jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
I think this line of reasoning conflates deflation caused by a massive deleveraging crisis and deflation caused by more of the economy jumping on the train of dramatic price decreases that the technology industry has always dealt with.

Our global deflation problem is caused by too much debt. Debt can't increase faster than the economy indefinitely because it becomes impossible to pay back. But it had been increasing in that fashion for quite some time before the financial crisis. We're now living in a world where debt isn't growing at those fast rates, and central banks have been trying to keep the economy going without it.

Central banks have kept the economy going by buying low-risk assets with new money, which makes the value of assets in general go up. They've also set interest rates to zero, which makes it attractive to borrow money. Asset holders feel richer and spend more money than they would otherwise. Investment opportunities become more attractive because it's cheaper to borrow money to take advantage of those opportunities. We get economic growth. These were reasonable actions for our central banks to take.

But eventually, the actions of our central banks will need to be reversed. Low interest rates and quantitative easing in perpetuity will eventually cause inflation when the economy gets healthier, or asset prices will get too high for people to continue to expect future gains. This is why the Fed is planning on raising interest rates this year. The problem is that raising interest rates will cause people to stop expecting higher asset prices as well, and they will sell.

Deflation in the long run is something to worry about, but it's strange for me to hear long term worries when we have more serious short term worries. How do you stop our extraordinary monetary policies without dramatically popping the asset bubble and causing the problems that our policies have been avoiding for six years?
Don't forget to check the Firefox 37 for developers [0] page which has more detailed info (it's linked from the sidebar of the public release notes).

[0] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox/Releases/37
Came here to say this. A couple of millions to get started, and then you can get power.

I feel powerless when I release an android app and can only put in a couple of hundreds for advertising. When if I had 50k to put in, i'm sure it would help my app's popularity.
With Amazon Prime (required for this, at least for now), you pay one time per year and get free two-day shipping for the year (along with other benefits like Amazon's Netflix-like video service and free delivery of diapers/nappies). With Prime, you generally don't think about combining shipments, since there is no benefit in doing so.

Except for those intangible benefits like reducing carbon footprints. I tend to feel guilty purchasing one-off small items and tend to group those purchases, even though I don't have to.
And of course, by the time we got to the Pentium Pro - and more or less everything ever since - we ended up with a hybrid pipelined superscalar design which takes advantage of the legacy of support (and, compared to VLIW, tight instruction coding), but as part of the decode pipeline, translates that to RISC µops inside with microcode.

The Transmeta Crusoe was a particularly notable (if not particularly successful) case in point, which brought that layer a little more visibility than most, although in all honestly, was probably mostly well-known for having been Linus Torvalds' employer.

There never was a particularly bright line between RISC and CISC, and it's only gotten blurrier with the decades as the two paradigms stole good ideas from each other.

That's not to say there isn't the occasional throwback, sometimes for a good reason. I've got an adorable little slug of a 'transparent' microprocessor on my desk which I hope sees the light of day sometime (when it actually works, because I've bricked it - first time designer == way too many errata! :P) because it's got some fun ideas for trust, like the host being able to directly read (and verify) all the software it's running.
FYI, this app just crashed Firefox 33 on Ubuntu 12.04.
I actually host the main repo on my (https://bitbucket.org/jozefg/pcf). I've just found that most people would prefer to see the GitHub version (for starring, more pleasant forking, better code viewing) so I usually link there.

I generally duplicate my repos on bitbucket/github so I can feel smug when one goes down for a while.
They probably send a message to you for every team you're on.
By that logic, every extra character you concat onto a salt is also "rolling your own crypto."

For example if my salt was CrytoRandom(10), and you increase it to CrytoRandom(15) you've just "rolled your own crypto" according to you.

If that is not the case then explain the difference between CryptoRandom(15) and CrytoRandom(10) + CryptoRandom(5) (longer salt Vs. salt+pepper).

There's a lot of people spreading FUD ("it is unknown!!!") and nonsense (concat two strings is literally rolling your own crypto!) in this thread.

I don't know if peppers are worth the dev' time, deployment issues, and additional maintenance (e.g. rotation). However I do know that the people arguing against it here aren't making rational counter-arguments that hold up under basic scrutiny.
If the abuses of Hoover's FBI weren't enough to make the American people (and especially their Congressional representatives) say "Never again," nothing will.

