jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
> How is a "You can't lead an organisation and be a role model if your views hurt a significant amount of people in the organisation" a non-judicial punishment? If you can't read or write you would also probably not lead a large organization, and it's not punishment.

Is it a decision? Yes.

Is it a decision made in the name of public interest? Yes.

Is it a decision that relates to some kind of transgression? Yes.

Is it a decision that seriously affects a person's liberty and pursuit of happiness? Yes.

Is it a decision made out of a fair trial? No.

Just because the labels "justice, diversity, inclusivity, equity" are displayed on a mob that harasses and assaults people doesn't make it less of a mob.

Also Stallman didn't "hurt" anyone. This is ridiculous.
Nice, thanks. Lol, I always have a slight concern entering my info into these sites because there's always that small chance that information is shared or leaked itself. Paradox, man. To check or not to check.
Great post and that first link is brilliant, thank you for sharing. I agree with you regarding your attitude to developing software - just get it out there first and then adjust the UX later.
I see having a single compiler instead of multiple competing compilers more as a bug than a feature, at least in the long run. It's fine as long as the language is in "exploration phase", but hopefully we'll see more independent Rust compilers in the future (e.g. https://github.com/Rust-GCC/gccrs)
School should also teach kids that they live in a complex society, where people have different backgrounds and, yes, different skill sets. I'm afraid that relegating "more gifted" kids (whatever this means) into a world of their own is not only harmful to those who are left out, but to them as well.
To anyone, like me, who has observed this from a safe distance : DFV is a widely-reported username. Like, you'd read it in a short news piece about the whole debacle. This post is the first time I see "Roaring Kitty".
Another use of this phrase that might amuse the HN crowd:

Until 1995, state securities regulators used to have independent authority over stock offerings occurring in their state. So your company might go through the SEC registration process for its initial public offering, get the go-ahead from the SEC and then get comments from regulators in Texas or California.

In 1980 the Massachusetts Secretary of State decided that a stock issue from a promising new computer company was too speculative for Commonwealth residents[1].

When Apple Computer, Inc. went public that year, Massachusetts residents where not allowed to purchase shares. Apple’s investment bankers later distributed lucite deal toys to the team that had the traditional prospectus cover stamped “BANNED IN BOSTON.” These are now quite collectible [2].

[1]: https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/AppleIPODe...

[2]: https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/apple-computer-inc-ip...
It's amusing to watch HN lose its collective shit over the NYT article, which I believe you succinctly and correctly summarize.

This is the highest rated top level post that presents any degree of skepticism at all in Scott's rebuttal, below pages of anger against the NYT "hit." So much for that quality, rationalist examination of the facts. As somebody who read both his blog and HN throughout its run, I find the NYT article on the money.

Scott's own cowardice about revealing his real name is incredibly telling, too. So long as he remained anonymous the NYT actually respected his wishes and buried the story, while this champion of free speech refused to stand behind his own words publicly and lamented the abuse of the MSM coming to dox him. Now that the checks are coming in, he seems to have no problem, though.

My advice to you, dear HN, is to take a look in the mirror. This isn't a hit piece and Scott isn't a saint. If you believe his long winded rants have merit, you should also believe they stand on their own, and you should welcome the scrutiny.
I agree with you about the positive points of Racket.

I would note however, that being developed by academic greats and being based on that language is exactly what enables it to stand out. It is usually academics, who innovate in PLT and come up with new elegant concepts, that one can use to tackle lots of challenges.
I lost count of the number of times the NYT used the same numbers and switched from praising to blaming and back the Swedish corona startegy.

I want facts and information goddammit. Not a tearjerking drama to fill my inbox. I was already annoyed with the NYT before this incident. This just broke the camel's back. I unsubscribed.
School didn't suck for me. I liked my friends, I liked my teachers, I was a relatively good student and not someone trying to get into trouble (didn't try to drink or smoke or cut class, etc...). Teachers were good. Got lots of freedom from my parents because they trusted I wasn't going to get in trouble. Had great friends, sleep overs, still in touch with them 38 years later.

I also learned quite a bit. Of course it was pre-internet, pre-smartphones. I went to school in the Apple II era. But I learned file i/o, sorting, and a bunch of other programming related things. I didn't become an expert in biology or physics but my knowledge of those topics still mostly comes from or at least stared in school. The periodic table, the atomic weights, electron shells, basic genetics like how recessive genes propagate. A bunch of history. Famous books an authors that still have influence in our culture today.
They're working on that, though they want to do it in a way that exposes less: https://twitter.com/moxie/status/1281353119369097217
> a rabbit hole of a pointless obsession

...like, a hobby? I don't see any evidence that this author has an unhealthy obsession. And, if the comments here are any indication: a lot of techies would be absolutely charmed to find unearth such a machine from a dusty box. I know I would!

