jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
Nothing you said contradicts what I said. The scenario is that you make two trades - a buy at $10 and a sell at $20. The buy is broken but the sell is not.

Now it's as if you sold but the buy never happened (i.e., you sold stocks you didn't own). That's a short.
24 hours later, never heard back. Great idea + bad execution = 1 lost potential client.
That sounds similar to their original attitude around the iPhone 30 pin connector.
> It’s understandable it’s a touchy subject. Why piss off China if you don’t have to? Only something to lose and nothing to gain.

Same sentiment for Saudi investors? Same for Israeli?

People have different lines and I'm sure soon founders will be doing a great more DD in this new age of outwardly conscious capitalism.

I'm patiently waiting for the tweet thread/medium article of a successful founder pointing out all the dirty cash they didn't take. Unfortunately, as of yet it is still a great deal of money that builds companies. Not unwaivering morals... One day.
You would have nothing that gives you no joy otherwise
MMS is used for group texting.

It's extremely common in the USA since most people in the usa have phone plans that include unlimited MMS and SMS, third-party chat apps like WhatsApp never became ubiquitous here as a result of that basic functionality being available through the phone.
I remember looking over the application form for the first Oculus Connect (after Oculus was purchased by FB). What struck me as odd was that the form didn't just ask for your phone number. It asked for your mobile telephone number. It was an unusual distinction that I hadn't seen before.

Now, it could be nothing, but I came to a personal realization just how valuable a telephone number could be for such a well-positioned company to do a deep-dive into a person's background just by using their mobile number as the key to tie additional records to the user's identity. Or their activities before, during, and after a company's conference.

To answer your question, I believe that Facebook wants the (mobile) telephone number of their users to facilitate any number of additional uses, and "account security" is one actual use that lets it slide under the radar of most people. Clever! (Or depending on your POV on privacy and personal security, unfortunate!)
Right, if you can throw away an obsolete rocket stage as part of profitably launching a much bigger load than you would have done with a re-usable one, it's hard to justify not doing it, and just selling it for scrap instead.
Could the same not be done in a single Terraform file?
Most of the industry runs Docker containers in production my dude.
Similarly, he gets the Turing Test wrong. He seems to think that all you have to do to pass the Turing Test is to convince a single person that you are a person.
I believe the cost to execute somebody in the US is significantly more than the cost of keeping them in prison for life.
> Once you hook together the right selection of abilities, I expect something that looks suspiciously like original thought to emerge.

It's very unlikely to simply "emerge". Sure it's theoretically possible, but that's very optimistic. It's more likely that if we develop AGI it will be due to gaining a thorough understanding of what it means to be "intelligent". (Yes, I know the word "intelligent" is vague, but I think you and I can at least agree that we "know it when we see it", and more technical definitions do exist.)
"What if I convince them that I'm the messiah? Would that make me the messiah?"

Yes.
The whole article is an argument from personal incredulity. http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logicalfallacies.a...
I always assumed that "memory constrained" referred specifically to the giant texture assets that modern games used. 2048x2048 textures are - from what I understand - not uncommon in PC game dev. I assume this is the biggest constraint.
Very interesting. I like that a lot. However I'm not sure it would ever work with an open forum.

Invite only is awesome, but open forums are important too.
Bloomberg was able to outlaw fizzy drinks, he just couldn't make an exception for the Big Gulp
They don't have the cameras on for normal games, it's just for the All-star game which is this weekend. It's notorious for being easy-going and low on hits.
Presumably, the issue is a non smooth helment. One option would be to use a fiber optic line to seperate the camera's location from immage capture. The other is a slightly taller helment with a built in camera window. Sure it would be bulky but I doubt an extra inch or so would mean all that much and looking at celphone camra's you could probably make it vary thin.
Nice. Ad hominem. What's next, are you going to call me misogynistic? How about homophobic? Would you be happier if I phrased it as "I'm not excusing his behavior"? Because that's essentially the same meaning, just not as "weaselly" [sic]. Also, sentence did not contain a "but", even semantically.
If I'm not mistaken it's this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_System_(Internet)

Basically if you get IPs from ARIN or another RIR:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_Internet_registry

You get a name on your block.
I agree. Buried somewhere downthread is a comment where I admitted being a bit knee-jerk about this.
It's implausible that they could decrypt it, but they could certainly block it.
I concur. The emotions the imagery invoked in me was a rare experience, technology hasn't invoked such feelings for years. So not sure if it is feeling associated with art, but still, it made me happy, and I do acknowledge the work as art.
Ooops, I didn't know that. I guess I rely too much on wappalyzer (which showed PHP). Sorry for the confussion...
It could make for interesting cutaway shots or PIP, but as you said, it would only be useful from time to time.