Oh come on - how many people did Hoover kill? There isn't even a number. Not because he was a great guy, but because the abuses of government power that have taken place in the US are quite mild in historical terms, when compared to the excesses of colonialism and various dictatorial regimes around the world.
And yet, all you did is talk. That is the parent's point. You talked. Maybe you voted for the other puppet of the elites that is ideologically 0.3% different from the current puppet. Maybe you convinced your interlocutors to do the same.

But participation in the farce of modern democracy is exactly what you're intended to do. You somehow feel like your talking or voting matters. It doesn't.

I'm no different, of course. Our lives are too comfortable. There is only one form of political action that ever works to depose despots, and it's a form that's not worth interrupting our comfortable lives to engage in.

At the end of the day, you need to either take real action, or accept that you're too comfortable with your affluent life to risk losing your comforts, and enjoy these comforts without complaint. You've chosen this path, as have I, as have we all.

Life is too good to meaningfully rock the boat.
I have 23 years of experience with the world surrounding us (and by "world" I mean: everything minus computers). In fact, I have hundred thousands years of experience wired in my brain.

Now, I only have a dozen years of experience with operating systems, programming languages, etc. I'm quite a technical user; I think I fit the definition of a computer geek, or power user. I have a talent to debug very nasty bugs in embedded, real-time software written in (unintentionally) obfuscated C. I can install and use OpenBSD, FreeBSD, etc. I can write small Scheme programs. And still, I feel I’m trapped in a jungle I can’t escape when I’m using Mac OS X or Windows for everyday tasks. Our computing world is a live nightmare. It’s a terrible, ugly mess. There really is a huge impedance mismatch between our brains and our computers.

Technology is designed (mostly) by people who think they live in a perfect, mathematically pure world. I can’t really blame them; because by "them" I mean "us". But the real world is not binary; it’s fuzzy. As you said, it's messy. It’s imperfect. It changes as our mood changes. Computers should reflect this. They don’t.

I think that user interfaces that tried to mimic the real world failed because the people behind them still kept thinking as computer scientists, university professors or ubergeeks (they were lying to themselves). Some user interfaces were designed to treat the user like a five-year-old kid (hello Microsoft Clippy). Others were replicating real-world stuff that was badly designed in the first place (VCR control panels are a good example). And most of them focus on being cool demos with great eye candy (look at where desktop environments are heading; who fucking cares about translucent stuff, rotozooming windows animations, 3D?) Hollywood film-makers should take the blame here :)

At first, when I saw this project, I thought: "yet another boring, eye-candy environment with cool tricks but no real innovation." But I should try it; maybe the user experience really is improved. It’s worth trying.

[Sorry about the whole rant tone of this post; itÂs not really a reply to your post either; consider it a draft of a work-in-progress essay I’ll try to complete and improve over time.]
Insurance is basically a game of profiling. The entire concept of insurance starts from a basis of a large, single class of people who cooperate to distribute the costs of improbable incidents over the group. Insurance companies don't treat everyone as one large, single class though. They break people down by age, gender, miles driven on average, geographic region, and tons of other metrics that are used to assess your risk level. Higher risk level? Hire risk class. Higher premium.

Also, you're not really insuring yourself. At least not in the way you think. In most cases, you're insuring yourself against liability, which means you're really insuring the other guy. If you get in to an accident, your insurance pays the other guy's medical bills, not yours. You can usually get some small amount of coverage for yourself, but it's a fraction of the liability coverage.
If the browser trusts certificates that aren't in the log, then what's the point of having the log at all?
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=sublime%20text&sort=byPopulari...

have fun
That is really interesting.

Can someone knowledgeable about the shell expand on this? I don't dare test it on my machine.
I'd say the fact that these bugs only very occasionally happen - relative to the huge number of shell scripts out there that are being executed every day - that it's not really "frighteningly common". You only hear about the ones that fail.
I have 600 and can downvote, though. It appeared at exactly 500.
That might be true but my tools should never dictate how I work.
I find the /etc/httpd/logs symlink more annoying. If you want to grep through your Apache configuration you have to explicitly grep through conf and conf.d otherwise just going to /etc/httpd and doing a grep -r you're searching through gigs of Apache logs.
> The seemingly unconditional refusal to explore technology companies. ... The allowing of the two new managers to keep breaking Berkshire's rules

If you think they are stagnating with their current mindset, then shouldn't breaking their existing rules be a good thing?
Yeah... those F22's aren't powered by magic.
Care to talk about these things with some examples?

