Currently your channel name is like youtube.com/<randomstringhere> or if you had a youtube account for a while it's like youtube.com/c/channelname or youtube.com/namehere if you're really big. They're throwing that all out the window and go with tiktok-style handles like youtube.com/@yourname. All old names and urls will still work.
It might not be nanoseconds, but something that's a power of 2 number of nanoseconds going into an appropriately small container seems likely. For example, a 62.5MHz counter going into 53 bits breaks at the same limit. Why 53 bits? That's where things start to get weird with IEEE doubles - adding 1 no longer fits into the mantissa and the number doesn't change. So maybe someone was doing a bit of fp math to figure out the time or schedule a next event? Anyway, very likely some kind of clock math that wrapped or saturated and broke a fundamental assumption.
2^57 nanoseconds is ~40032 hours. I wouldn't be surprised if someone out there was counting intervals in a 64-bit value and masking off some of the higher bits for flagging.
Any time I see these sorts of issues (odometers that kill themselves, for example) I think of smaller units at higher bit depths. That's not the only way to get to this kind of concern, but it's a way that pretty-darn-competent engineers can leave ticking time bombs due to estimation failures.
Always check types for overflow and/or precision loss. Always.
The punch line of this game is probably the most painful lesson to see play out in society again and again: In the game of prisoners dilemma, if you let defectors win, then you will end up with more defectors. It is not enough that you "win," defectors must lose. Defection must be a losing strategy.
The results that this game displays so eloquently are so central to living in a high trust society that I think it should be mandatory curriculum for all schools.
Crime or corruption gone unpunished will breed more crime or corruption.
Overall, divestment from china seems to be the goal. But this many new factories being produced is going to overproduce chips and eliminate any profitability; but inexpensive chips like this will most likely create a boon to the economies.
Related: There is a massive TSMC factory being built in Japan right now. Take a look at the pictures, I've never seen this many cranes at one location:
I'm gonna be the guy, and risk the downvotes. Its been long enough, and if we're gonna be idolizing this guy we need to have a serious discussion about the naivete of him.
Aaron Swartz claims that politics, news and all that doesn't affect his life. And then a few years later, when he makes the news, he commits suicide. In particular, it was clear that his morals were not lined up to what the powers that be are.
Instead of working to better understand the risks in the "piracy" that he was undertaking, maybe he could have paid attention to the news and garnered a better understanding of people around him.
This "I hate the News" article glorifies ignorance in the most terrible way possible. Especially since it was that ignorance that eventually gave way to Aaron Swartz's untimely demise.
Aaron Swartz eventually did wish to become involved in politics. He took documents from a university and published them online, in the name of "opening up information". If he did so with the naive "I hate the news" attitude however, then he was flying blind. He had no idea how others perceived him, including the FBI and other police powers.
That was his mistake. And it is a mistake I hope no one else makes. If you are going to put your neck on the line and perform a protest that toes the lines of the law... be sure you are ready and willing to receive the attention of the media that will fall down upon you.
On the one hand, we have Martin Luther King Jr. who broke the law, and managed to turn those crimes into a strength. A victory that changed the country for the better.
On the other, we have Aaron Swartz who (probably) broke the law, and instead turned those crimes into a tragic weakness. A weakness that ends in the most horrible way possible.
Note: I supported Aaron Swartz's cause. I've donated money to his prosecution when it came up years ago. So my money and actions are where my heart's at. The irony in this article is rather strong however, especially when we take it into context.
"Be wary of old men in professions where men die young"
- old Norse proverb
However, I've seen this rarely applies in tech. It works in fields where old knowledge and experience is highly valued and not go obsolete very fast like medicine, law, accounting, military, construction, sports or martial arts, but modern web and app driven tech moved fast and made a lot of old knowledge experience obsolete.
If a company is hiring a JS dev, your cobol and fortran experience from 30 years ago is pretty useless to them and won't give you extra money for it than a new grad with only JS experience under his belt. But as a dentist, the experience you gained 30 years ago is still a benefit to you now.