Previous footage I have watched of football players (American) is very disorienting, and the field of vision is very narrow with a helmet mounted camera. It looks like the player has tunnel vision. However, a player's eyes will dart back and forth very quickly taking in a much bigger picture, so you aren't really seeing what they are truly seeing.

The Madden video games implemented a first person perspective (I haven't played for a long time, so not sure if they still have it), and it was nearly impossible for me to play in that mode. You don't have any peripheral vision using that mode, and that same problem will exist for these live sport shots.
> Anyone would think they are trying to discourage people from choosing that option?

I realise it's comically unenforced, but doesn't the GDPR forbid websites from doing that?

Obvious ugly workaround: use a Private Browsing session for that website.
Millions I have a problem in believing, certainly once the iron curtain proper was put in place.
If you're interesting in reading a very long, very engaging interview of Steven Pinker, check this out: http://www.cosmoetica.com/DSI4.htm
he's accumulating a variety of gossip about her life and judging the organization that she formed

By my lights, an individual or organization can be judged by how well they adapt to reality: do they interpret facts to suit their ideology, or does their ideology grow by accepting new facts and knowledge?

By this measure, it's much easier to have a negative view of certain of Rand's followers.

They sought only their work and the fulfillment they gain from it.

I think this will be my new credo.

Perhaps this feels foreign to those in academia who live grant to grant.

Perhaps this is like certain entrepreneurs who live to exit, or head hunters who live only for their fee. We should navigate and groom our incentives instead of letting them rule us.
If you banned gum in NY, the first thing that would happen is a significant increase in gum on the sidewalks, gum sales would soar; then after a short rebellion, consumption would fall by half as the more pliant folded. It would also generate a classic soda-ban type media circus, nanny state accusations, and so on.

Lee Kuan Yew would know that Asian cultures vary as much amongst themselves as they do compared to Western cultures. Strikes me as a convenient defensive line to shut down debate.

The manners in China are very different than the manners in Japan for example. Whether we're talking about spitting in public or line queuing. In his same line of reasoning, what would work in Singapore, would not inherently work in the Philippines.
Example of famous dx7 songs - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCwn26FePAo
Exploit, or exit scam?
I've been playing go for 25 years and never made the connection. Mind blown.
Scientism Defined: A snarl word from those who know that their claims won't stand up to scrutiny and try to pathologize disagreement with them.
ok understandable, although I think probably everyone jumped to the same conclusion I did as you quoted from the section most pertinent to pediatric oncologists, and I think that was the profession most central to the parent comment.
Definitely.

And that's why we give different weight to different features. Smallest ones (Math methods, octal & binary literals, etc.) have a weight of 0.25. Medium ones (Map, Set, rest parameters, etc.) have a weight of 0.5. Finally, landmark features (arrow functions, classes, generators) have a weight of 1.

The final % score is calculated according to all this.
I can understand a business oriented (I'm assuming) co-founder pushing for quality/release/cost, but in no way I would let them say whatever I'm doing is "easy". It's disrespectful!

If this was being said by a customer, my treatment would be totally different. But to a co-founder, honestly I would tell him to fuck off. I would be irate. I wouldn't let him downplay my work. Ever.

C'mon. What kind of work environment is your company going to have? Imagine hiring some employee and telling him "Your work is easy. I'm now wondering if I'm paying you too much."

Or maybe I'm too bitter and stressed today and someone else will give you a more diplomatic route.
Doesn't look free to me. Microsoft and Google don't require you to pay 99$ to watch their conference videos.
I really like the Mathematica language/environment. You can prototype stuff incredibly quickly, the algorithms are fast, and the viz is really nice.

I wish the open-source alternatives weren't crap ... or that I had the time/intelligence to write one (I don't).
Lisp is blub.

Compared to some things, yes. For instance, I think the type system of Haskell (combined with its purely functional nature) is a powerful abstraction technique not present in most languages. I'd like to hear what you think is missing from Lisp that makes it less powerful than other programming languages!

It ignores Noam Chomsky and a large amount of research and development in linguistics and CS that goes way back to the 1950's.

Could you please explain? I've read some of Noam Chomsky's stuff but haven't touched his linguistic material much (I intend to though). Keep in mind if you're going to call it "Blub", it helps your point if you play by the rules of the original Blub thought experiment. Namely, you probably should provide a language which is more powerful (see my response to your last point).

Sometimes I wonder if the MIT CS department was so hot on LISP in the 1970's as a way to spite Noam Chomsky for biting the hand that feeds them (DOD research $.)

This seems like a far-out conspiracy theory, but I wouldn't know if it's true or not.

