jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
Why can't we redefine words? Words are created, generalized and redefined all the time in English. Is it incorrect to say "he stole my idea" because I still have the idea? Maybe at one point this wording was incorrect, but not anymore.

As content gets more digitized wouldn't it make sense that to steal be generalized to mean copy/take something without permission instead of just take, especially considering it has already evolved to mean "take credit for something without permission" along with "take without permission"?
>which is why I think this needs to be approached in a structural way.

The answer is federal legislation. How break time, overtime after certain # of work hours in a day, parental leave.

If we want people to have a certain quality of life at work, I don't see any purpose directing any energy at certain large employers. All efforts should be direct to politicians, who we can vote in, to provide that quality of life at work.
It CAN be. It depends how you rebalance.

If your target is 50/50 and one stock goes up, you can either sell that stock or buy more of the other one. Only one of those models is a taxable event.
Didn't Meteor offer a conceptually similar solution, in the sense that data is constantly synced, via sockets? But it didn't require us to think about sockets so much, which is great.

There is a lot of talk at the start of the article how web development should be easier, how it should be less about the underlying architecture and that we shouldn't spend time on implementation details like state that SPA suddenly has to manage. On the other hand, I felt the rest of the article seemed pretty implementation focused, talking about details of how sockets could be used - I do have decent web dev experience but grasping the practicality of the concept based on what was described was beyond me.

That said, I love the first part that is talking about simplifying the web app development, to make it similarly simple as it was 10 years ago, but I can hardly imagine that solution to that is replacing one piece of underlying technology with another piece. I imagine that instead, we need a higher level of abstraction that will hide all the implementation details that we don't care about and capture that what is common through time, so we don't have to care if we are using websockets or http or smth else underneath - instead we say how we want data to behave, and it gets done. Dealing with HTTP or sockets should be reserved for advanced use cases, not typical web apps. I am working on a concept of this, open-source web dev DSL, still in alpha though: https://wasp-lang.dev , and while I can't be sure that it is the exact solution, I imagine something similar in the future, a DSL. At the end, frameworks are a step in that direction (embedded DSLs), it is just that they are not standalone languages and are therefore again pretty coupled with the language and architecture they are modeling.
And, additionally, using USB-C is a common and widely used standard - slamming them for using that instead of something proprietary (to make it less "dongly") is really not a good thing.
In my eyes, that's part of the problem. A single executable is a lot easier to deal with.

Having someone download Anaconda Python (massive install) to run a script is a huge fail in my eyes.
What's your math on that, considering Melvin's multi billion dollar bailout?
I don’t think anyone is disputing the greatness of Google Analytics on a functional level.

The problem is that indeed Google isn’t a charity and will not give away such a powerful tool for free without getting something in return.

That return is the privilege of stalking all your website’s visitors, which are often not aware of the tracking and have no say in the matter. Furthermore it would be against the GDPR if it was actually enforced properly.
I'd say if you are starting from a common language, you are already on the wrong path.

Doing proofs is so expensive, it is better to optimise your language for your proofs, than the other way around.
The difference is one of precision, scale, and duration.

Also in terms of cost, there's a difference between tracking which imposes a marginal human cost of production versus tracking which can be fully automated by machine, even if there is still a per-machine cost.

A relevant example is the Supreme Court ruling on needing a warrant for using a GPS tracker on a car versus just tailing them.
I can only imagine the machinations and flame wars leading to that document.
I'm afraid it's not. GCC still compiles them separately. It generates a bunch of object files in /tmp and links them as usual.
And all unicorns could poop rainbows, too. A world wherein secrets cannot be kept does not exist, so any argument that suggests it is pointless.

The world is not black and white. Unless it was physically impossible to keep secrets (which would likely mean zero privacy for any of the citizens, as well), people in power will keep secrets whether they are "official" or not. You will still never know about what you don't know about.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.07/haven.html

I don't know if I can say "I was on the cover of Wired" correctly, since it was an aerial shot of Sealand out of proportion on a globe, with 7 of us standing on the helideck; I'm probably about 4 pixels.
I would have to assume that this absolutely is the case. As far as I can figure, there'd be no way to get percentage decrease in speeding without already having a speed camera installed as a baseline. Without a speed camera, the only way to measure speeding is by number of tickets issued by police at that exact intersection. But police would only ever be able to catch a small percentage of all speeders, whereas speed cameras could potentially catch all speeders. So installing a speed camera would likely show an increase in the number of speeding tickets issued, whether or not the actual number of speeders changed.

In fact, a cursory googling turns up no studies showing whether speed cameras actually decrease the number of speeders. Only inference can be made, as studies DO show that speed cameras decrease the number of injuries and deaths.
USPS has an API: http://www.usps.com/webtools/address.htm
Census.gov has downloadable data: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tigermap.html#ZIP
Any context to what this OSS is/what can be used for?
I tend to disagree with the assessment that the an artists technique has anything to do with how good an artist is.