I've had to struggle a lot to get hired as a backend dev with 10 years of experience in coding C for real time systems because no employer valued my previous knowledge for their business.
I've been programming since I was 10, earned a C.S. degree in '96, and have been a successful generalist working as a sysadmin, programmer, network engineer, devops, open-source contributor, etc at everywhere from a small ISP in a college town where I was the only tech person to startups to companies as large as H.P. working on enterprise software. Really a bit of everything. I guess you'd call it dev-ops, but even if I were just a programmer, my curiosity about how things work would drive me to understand my tools better. And at the same time, even if I were just a sys admin, my impatience for repetitive tasks would drive me to automate my tasks.
These are the books that really helped fill out my knowledge and helped me in my day-to-day work. In no particular order:
Code by Charles Petzold. I read this around 2010 for the first time. There isn't really anything in it I didn't know, but the material is just so amazingly well presented that it helped me realize there were things I could only explain in a very hand-wavy sort of way or that I'd forgotten. Just an amazing book. I re-read it every so often. I just got the 2nd edition and look forward to reading it soon.
Higher Order Perl by Mark Jason Dominus. Even though I'd mostly moved on from Perl when I read this, this book really helped me better understand C.S. concepts that I should have learned better getting my degree. This is secretly a book about Lisp for people who are allergic to parenthesis. After reading this book, I was able to back to The Little Schemer and The Seasoned Schemer and get a lot more out of them.
All of the Stevens books, but probably UNIX Network Programming to start. I had the TCP/IP state diagram (from TCP/IP Illustrated) taped on my on cubicle wall for a decade or more.
Mastering Regular Expressions by Jeffrey E. F. Friedl. You get what's on the tin with this one. I've used RE's to great effect throughout my career and I mostly have this book to thank for it.
Programming Pearls by Jon Bentley. A humbling book. I read it and think "that's really clever, I would not have thought of that."
These are the ones that spring to mind. I'd have to peruse my bookshelf to see if I'm missing any other obvious entries. I've used a lot of the O'Reilly books over the years too, e.g. sed and awk. I'm also intentionally leaving out text books that would be part of any C.S. degree.
As an addendum: Man pages. All of them. The Linux man pages, maybe not so much. SunOS was my introduction Unix, and I was spoiled by their quality and comprehensiveness. I recall one day discovering "man intro" and then spending a week doing nothing but reading man pages. http://software.cfht.hawaii.edu/man/solaris/Intro(1)
Here are two papers on this topic. In particular, the first is the shorter version (with a better/more journal friendly layout) and second is basically the technical report for the research. It does show some support for your hypothesis compiled languages are more energy efficient. C ranks in at #1 and Python is last at #15.
There is also a paper that I can’t find (I’m on my phone) that was done in conjunction with a Google researcher that reaches similar conclusions.
The matrix for effort vs. impact is something I find myself drawing in meetings a lot.
Effort
Low High
┌───────────┬───────────┐
I │ │ │
m Low │ Ok │ Bad │
p │ │ │
a ├───────────┼───────────┤
c │ │ │
t High │ Perfect │ Ok │
│ │ │
└───────────┴───────────┘
I'm not all that against it, Finnish is quite beautiful. Practically, however, it is too late. English is already the de facto international language with 1.5B speakers and is the most spoken language on the planet followed by Mandarin with 1.3B speakers. I suspect English's international popularity is mostly due to two factors, namely, 17th century British imperialism and that English has been the international language of aviation since the 1950's.
A lot of the time HN users just have very different priorities and tolerances. I see all the time people ranting about induction stove touch controls. I have used both gas stoves and inductions for years and the touch controls never bothered me, yes they beep and disable if you spill water on them, but you wipe it with a paper towel and move on. While cleaning a gas stove with knobs is a huge pain that impacts me so much more.