Watching the incredible work of amateur retro-computing enthusiasts today, I have no doubt that whatever Steve Lord creates could find an enthusiastic operator a century from now.
Wish granted. Facebook and its tracking cookies are close to pretty much everybody who surfs the Web, regardless of having an account or not.
Because enough of its users use it?

I'm a graphics programmer and I use Emacs' in-built RPN calc for its linear algebra capabilities almost daily.
I'm not justifying it, just giving context for why folks are alarmed, especially for people from other countries who don't necessarily have context for obscure US symbols.

And yes, the American flag is problematic in its own way.
I happened to have recently bought a police trade-in Glock. I'm returning it. I'm disgusted. I've had enough. We're back to carrying the Sig.
dupe https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25672461
Bending over backwards to make excuses for a mob forcibly entering the Capitol, isn't 'just asking' about evidence.

What I heard all summer was anything is a weapon, but this guy has a gun and ties.

https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/protesters-enter-the-se...
Facebook, and it's tendency to create fake reality bubbles around its users in the name of the all important "engagement", is perhaps more responsible for the sorry state of US politics and democracy then Trump himself.
For a while during a coding sabbatical I was a FOH sound guy. During another break I was a health food store manager. On vacation I'm usually deep in the woods. I probably do more of the latter if computers just didn't exist.
And outside of Tor, your public IP says a lot... never mind profiling. It would be very hard to prevent, especially for the least legitimate tracking, and then if incognito makes itself too obvious, that info is also interesting for tracking...

Privacy is hard
I also use it on gentoo and works great.
Lets see, 360 million Americans, a good number use Excel spreadsheets. How many businesses in America that can be called Enterprise? Maybe 9000.
Actually, wrt the Snellen optotypes, the entire optotype subtends 5 minutes (I couldn't find the 'elsewhere' you're talking about), but distinguishing them requires that you be able to resolve features 1 minute in size. In fact, on Snellen charts, the letters are carefully designed to reflect this. For instance, on the 'E', the width of each bar of the 'E' is equal to the width of the white space between bars. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snellen_chart#.2220.2F20.22_.28...

So yeah, if you drew out a tiny "E" (or "P" or "F", I don't think it matters) on a 326 ppi screen a bit more than 12 inches from the viewer's eyes, where the width of each bar was 1 pixel and the space between bars was 1 pixel, then I think that would match up closely with the standard for normal vision, at least in terms of visual acuity for one eye.
I've had more the opposite experience--- one CS professor used only a Unix command line without X installed, and his machine didn't have a mouse. Not sure which is worse.
What? How is rejecting apps/updates for technical infractions (cross-compiled code) absurd? Undesirable for the developer perhaps, but nothing compared to the worry that someone's general opinion of your individual app could kill the whole project. The rationale is also pretty much irrelevant if the rule is already published (eg. no cross-compiled code) - you don't need to second-guess it, you just need to follow it
It would give the president the authority to take such steps: I'm trying to imagine what would give him or anyone the power.
OK, provided that we are clear on the distinction between state rights and individual ones as understood today. Most of the colonies went into the revolution with established churches; all states but Massachusetts reached the first census with slavery legal.
If it's not called run out, what do you call it when a company goes to their RIR with a well-justified request and is told "Sorry, that's a great request -- sure -- but we don't have a block to give you."

If that's not a sharp cutoff, I don't know what is. If you're a hosting company, what do you do when your customer growth outpaces your ability to procure IP addresses?
Tenacity is everything.

Both when looking at a particular problem, but also in sticking to RE in general for long enough to pick up the skills and tricks that make you quick. There are countless tricks you pick up that cleave off huge amounts of time that would otherwise be wasted.
I'd imagine most customers aren't on vacation for three weeks at a time.
I've been wondering, it seems like people have been setting up systems where multiple patients are connected to a single ventilator (with individual regulators?) If that works, maybe it might be more efficient to solve the supply problem, not by building a million cheap individual ventilitors, but rather a few thousand mega ventilators designed for multiple people.
This paper has a good overview, they say the rate of adverse events is around 1/1700. So if it reduces your risk of death from respiratory failure in the next week by almost any positive amount, it's worth doing.

This is only going to be used in hospitalized patients who are already developing respiratory failure (low blood oxygen levels), not in random people off the street with a cough.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3356109/#S1titl...
Just like Elon was going to rescue the Thai cave boys, fix Flint’s water supply, etc.

Musk’s PR strategy is to inject himself into every trending topic.

This, after Musk has made several incredibly irresponsible factual misrepresentations of the current outbreak, comparing it to the common cold and suggesting that car accidents will kill more people this year than this virus.