Funny, modern work on machine understanding of language is pointing more and more to the primitive "markov chain" sort of models that Chomsky rejected in the 1950s; simple experiments prove that humans don't have recursive (LISP-like) mental models of language (or anything else) -- actually, ALGOL-type languages, much closer to natural languages, are a much better match for the human brain.

So the use of recursion makes the language less powerful because it isn't close to writing a human language (recursion is pretty relevant to a lot of activities, whether you realize it or not, but I'll play along)? I think from this discussion you can ask an interesting question: if you have a language with less abstraction ability that is more intuitive to use than a competitor, is it actually more powerful? So (playing along with what you wrote, not saying I agree) is Python better than Lisp because, despite the fact that it lacks some abstraction techniques of Lisp, it is easier to write? Doesn't that whole house of cards collapse when you realize there are:

a) human languages which syntactically and semantically probably don't resemble anything ALGOL-ish

and

b) there are people like me who find Lisp much more natural than Python

Despite the fact that part of your comment sounds absolutely crazy, I think there are tidbits in there that can provoke an interesting discussion. Thanks!
Isn't it pretty clear? Evolution predisposes people to a lot of beliefs and attitudes which served our ancestors well, but are still irrational. Intelligent people have greater ability to figure some of these out.
So, religion is natural?

I know I've seen a few citations to studies on this over the past couple of years. They allude to the point that religion is somewhat natural/baked in for humans. Only one immediately came to mind though: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118545428/abstrac...

It could be that religion was, too, an evolved and advanced behavior for its time but that deliberate abandonment and irreligiousness in humans today is a further step.
I see humor is not your thing...
Here is a study that backups the claim made in the article http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal....
> Why hasn't "peak office" been reached yet?

Because most offices are staffed by people working for arrogant old people who can't imagine getting through life without staff, because they themselves are not actually capable of doing anything. [Disclaimer: I am both arrogant and an old person, but do not fulfill the requirements for "arrogant old person" because I actually know how to do stuff.]

This is a generational shift. I'm old enough to remember when a certain class of older executive would become enraged when they saw a scientist or engineer in their business unit typing at a keyboard. In their world, secretaries typed up the long-hand notes that scientists and engineers wrote. It wasn't so long ago.

Likewise, the notion that an executive today might book their own travel, or pay their own bills (because really, it's all a couple of mouse-clicks and hardly a significant distraction from thinking the Deep Thoughts[tm] that execs are paid to think) is still anathema to many executives older than their late 40's.

As they retire we will hit "peak office", but not before. My bet is somewhere in the 2025-2030 range.
Looking to the future, what is being done about in-home distribution? Ten years from now, are we going to find ourselves with 1Gb/s fiber lines to our houses, and still dependent on oversaturated 54Mbps WiFi to get to it?

What I'm getting at is, have we had any related push to wire up more homes with cat6a (or something of that nature)? It isn't quite as future proof as fiber, but it's cheap and 10Gb/s should keep up for a long time.
Looks like the prize has gone up to $75.
No worries! I didn't want to link to it directly, trying to compartmentalize. :D
No, i still haven't heard any response to "Can you articulate a single, _specific_ current business problem that would be solved by NFTs and _wouldn't_ require appeals or validation from a non-blockchain source like judge or insurance adjustor?" Do you have one?
It isn’t running modern software. It is running MS-DOS 6.22. If it’s not loading for you, you can try the snapshot.
> why does he believe those things?

Just look at the conditions in any society without free speech and you'll find your answer.

More abstractly, free speech is required for free thought. Without free thought, we're all thought prisoners to whomever controls the information we received. Musk's contention with Twitter is that they have been positioning themselves as that entity.
We can no longer even afford the second-hand ones that were supposed to be fully paid for way before we were born.
This is what my first PC was my freshman year of college back in 1990. Felt damn good I got the 65MB hard drive instead of the typical 40MB that most machines had back then.
I vividly remember watching Mir space station deorbiting in VRML in real-time in 2001.

It seemed normal back then, but looking back it is unbelievable how smooth the whole experience was given the state of the internet in 2001.

Edit: Wow, the site still exists!
http://www.parallelgraphics.com/vrml/mir2/
First except of course for the corner cases that Go thinks should not be accounted for. These include serious system failures (e.g. gc fails for some reason), memory allocation failures, and of course anything that calls panic. Other errors are effectively impossible to be handled (e.g. system is thrashing and Go's gc runs - you'll never see your program again). So this can't be solved.

So please don't say Go doesn't have exception handling. It has code that detects exceptional conditions and attempts to handle them by unrolling the stack. Of course that's entirely different from "exceptions", right ?

Plus it once again points out the schizophrenic nature of Go. Go uses error codes. Except when it doesn't. Go doesn't have generics. Except when it does. Go doesn't allow polymorphism. Except in ~5 cases. No language on the planet allows for return type polymorphism (meaning of the function changes depending on what you assign it's result to) ... except of course Go.