My gullible brain thinks that he has something valuable to say and that requires more efforts from my side to extract that.

I feel same from reading his books too like.
Talk to your accountant.

This is not a productive use of your time.

The potential cost of getting it wrong (aka "dumb tax) is exponentially larger than the cost of professional expertise.

There's tax liability.

There's fraud liability.

There's opportunity cost because this isn't making you money.

Good luck.
So how come this still can’t be done with AMD GPUs?
That default is sensible. You're making it sound like this setting applies to all "timeouts" regardless of type. That is not the case.

This setting applies to lock-wait timeouts. The default value allows applications to decide on the correct course of action: either re-try just the statement that timed out (without having to re-do the previous parts of the transaction), or rollback the transaction.

The application still receives an error on the timeout regardless of this setting. The database doesn't automatically commit the previous statements in the transaction regardless of this setting.
From SuSE (Germany), you bought the books and the CD was a gift. That was a law thing, they couldn't sell a CD but on the same time just don't give any warranty.
See also this comparison: https://our.status.im/private-messengers-what-can-they-reall...
What’s wrong with using Rust for “GUIs, distributed computing, web development”?

In the case of a GUI, I’d expect a modern Rust GUI toolkit binding to look like any other GUI toolkit binding: an FFI-like abstraction that parses its own declarative view format, and exposes handles from those parsed views for native controller methods to bind to. Y’know, QML, NIBs, XAML, those things. This kind of GUI toolkit doesn’t exactly have high requirements of the language it’s bound to. (And I don’t believe many people want the other, procedurally-driven kind of GUI toolkit in the year 2021.)

Re: distributed computing — I can see the argument for Rust being the antithesis of easy network “rolling upgrade” (e.g. via being able to recognize known subsets of unknown messages, ala Erlang); but pretty much all languages that support distribution are very nearly as bad in that respect. (Only the languages that have distribution that nobody else actually uses — e.g. Ruby, Python, etc. — are on Erlang’s side of the spectrum in this regard.) But in terms of pre-planned typed-message version migrations, Rust can do this more idiomatically and smoothly than many other languages, e.g. Go, Haskell, etc.

Re: web development — there’s actually a lot of activity in building web frontend SPAs using Rust compiled to WASM. Started with games, but has expanded from there. Not sure about web backends, but the argument is similar to distribution: you need to do it differently in a static compiled language, but of static compiled languages, Rust is really a pretty good option.
Fair enough. The language has quite a bit of bagage and some habits are hard to break.

That said, it is not unpleasant to use for numerical codes, when you’re not working with people stuck in 1977 (so, no common blocks, everything in modules, decent array syntax, etc). It fits its niche quite well, with Python for everything else.
Can't all this be done on facebook?
I'm not quite sure what your point is here; you are making several different arguments that don't really make sense.

> I don't understand the mindset that losses aren't real until you convert them back into cash.

stocks, cash, real estate, etc are all assets, but they behave very differently. in particular, there are some very special attributes to cash: it can be directly exchanged for almost any other type of asset, and the prices of those assets are almost always denominated in cash. simple example: my lease says I owe $1000 each month in rent, not $1000 worth of any asset, but cash specifically. if I have $10k in cash, I can definitely pay rent for the next ten months. if I have $10k worth of some s&p 500 ETF, I a) can't pay rent without converting to cash first and b) risk being forced to sell at a time when my shares are worth less than $10k. I have a good chance of making rent for roughly 10 months, but there's a lot more that could go wrong. of course, cash itself does fluctuate in value just like other assets, but we are mostly insulated from that in the short term by the fact that most legal agreements are denominated in nominal dollars, and that the prices of most material things are much stickier than financial instruments. in short, this is why the concept of unrealized vs realized gains/losses makes a useful distinction.