There is no objectively right opinion. It just depends on how much you are bothered by either downside.
I wouldn't read too much into this - this sentiment is quite frequent here by some more vocal members, and HN is very far from being representative of general population (which is very good in this regard, since mankind would be over in 2-3 generations).
I have personally a very different opinion - smart handy balanced successful (in life, pursuit of happiness, usefulness to society) people should have more kids/kids more frequently as they do, of course if they are able to do so physically, emotionally and overall mentally. Why - this world desperately needs more of such people, and instead gets explosion of poor uneducated farmers or basic factory workers.
Quiet average (or under-average) majority never changes much, they listen to what they should think, what is right, cool etc. Decision processes based mostly on emotions, which is always flawed long-term (and mass media abuse this to no end). We as mankind are clearly heading to self-destruction if we continue this trajectory long enough (longer than doomsayers preach but not absurdly long).
Also majority of childless older folks I've met are in one of these categories: 1) physically impossible, didn't want to go through adoption bureaucratic hell; 2) would be OK with kids but didn't meet the right partner during say age 20-45; 3) didn't want them earlier and when decision changed they realized it was too late (I know quite a few guys in this bracket too). Those that made this decision consciously at early age and stand by it till death without regrets are really small minority.
Even those fearing overpopulation are helping shrink it a bit if they have 2 kids max (equilibrium is somewhere around 2.1 IIRC). There are other points but I don't want to end up with article on this topic. Suffice to say, in my view, life is a (short) game that shouldn't be played on easy difficulty (=no kids) to get most out of it.
If that makes me some arrogant a-hole for stating that, because I ruffled some underlying feathers of somebody online is of no concern to me. Being people-pleaser is a shitty life from all possible angles.
There have been a number of transformational things in the last 5-10 years that are far from gimmicks. Wider tires on road bikes. Disc brakes for cx and mtb. Dropper posts and 1x drive trains on mtb. Cycling is rife with orthodoxy that begs to be challenged.
Heart of the system is aquaponics. Fish and veg in closed water loop. Some internal waste from the plants, plus wheat bran, become food for insect larvae. They make up to 40% of the fish feed. We complement the feed with locally grown mussels, which take nutrients back from the sea, into the system.
Instead of a nutrient loop that stretches across half the world (for example phosphor from Morocco to Brazil, chop down rainforest to grow soy, soy to fish feed for Norwegian salmon, dump the excess nutrients in the sea), we can create a local/regional nutrient loop, with extremely little leakage to the ecosystem.
It will look different for a smallholder in a poorer country, you have to research, but I think it did possible there too.
There absolutely is a flood. Mostly to Armenia and Georgia.
As for me, I'm torn on staying vs leaving. This may seem irrational (and it probably is), but this is my home. I'll be perfectly fine in any European country on a day-to-day level, but I'll never be at home (and I'll need a thicker skin since we're the nazis now). There are people and places in Russia that I love, and my life won't be complete without them. I guess I'm just old.
On the other hand, we may soon live in a Gulag. I'm already cleaning the history of some of my Telegram chats when I go outside. People are getting arrested for holding a sign with asterisks ("*** *****") or just a blank sheet of paper, and you can get a prison term for a careless repost.
On the third hand, Russia may crumble. Our resources aren't unlimited. We are under the heaviest sanctions in history, our industry is a sham, our energy exports will cease in a couple of years, we've already committed 70% of our military to the war, and this won't end even if we "win" -- we'll need to provide police / counter-guerilla presence over a country that's 30 times (times, not percent!) larger than Chechnya, for at least a decade. And we'll need to rebuild a couple of Stalingrads to boot. I can't see how this is sustainable.
What the heck is wrong with older generations? Leave young people alone, they literally can't win in this discussion.
This article is filled with baseless pseudoscience and random cultural anxiety, and without any real substance the article just ties all of it to this phenomenon that isn't even really definitively bad. People look at anything different about teenagers and young adults, and this becomes an opportunity to air out every single grievance we have with younger cultures, even though we often have zero evidence that there's any causal link between our anxiety and the result exists, or even that the end result is itself bad.