I wouldn’t be surprised if this ventilator play is an exemption which keeps his workforce at work, working on things he wants to work on, like cars and rockets, all the while spreading COVID-19.
Love the idea! Maybe a suggestion with the "bit rot" problem (getting out of sync with code). Code tours will likely cover the most important parts of the codebase, which should be well tested in large projects (and large projects are the ones that need the tours). You could link the comments to those tests, and if any of those tests are changed, you will be advised to take a look at the tour comment. These tests can be also discovered automatically, as there exist code coverage tools.
It’s not really though. SF has a housing crisis. We would all be better off if an unhoused person was living there or someone with lower paid but necessary job (e.g. caretaker at a nursing home).

Making money off people on vacations is worse than providing stable housing for people in the city.
Just got back on my college senior project: code-explainer.
It's a tool that you can paste any JavaScript code in there and it'll parse it and tell you what each keyword means (It's more of a learning tool for beginners).

I was only able to get a handful of keywords done and had to dropped it when I got out of college. Now I'm jumping back in to finish it and add more features.

[https://github.com/ChrisSannar/code-explainer]
Why do the Kelly brothers have 100x the media exposure of any other astronaut?
Well, there's an interesting technique - quoting me in reverse order, thereby breaking up the logical connection of my statements. Put them in the correct order, and your initial question is answered.

To be absolutely clear: you have identified a greater good if and only if your proposed solution for making housing more affordable is implemented successfully.
> Notably, the computer was still doing important work (ahem, flying the LM :-) ), and the tasks it didn't have time to do were not critical.

I believe this is incorrect. From an earlier HN discussion:

"The 1202s were also a lot less benign than is often reported. They occurred because of the fixed two-second guidance cycle in the landing software. That is, once every two seconds, a job called the SERVICER would start. SERVICER had many tasks during the landing. In order: navigation, guidance, commanding throttle, commanding attitude, and updating displays. With an excessive load as caused by the CDU, new SERVICERs were starting before old ones could finish. Eventually there would be two many old SERVICERs hanging around, and when the time came to start a new one, there would be no slots for new jobs available. When this happened, the EXECUTIVE (job scheduler) would issue a 1201 or 1202 alarm and cause a soft restart of the computer. Every job and task was flushed, and the computer started up fresh, resuming from its last checkpoint. It was essentially a full-on crash and restart, rather than a graceful cancellation of a few jobs. And unlike is often said, the computer wasn't dropping low-priority things; it was failing to complete the most critical job of the landing, the SERVICER.

Luckily, the load was light enough that of the SERVICER's duties, the old SERVICER was usually in the final display updating code when it got preempted by a new SERVICER. This caused times in the descent when the display stopped updating entirely, but the flight proceeded mostly as usual. However, with slightly more load, it was fully possible that the SERVICER could have been preempted in the attitude control portion of the code, or worse yet, the throttle control portion. Since each SERVICER shared the same memory location as the last one (since there was only ever supposed to be one running at a time), this could lead to violent attitude or throttle excursions, which would have certainly called for an abort. Luckily, this didn't happen -- and the flight controllers didn't abort the mission not because 1202s were always safe, but because they didn't understand just how bad it could be, were the load just a tiny bit higher."

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20791307
> Keypresses don't get dropped from the buffer even while the application is thinking.

This annoys me to no end. Some applications (Firefox) even reorder keystrokes!

I'm beginning to think we've been using the wrong programming paradigm for user interfaces for the last 20 years. I never had these sorts of complaints about DOS programs, or even Windows up to version 2000. Then something changed. Computers have been feeling slower and slower ever since.
TIL https://github.com/thepowersgang/mrustc
So at what point do they throw the switch that invalidates millions of dollars of investment in mining Etherum? Or is it all transferrable? And who is the "they" that throws the switch?
I think the inputs should be sent at the level independent from context: "player pressed SPACE", not "player jumped".
The reason for a 100% migration is that Bitcoin ought to be switched off in its entirety. Which you can't do while it's being used.
We have multiple data centers and a similarly sized devops team (separate from SRE). They're exceptionally skilled and lord I pray they'll make it, because I know it won't be an easy journey.

None of our teams have dedicated devops engineers. Teams just have engineers that do everything: back end, front end, deployments, monitoring dashboards. Teams write run books for SRE. Dev Ops supplies eng teams tooling for deployments.

I've argued many, many times we spread our engineers too thin and we need greater specialization for better outcomes. We have enough engineers, but the problem is everyone owns their own thin but very tall vertical slice of the total system.
Ok. Thank you.

My reply would be...

By any other name.

Another way of how 'not' to understand the world, but a way to simplify it, for both benign and nefarious reasons. Control is in there somewhere. And it is more than mildly concerning that people here understand something that is considered deeply complicated by most, computers, and yet seem convinced humans can be pigeon-holed into a few 'types'.
At least in the example given, I think it could be worse. The guy said "Bill doesn't really want to review your spec", but he had effectively reviewed it, reading and marking up 500-something pages.