Case in point: in Picasso's formative years, he was a great realistic painter. He became a great artist because he pushed the boundary of abstract art that is arguably easier to paint than his earlier work.
To me, Picasso was so good because he built a story (myth) around his work that resonated with so many people.

The Mona Lisa is the most famous painting because of the myth around it. It's a beautiful portait, but is it really the best portrait ever? I think in the same wing of the Louvre there are better paintings of Da Vinci on show, even though there is no crowd around it.

Recently, the myth builders have been (maybe they still are) Jeff Koons and Damien Hirst, I think that's what makes them great artists.
Check out https://www.crusoeenergy.com/ - not renewable but a major enterprise capturing otherwise "wasted" energy
> If people were good at actually taking that into account then advertising wouldn't be effective,

This makes no sense. Yes, advertising can by deceiving people about how beneficial a product is.

It can also work simply by informing someone about possible benefits of a product the otherwise wouldn’t be aware of.

> and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

See above. You are affirming the consequent here.

> It amplifies the speech of anyone who’s business is profitable and who chooses to invest in advertising
AKA (a subset of) rich people.

Obviously false. My local coffee shop started by Latino immigrants advertises their coffee.

I started buying their coffee as a result.

They are not rich.

> That is fundamentally democratic. It is also fundamentally anti-democratic to restrict people’s speech in general, however much money they have.

1 person = 1 vote = 1 voice

You are going to have to explain what “1 voice” means. Does it mean no speaking to more than one person at a time? No public speeches? What exactly?

> To prevent advertising, you’d have to police what the poor could say, in case they were caught taking money to say nice things about the products of rich people’s companies.

> Is it wrong that it's illegal for the police to let you off with a warning in exchange for a bribe? Is it wrong that it's illegal to sell votes?

Neither of these are speech. It’s an absurd comparison.

> There are plenty of things that are legal to do of your own volition, but are illegal to sell. That's not a restriction on the performing those deeds in themselves, it's a restriction on commerce.

Yes, and there are reasons speech is protected from such laws.

I see that you are wholeheartedly confirming that you would have to police what the poor could say, in case they were caught taking money to say nice things about anyone’s products.
And basically... I mean, so what in 2021?
> The CCAF team surveys the people who manage the Bitcoin network around the world on their energy use and found that about two-thirds of it is from fossil fuels.

Nice to see actual data on this. Bitcoin advocates keep claiming it's mostly renewable.
Well, the security of Bitcoin == amount of transaction fees + block rewards. The cost to 51% attack the network is opportunity cost of mining valid transactions

So you either get secure wasteful bitcoin, or insecure bitcoin. Not really any other options with PoW
I think it's something interesting to consider. I'd describe it more as computation than as intelligence, but I also do keep in mind that there is no single universally-agreed-upon definition of intelligence, so the goalposts can shift.

For an example, consider the AI effect [1].

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect
It depends heavily on what you're buying; Parts for projects, or cables - mostly great. Pet toys - usually fine. Small household tools and other utilitarian bits - good as long as it can't get bent or dented en route. (Western) Name-brand products - don't go there, they're more expensive or fake.

I've bought around 400 things on AliExpress, with an average value of, guessing, about A$7.50. I'd say just under 10% had a problem that needed a full refund -- mostly just not arriving or arriving beaten up. I only had to complain bitterly when a surface-mount component fell off a PCIe card and I refused to accept their recommendation to fix it myself. Fewer than 2% of goods had a disappointingly short life span.

Meanwhile, the price is at most a third of what I'd pay to get the same (or seriously similar) product locally. Doing the math very roughly, I've probably paid about A$3k for stuff that would have cost A$10k. And all I had to do was wait 1-3 months for everything.
Might be wrong, but I'm under the impression that the video encoding has a significantly higher energy cost on the Quest 2. Virtual Desktop even allows an OC setting if I remember correctly.

It helps, of course, that the bandwidth required for VR streaming is fairly low using the Oculus link protocol.
I wouldn't be sad to see IRC die if it were for a superior alternative, but seeing it die to get replaced by a propietary alternative simply saddens me.
It's not surprising that a project that's really early in development chooses to keep up with the latest rust as a min. reqirement.

Once it gets to a 1.0, that adoption of new features may slow down.
I might simplify that further into three segments with different silicon strategies:

Low (~15m units) - MacBooks except 15" MBP

Med (~2-4m units) - 15" MBP, iMac, and Mac mini

High (<1m units) - iMac Pro and Mac Pro

In LOW, silicon-wise its essentially free since they already have a SoC powerful enough w/A13X+. They can always bump up the wattage/frequency and/or decrease the chassis size to define a slightly new market segment where compute expectations are lower (e.g. the Air approach).

