It's considered an entry level board, so it's nothing fancy, but for me it's been great.

The whole thing reeks of Bezos wanting to be cool. You can almost hear his desperate cries for approval through the poorly written, and poorly delivered, script.

Honestly, just watch the first scene. It's hilariously soulless.

(This is all my opinion. Others are entitled to feel differently)

That's why I love them. I benefit from their obsession because they definitely know how to find the good shit.

I'm not a mechanical keyboard fanatic, but I browsed their forums and found an excellent, affordable, keyboard I would have never found otherwise. I just use it and get on with my life, not going down that rabbit hole, but I'm grateful for the ones who did and found this beautiful board that I really do enjoy using.

Same with wetshaving - they're a little obsessed, but I benefit from that because now I have an irritation-free shaving routine that I would have never found without them!

I absolutely love niche communities like this. Fountain pens, mechanical keyboards, even wetshaving - it's fun getting glimpses into how deep these rabbit holes go.

It's almost like millions of people with valuable knowledge and skills were killed off or disabled by some kind of global pandemic or something.

Go figure!

Well said, I agree.

According to the parent comment, in order to criticize Joe Rogan, I have to "get on his level" first. Got it.

Brb, gonna go do some whipits.

I mean, at the end of the day, it's just yet another symptom of how entitled these people feel to...well, anything. The message is:

"These are MY roads. How dare a cyclist force me to slow down for 10 seconds? I'm IMPORTANT! Don't you understand how valuable my time is, and how critical it is that I arrive at my destination without delay? Roads for me, but not for thee."

They act with the urgency of an ER doctor en route to saving lives. While going grocery shopping.

I suspect that people who hate cyclists may also hate other groups of people who are not like them, and may be politically aligned with a party that fosters and embraces fear-based tribalism. Just speculation, probably wrong...

Doctor: "Tests came back negative my man, have at your sister!!"

High fives all around

Found em: https://archive.org/details/civ-vi-25-th-online-manual-eng

(Just kidding, don't hurt me)

Right, because only extremes exist...

Or you can add, oh I dunno, two or three more sentences to maybe hint at what is novel and important about the approach?

Oh damn, I hit a nerve, huh?

Not trolling, I am serious. It took Peter freakin Scholze to finally settle the debate over Mochizuki's work. What came out of it? What else could Scholze have been working on instead of spending time finding the incredibly subtle gaps in logic that he used to construct his false theory?

What Mochizuki did was wrong is because he was utterly uncooperative with the mathematics community, he would answer questions only with more papers that never addressed the concerns being raised, and he was offended that so much scrutiny was applied.

Has Nick made an effort to educate people on the incredible breakthrough he has made? How many lectures has he given on it? Any conference videos on YouTube? Because I'll watch them. Mochi is an extreme example, so I'm sure he's not trying to do anything wrong. He should just retract the paper and keep working on it. An interested volunteer can tell him what is specifically wrong, and that's all that needs to happen.