But rather than nitpicking or demanding changes be made, he simply satisfied himself that the guy knew what he was doing and left him to it. In fact he doesn't even give him the marked-up spec! Maybe I'm just too familiar with uninformed (or dangerously informed) management meddling in technical issues.
I agree with you, but the problem is that the OSS/free world is not willing to confront the simple fact that without a revenue model it is not possible to compete with walled gardens or proprietary software.

Sure you can build functionally good software, like PGP, but making something work is only maybe 25% of the way to delivering a product. The other 75% of the work is in getting the user experience right, packaging, supporting all the different platforms, etc. Walled gardens are winning because they deliver orders of magnitude better UX than open systems, and that's because they have a revenue model that can allow them to pay people to do the immense amount of work required to polish things to that extent.
They're moving money out of their countries past currency export controls.
Vimeo has amazing documentaries as well. Similar to Arte.
This is how I enforce my private DNS on my Android devices. I just wireguard my Android devices up to a PiHole device. Works everywhere I take my Android devices, so I get all the benefits of my home network anywhere I go. :)
To me, the value of these streaming services are probably 1/3 their actual price, so like many I split the account with a half dozen people. It's gotten to the point where the scale is shifting further and further, and I'm streaming content gratis using bittorrent rather than the actual platform that I have an account with because sometimes it's easier and faster to get straight to the content without being bombarded. Not to mention the latest Hulu dark pattern, where something will be labelled as "available on Hulu," then you go and look and it's only available on the Hulu plan that costs as much as your old cable bill.
It's to be entirely expected that people who reject the concept of "normal" find themselves at odds with statistical models.
That is a lovely article! Thanks for sharing.

I feel like the US would be better off looking at cities around the world that are pleasent, and pattern-matching off of that.

Vienna is beautiful. We should do more of what Vienna does.

Clearly tweaking the US's "process" is just moving deck chairs on the titanic.
At last, a music service that actually cares about UX. It's great, the animations are a bit choppy on my machine but other than that everything is great, very intuitive interface. Where are you getting artist info from?
Again, congrats.
Corporations write laws and use the civil courts as a weapon. Nobody can even afford to defend themselves. For those who can't live with the injustice, there aren't many options.

And you can bet that Sony's counterattack will involve buying a few more of those laws.
It solves a problem I have as a westerner who likes to live in non-western countries. Simply put, moving, storing and accessing my money anywhere in the world is hard. Crypto makes it a trivial non-issue.
One thing I can think of immediately is that smaller companies may have to implement something now that wasn't there - whereas larger can easily absorb the cost.

I've seen "subscription forms" that don't actually process anything, they just save the info in a database for someone to manually do stuff with later. These companies will now have to work out how to do a cancel button.

Arguably, they should have to anyway, and it's not likely to be a big issue, but these types of legislation are often used to make a "moat" for established players that new ones find hard to cross.
> All-remote work has definitely made a big (negative) impact in the velocity that ideas can be communicated.

This, along with the fact that employment half-life is long relatively to COVID (2 years average tenure), convinces me that this "remote permanent" hype is going to grind to a screeching halt in another year or so.

Yes, I'm putting my money where my mouth is (in SF Bay real estate, in this case).
> Maybe if they were more interesting, more people would read them?

This is what caused the existing problem.

We had a media where people mostly believed them because they mostly cared about telling the truth, issued corrections when they were wrong, were critical of both political parties etc.

That media discovered that if they published outrage bait they got more clicks, because if something is outrageous and true then people are very interested. But things that are outrageous and true aren't all that common, so to keep the mill running they started publishing things that were outrageous and false.

That works until people figure out that they are no longer the media they were thought to be. Because things that are outrageous and false are boring. Anybody can write outrageous fiction. That's how we got into this. But the more readers who figure that out, the less credibility they have, and the less anybody wants to read their made up accounts.

Their existing solution seems to be to turn the dial up to eleven. So then everything is an existential threat and a hot war and literally Hitler. That whips up the frenzy for the people who still think what they're hearing bears some resemblance to the truth, but increases the number of people who realize it doesn't.

Eventually you get a critical mass of people no longer interested in hearing fantastical conspiracies about everything and somebody realizes there is a market for objective journalism and makes a name for themselves. Then, with any luck, the others follow. One can hope.
Well what if the science is still developing and is extremely complex and the predictive models require petabytes of data and supercomputers and expert interpretation? Like, say, with climate change. Doesn't seem like there's an easy way for an individual scientist to take in all that info and make accurate predictions. Hence groups of scientists reach a "consensus" of what the current best interpretation of the complexity is. The consensus might still be wrong, but at least it signals "all the experts are currently thinking the data means X, Y, Z"