----
Oh, young people have less sex? This is definitely a problem, and judging by the article and some of the comments I'm seeing around it, the cause is:
- Too much hookup culture.
- Not enough hookup culture, nobody is hitting on each other anymore.
- The hookup culture is in the wrong place, people don't meet up in bars anymore.
- Those darn dating apps. You can't form a connection on a screen.
- Sexting doesn't count, but also why aren't people sexting enough?
- Young people just don't know how to shake someone's hand and look them in the eye anymore.
- They'd rather play video games, and the idea someone might like a video game more than sex causes me emotional stress for some reason.
- They're taking this too seriously, they expect everyone to be an expert at sex, and their standards are too high.
- They're not taking this seriously enough, the young expect to just be able to do sex really well out of the gate, because complaining about #$X&ing sexual work ethic is apparently where we are as a society.
- Have we tried training them to do sex better?
- Pornography. You know, just in general.
- Women are terrified of men who are bad at sex, and so now we all have to deal with the fallout caused by men who are bad at sex and giving the entire gender a bad name.
- It's the hormones/drugs, are we giving kids too much?
- It's too little chemicals, are they eating right?
- Advertising makes people uncomfortable in their bodies.
- Maybe people feel too comfortable in their bodies? We don't have evidence for this, but let's imagine if it was happening.
- Women aren't asking for specific sex acts that we think they should be asking for. Is it a problem with education, maybe they just don't know those positions/acts feel good? But at least we can all agree that it is definitely a problem that they're not doing sex the way I want them to.
----
This is just a laundry list of everything older generations hate about the youth, with a thin premise tied to it to justify interviewing a bunch of people who are all like, "well, instinctively we feel like hitting on someone is now creepy, and we feel that's bad."
But really, you find out that the big objections outside of just general "everything is worse now" sentiments are that it might mean immigration increases to sustain the population, and also Toys R Us is having more trouble. Which... just heck off, now we're going to get mad at Millennials/Gen-Z for not supporting the toy market well enough? Throw in a dash of "it's the younger generation's fault that incels exist" and "the stuff I think is normal some people find creepy" just for flavor.
I want to complain that there's no way to win, that if Gen-Z was having more sex we'd be having the exact same conversation except coming up with reasons why increased sex was bad. But honestly, the specific argument is not the real problem. I just feel like people in the media need to take a chill pill and leave Gen-Z alone. I don't see solid evidence in this article that any of this is a problem, and as long as all of the researchers they interview can talk about their feelings, my feeling is that declining teen pregnancy is probably a good thing, and it's a thing that older generations have wanted for a long time.
-----
I also can't even begin to express how frustrating paragraphs like this are:
> Humans’ sexual behavior is one of the things that distinguish us from other species: Unlike most apes, and indeed most animals, humans have sex at times and in configurations that make conception not just unlikely but impossible (during pregnancy, menopause, and other infertile periods; with same-sex partners; using body parts that have never issued babies and never will). As a species, we are “bizarre in our nearly continuous practice of sex,” writes the UCLA professor Jared Diamond, who has studied the evolution of human sexuality. “Along with posture and brain size, sexuality completes the trinity of the decisive aspects in which the ancestors of humans and great apes diverged.” True, nobody ever died of not getting laid, but getting laid has proved adaptive over millions of years: We do it because it is fun, because it bonds us to one another, because it makes us happy.
> A fulfilling sex life is not necessary for a good life, of course, but lots of research confirms that it contributes to one. Having sex is associated not only with happiness, but with a slew of other health benefits. The relationship between sex and wellness, perhaps unsurprisingly, goes both ways: The better off you are, the better off your sex life is, and vice versa. Unfortunately, the converse is true as well. Not having a partner—sexual or romantic—can be both a cause and an effect of discontent. Moreover, as American social institutions have withered, having a life partner has become a stronger predictor than ever of well-being.