Between LOW & MED is the mobile workstation use case of the higher spec 15" (or larger) MBP. Cheapest solution: add a discrete GPU.

In MED, they could still use A13X+ and add discrete GPU at higher SKUs. Alternately, they could create a beefier chip ("A13XL"?) that would just bolt more cores onto the CPU/GPU.

Between MED & HIGH would be the semi-pro use case of the higher spec 27" iMac (or even certain use cases of Mac Mini). Hard to say what cheap solution is here beyond better GPU.

In HIGH, it feels like Intel is here to stay for a while. These use cases still really need the beefy Xeons and are dealing with lots of pro-level edge cases which favors staying with x86, ECC, etc, and cost-wise it's very low volume.

On these Pro machines where price is less of an object, and to keep up with the rapid feature development roadmap they get from A-series, it feels like they'd do the 'why not both' strategy and throw in an A13X+ as the primary processor and a Xeon as a co-processor with it's own RAM. Just like GPUs are co-processors today. The OS, everyday apps, and specific tasks that favor the A-series would run on the A13X+, while certain instructions and legacy x86 programs/VMs/etc would be routed to the Xeon.

---

The more I think about it the more this co-processor approach really makes sense for the next 5 years of Pro-level Macs, since it avoids the cost of creating new low-volume, high complexity silicon.

It's fun to speculate because it represents quite an interesting business + technical + market segmentation challenge. They don't want to siphon off or detract Mac users any further than they already have, but also need to start reaping the benefit of their highly competitive and high volume chips.
Are they properly compensating for overtime? I'd say that's the main point of contention. You can push it to your benefit: more pay, more holidays, or some other arrangement.
What would have happened if they had pushed into the room? What would have happened if they had had firearms on them? What if they had been able to grab just a few congressmen at gun point?

Sure, I'm not proposing to escalate and it's wonderful that it is over with no real effects. But the security handling was atrocious, and the results would have been much worse if the mob were only slightly more organized and intent on bloodshed.

I'm not claiming that they would have succeeded to actually install Donald Trump for a second term. But I do believe that they could have forced a mock result to eb proclaimed on the senate floor, creating a much larger problem for the future and giving much more power to their narrative.

Also, note that the quote from me was supposed to reinforce the idea that there were compelling reasons for the police to take their presence as a serious threat. These weren't protesters chanting to save the whales, they were protesters asking for the election to be overturned (even if I agree with you that they had no real chance of achieving this goal).
Try AnySoftKeyboard. Works great and is FOSS.
Do theoretical speed limits matter though? Real speeds will be much lower anyway. And if you need consistent high speeds you're likely to use a cabled connection anyway.
Just a small detail about cryptographic hash:

https://gdpr-info.eu/art-4-gdpr/

"‘personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (‘data subject’); an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person;"

Cryptographic hash of phone number is still uniquely identifying natural person and is by GDPR still under the definition of personal data. The GDPR authors knew what they were doing - or they were lucky although also other parts of GDPR suggest that they had some technical think-tank behind it.

Anyway, hashing doesn't solve anything, whatever "obfuscation" is used/invented, as long as information points to "natural person" it is considered personal data.
I can’t believe this didn’t even break into the top five on HN.

Can someone explain what I’m missing?
European resident here - ended up deleting WhatsApp and asking contacts to switch to Signal/Telegram. Quite a few people were happy to make the move and some were happy for the push.
90% dominance of what is increasingly a small niche market. Apple controls a large fraction of the mobile device market, and everything else runs linux.
looking forward to see those changes
Yes, a keyboard app just should not allowed to have a network connection, but yeah, a thing to dream in 2021.
I’m not sure that the general public will own these cars. They’ll be fleet/taxi/etc. Not sure about you, but I don’t pay much attention to make/model/year of vehicle when I get into a taxi/Uber.
Though they've provided no reason to suspect JetBrains, nor have they said who is "investigating" the company, the article does say they may be compromised. If you rely on their software, it's probably a good idea to make sure you have a mitigation plan ready.
Why, from the first principles, though? It's a slope and not a switch, but even in the case of "regular" crime, I'm not entirely convinced someone showing willful, unambiguously intentional disregard for basic social contract/others' negative rights, has full claim to the same rights, i.e. full moral value.

In this case we are talking about trying to achieve political means via violence. The kind of people who do that outside of very extreme circumstances definitely renounce their moral value as human beings in my view. It's not that they /should/ be shot as a punishment or something; it's more like dealing with malarial mosquito - the evil is on the level where ends justify the means.
Please read my comments, I read the transcript. There's a link to it from your link. Unless you're saying CNN is outright making stuff up?
In Ontario, private MRIs aren't allowed except as a third-party service — such as an employer paying through private insurance. Think professional sports team ordering an mri for a basketball player.
BBVA is closing US operations. They haven’t had a massive presence here but their NBA card was pretty interesting.