This was one of the main, and valid, objections people had to languages like modula-2, oberon and the like in the past. And maybe I'm getting old, but my money's on that the pendulum will swing back again.

Furthermore I disagree with your assessment. Go and C insist on the same thing : in-line errors. In C that lead to errors being ignored in the vast majority of cases by "average" programmers. In Go ... well, here's the top-5 of Go projects. Go and take a look for yourself :

https://github.com/trending?l=go (note: changes every day. Now check if errors are ignored today or not. Today's answer 4 of the top 5 projects ignore almost all errors)

But I don't see how your comment addresses the complete unnatural way of thinking that C and Go promote. Handing errors in-line is not natural. This was one of the big complaints when we moved from C to Java/Python, a move supported by a lot of programmers.

So let's be honest here. Go's philosophy in practice is to make users ignore errors.
I don't think anonymity means what you think it does.

Having a persistent account with a nickname I can hide but which is still tied to my device isn't anonymous.

It definitely doesn't mean posts being geo-locatable, or having all of my 'active' data be sticky, followable, trackable, etc.
You're probably seeing fluctuation within the normal range. HN's policy and moderation approach have been the same way for a long time. The submissions and comments that get posted are certainly influenced by macro trends in society at large, but that's happened before as well. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869 if you want more reassurance.
What, if any, alternatives are there for Google Voice?
Same thing, more-or-less. And NAT is effectively a firewall for inbound traffic, even if a lot of people say it isn't.
And trying to design an optimal vehicle for mars is how you bloat the costs of your rover program by many many millions of dollars. Downmass is expensive, engineering is more expensive. The result of that is to take advantage of the fact that "mass cures a lot of sins" (Paul Wooster, SpaceX Principal Mars Development Engineer at Mars Society Convention 2019).

> true all-terrain body-on-frame construction

Why would you prefer this? It's just a form of construction that requires more materials, and results in a weak body that can be damaged. Furthermore, we get all the materials for the unibody design (lots of stainless steel) free from starships that won't return, and the material is easy to work with.

Mar's terrain is pretty simple. Rocks, and sand. We almost certainly will choose not to land on sand, so we only really need to deal with rocks. Cybertruck, really any earth vehicle with a reasonable clearance, should be able to deal with that well enough, maybe with some custom tires.

Thermal management, and problems relating to pressurization, are the only things that jump out as me as real difficulties. Neither sounds like it needs fundamental reworks though.
They were only added in HTTP 1.1, and it's initial drafts had even more variants that were clearly for file management: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-00#sect...

This is before me being old enough to follow technology, so below is a good portion of conjecture and hearsay (I'd love to be corrected by someone who actually remembers it):

Tim Berners-Lee initial web browser was intended as an editing tool as well as a viewer, and these ideas came back when they went to write up HTTP as a a "proper" IETF standard. Not uncommon (bit less so today, but back then especially) to design specs with what they thought it should do, not what they'd tried/done in practice. Making an official spec is the chance to get this stuff in.

At some point, a bunch of the file-specific stuff was split off to WebDAV as an extra thing (work on that started 1996, HTTP 1.1 was finished 1997) - or rejected and WebDAV created as a new home for those ideas? But PUT among some others survived.
I was thinking of Oracle, where aliases are evaluated at column protection time, so after grouping but before ordering.
The first iphone doesn't self-propel itself to 60+ mph nor was it capable of remotely damaging critical electric infrastructure. It was a toy.

When you're working in higher risk domains, higher safety standards are reasonably demanded.
People would certainly pay a premium for WeWork offices, though it is unclear how much of WeWork’s superior offering could be retained while bringing costs under control.
This is why man invented machine learning...
I'm far more likely to have my wallet on me than my phone. Credit cards have infinite battery life, 100% waterproofing, no real-time tracking/spying and low to no cost to lose. Cash trades out the low cost to lose for anonymity.
Haskell is much more than folds, maps and monads.
No, the merchant still does get a stable identifier with every payment (the "device account number").

More recently, an additional identifier uniquely identifying the underlying card has also been added [1]. That one persists even across multiple devices and token deletions.

[1] https://www.level2kernel.com/payment_account_reference.html
You’re assuming the attacker needs to be in the room with you, coercing you directly.

Imagine this: an attacker has something against you. Maybe they know a secret you don’t want getting out, maybe they’ve kidnapped a loved one, etc. The attacker has threatened you and shown proof of the threat all with coming face to face. They now demand you give up the contents of the safe as ransom.

How is your time delay and secret code words gonna help?
Uh... I don't think inflation is any more popular in progressive circles. Or countries without conservative media.