There are other animals that have sex for fun. No, the fundamental thing that distinguishes humans from the beasts is not that we wear condoms, come on. There's this tone running through the article of "we're not saying you have to have sex to be emotionally fulfilled as a human being, but we are going to constantly look at you weird and act like you might be emotionally stunted because of it."
I'm aroace, so I may be over-sensitive to this kind of, "we're not saying there's anything wrong with you, we're just going to imply it over and over again" talk, but holy crud, could older generations stop using everyone else's sex life to validate whatever insecurities they have, even for just ten seconds? There's very little substance in this article beyond pop-science and people writing books about mindfulness, and then in very worried tones saying, "but maybe these two things are related, let's consider that." There's so many non-sequiturs and random jumps in logic. It really feels like just an excuse to talk about how the kids these days are all wrong.
If I give up computers in the evening and alarm clocks in the morning, this type of sleep cycle actually happens to me quite naturally. I prefer it, actually, just a hard habit to keep in the modern world.
I think the ubiquity of clocks in western societies points to the fact that time cannot be directly perceived. Our perceptions of time are both individual and circumstantial. For instance, time dilation slows the apparent passage of time during sudden trauma like a car crash.
Even in computation, where time is ideally measured very precisely, event based applications are extremely common, far more so than absolute or even exact relative time applications.
Time is computationally and culturally important because of the need to synchronize. But cross cultural synchronization of meetings is hard even at the basic level because prevailing attitudes of “On time” are different in, say, Germany, Spain, and China.
There have been a lot of perspectives on time through human history.
The Mayans were very gifted astronomers, and built their temples such that the sun would shine exactly through a small portal at the top of the temple on the equinoxes. Christian basilicas and Jewish temples had similar timekeeping functions.
The Greek and Roman pagans saw time as turbulent and cyclical, subject to the caprice of the gods.
The pre-modern, Christian worldview saw time as a story with a beginning, a middle, and an end, but also as a vertically-structured fractal of cycles within cycles, and our orientation within was ascending upwards to an eternity outside time and space.
The Protestant fathers saw the linear progression of time forwards towards salvation as the true content of the gospel — that our orientation is forwards, towards the future.
Some Maori saw our orientation in time as backwards, that we walk with our back towards the impenetrable future, with the past visible in front of us.
None of these, however, saw time as an infinitely critiqueable, totally relative social construct with no given reality outside of humanly mutable, intersubjective power relations. This makes the author of the article, in my sincere opinion, the “whitest” of them all.
TC isn't everything. I'm pulling truly bonkers TC at 26, and yet I feel a deep void inside me.
I recently realized that this void is because I am not living by my ideals/purpose. I know what I want to do in life, I know how I want to contribute to the story of humanity, and yet I am letting my greed overrule me and force me into a different path. Essentially, I am betraying myself, and this causes that feeling of unfulfillment/void.
I suspect I am not the only FAANG/unicorn/quant engineer that feels this way. Don't get me wrong, I greatly enjoy the day to day technical work I do. But my day job does not help me work towards what I have defined as my existential purpose.
Recently I decided I will change this, whether through volunteering or a new job (even if it might pay less.) I'm more excited than I have been in months. I will die happy if I can positively impact humanity towards the direction I hope for it to go towards.
The annual budget of the entire NSF is $8.28B. The NIH is $42B
Google's net profit was $40B in 2020. Apple's was $94.6B in 2021. (all according to wikipedia).
Edit: The above is net income, so AFTER paying all the exorbitant salaries.
Apple alone makes enough money that it could fund pretty much all current publicly-funded science happening in the US at the current rate. That is a ridiculous amount of money, and publicly-funded science just cannot compete at that level.
(Currently on publicly-funded grants. Underpaid relative to what I could make elsewhere, but happy to be contributing to the greater good rather than helping some advertising company).