It’s a pretty standard credit card, like 1% back on everything and 3% on NBA purchases. But it was 5% back on everything during the finals and all-star weekend.

Those two weeks were wild, probably ten thousand plus people buying tens of thousands of dollars of Visa & MasterCard gift cards to liquidate via money orders and repeat for a ~3.5% profit.

They changed the rules like a day after the first finals week, $5,000 cap on the 5%. I can’t imagine they had anticipated the magnitude of the response!

Anyway, I generally suggest getting
Physics-wise in an ideal world, no. But it is possible and should be designed (like using better shielding and improving tamper resistance) so that the released radiation is minimal to the point that it is indistinguishable from noise. These are actually very possible: radiation-hardened parts are hardend against out to in radiation but usually also blocks in to out EM radiation.
Haha typed on mobile, my bad. The trains are pretty cheap compared to the cost of car ownership in America. From another comment I wrote:

> I live pretty far from central Tokyo and for between 200-350yen one way I can get to Shinjuku / Shibuya / Ikebukuro / Ueno and everywhere in between. So that's 400-700yen round trip for a night out.

> In Seattle or Atlanta? You'd be extremely lucky if your destination within a 15min walk of a bus stop or train station. In Atlanta good luck not getting mugged while waiting for the bus at night. Uber typically costs $10-15 one way (although to be fair you can split the cost between friends if you're travelling together).

> Or if you own a car in the US, you can reliably get from A to B, but you're paying between $5-10/day for insurance (whether you use the car that day or not) and $10-20 to park if you're in a city.
This links to a HN discussion on the relative merits of VPN access versus bastion/jump boxes (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8637154).

This conversation didn't ever seem to bottom out to conclusion? In particular I was wondering how servers connected _outwards_ in the VPN scenario.
This reminds me of discussions of pain asymbolia or not being able to feel pain (diabetes, leprosy): it's a crippling and dangerous problem.

Fear, pain, guilty - the gifts no one appreciates.
Exactly. MSFT and Oculus are not at all targeting the same thing. The comparison is natural, but ill-fitting.

I bought an oculus and am excited by VR because teleportation IS FREAKING AWESOME. AR is cool, but a far cry from the sense of presence that we talk all day about in VR land.
She's not Einstein, and she's not well known outside of computer scientis. Seems to line up perfectly with ok_craig's comment.

Of course she was brilliant, and influential, but putting her in the same list as Newton or Einstein feels like intellectual hipsterdom.
My experience is similar. EC2 performance is mediocre in general and quite poor compared to dedicated bare metal. Disk I/O is abysmal (yes, even on "SSD" EBS).
The Dawn Wall is actually between 28 and 30 pitches. Here's a good topo, for anyone interested: http://www.dpmclimbing.com/sites/default/files/uploads/image...
> But now I've switched to this Neocities [3] hosted site.

This file is far too large and may cause DNS cache problems on Windows.
> Kant's categorical imperative:

> > Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.

For what it's worth (and perhaps you intended it this way), this is a somewhat shallow application of the categorical imperative. There are other ways to justify using AdBlock (and in fact, condemn not using AdBlock) by means of the categorical imperative. For example: "If everyone uses AdBlock to prevent sleazy ads that can contain malware, then those ads will no longer have value, and they will cease to exist." If you think of AdBlock as a vaccine, then by the categorical imperative, it's necessary to vaccinate everyone[0].

Or, "If everyone uses AdBlock, then websites will have to invent monetization tactics that don't involve auctioning off its user's eyeballs and privacy". If you consider ads to be an intrusion and invasion of privacy, then killing the ad-supported model could actually be a good thing.

I don't really want to get into a debate on adblockers in general, because the topic has been beaten to death on HN before, but I just felt compelled[1] to make this note about the categorical imperative for the sake of others reading this.

[0] This is also a somewhat simplistic reduction, but you get the idea.

[1] (Yes, that's a Kant pun)
Thanks for your attention, fixed.
Except it wouldn't stop there. If CF blocks bot services, then they should of course block places selling drugs. Drugs kill people unlike botnets. And actually, sites promoting drugs are equivalent to sites promoting suicide. So block both of those. And come to think of it, botnets only exist because of hackers, so we should probably get those blocked, too.

It's unfortunate there's any limit on hosting. LE can still go subpoena CF and use judicial channels like always. CF should stay in the anti DDoS business and just annoy everyone with their captchas instead of implementing law and morality.

Child porn seems to be the exception, as it's easier to look at "stopping" such things getting near our visibility, instead of worrying about the actual incidence of the problem. (See Craigslist where AGs preferred to shut down a system they had access to, since that's visible, preferring to force "adult" users to buy and sell in uncontrolled markets.)
Has anyone tried to reverse the call so they can post? How hard is it?