> It just seems fundamentally wrong to me to consider different forms of money (cash, shares of an investment fund, casino chips, etc) as being distinct. Changing forms may have tax implications but it's not like the form protects you from loses in some way.

nothing is 100%, but different assets have sufficiently different risk profiles that it's worth distinguishing between them. cash is an extremely safe asset in the short term, but almost guarantees a loss in the long term. if you can identify buckets of money that you probably won't need for a long time, it has historically been a good bet to invest them in bonds/stocks/whatever based on your tolerance for risk. it doesn't guarantee a good outcome, but it avoids the guaranteed bad outcome of holding a lot of cash for a long time.

> If you keep your money in an underperforming investment it should be because you expect it to go up in the future, not because you are afraid of realizing a loss (which you have already suffered).

agreed, and this is a common mistake that people make. but this is more people applying the sunk cost fallacy to the concept of unrealized vs realized than an issue with the concept itself.
Awesome, I have been working on something similar for a long time. I used to greet news of similar services with dread, but as HN has taught me, having competition is a good sign that you are thinking of something less than completely hairbrained.

I do have a different angle than Flock, and I am far down the path to launching. But, my daughter just arrived at 31 weeks and my time is now happily gone.

So, good luck to you (and to myself! Heh).

Edit: the teaser site is http://PlayRelay.io
"Call me old fashioned, but even as an atheist I've found having a 'moral' view of the universe is far more productive."

Morality certainly is a useful approximation for rapidly predicting the effects of actions. My point is that it is not a useful basis for hacking the underlying machinery to take different actions.
Jack LaLanne managed to have the health of an athletic 25 year old into his 50s. And the health of an athletic 50 year old until his 70s. I have a great uncle who followed LaLanne's advice and is 84 and looks like a 45 year old bodybuilder with a 65 year old face. In contrast his brothers are dead, except for my grandfather who is fat and has diabetes and mild alzheimer's and is basically confined to his retirement apartment. I would say we already know how to be a 25 year old for much longer than than expected - the key is to exercise a lot more and a lot differently than you would think, and eat a diet similar to that of a 7th day adventist. Unfortunately this lifestyle is in opposition to pretty much every cultural and marketing trend in every society on the globe today.

Personally, I would prefer to have the health of a 25 year old until I'm 90 and then croak, rather than live like an 80 year old until I'm 150.
This single-window design might be hard to run it on 13 inch Macbooks given their limited screen.
I think javascript is fine when you don't actually have to support a dozen different browsers. But for most use cases, you have way to much cross platform support to worry about, and that's no fun.

Php is fine when there is less than 100 lines of it or so in your project. It just gets unfun fast as the LOC goes up.
Find a friend who passionate about coding and start working togather =) If you can't find such friends - find another good freelancer for that purpose =)

I believe ideally everyone should do just what he like the most =)
> It sounds like you were working on shovelware for EA or someone like that.

direct hit.

> find a small development shop which does it for fun and enjoyment just as much as for money.

i thought i'd found that at my present company but it's the same crap. i was really naive about this place.

> As for where to - what have you worked on

this is the most worrying part. i used to focus on graphics, but what these operations need is someone competent to deal with a broad range of issues. and that's what i've been shafted into doing.

> You make it sound like its dirty to have C++ experience!

i didn't mean for it to sound like that. i worry that people who make hiring decisions won't see beyond their keyword filters though.
But you're picking one aspect (distance) and attributing a lot of importance to it. Depending on who you are and what you want to do, that may not be the most important thing. For example, if you want to drive somewhere, the exact distance may not be overly important, but the intersections with larger roads probably is.
Going indie can work, but there's a ton of competition, and you have to work your arse off to make yourself a known commodity. Branding is important, and with so many platforms open to small developers, it's tough to know which ones to target. Aim too big, and you get swamped with other titles (iPhone). Aim too small, and no one will have a gadget that runs your title (PSP Go).

Getting coverage via engagements such as IGF and Indiecade helps a lot, but it's no guarantee of success. It's not impossible by any means, but I want to stress how much work it is, and what sort of timetable you'll be looking at to actually turn a profit from your first few titles. Expect your first games to break even at best, unless you have a truly imaginative idea and happen to hit the right platform at the right time.
If we are talking about Iceland then reading the primary historical sources has some value no?

And that fact the my then employer had enough pull with some very scary people to get a kidnap victim released from beruit doesn't make you think.
Viacom weren't exactly the most sympathetic of defendants.
Different strokes for different folks and all that. I'm not sure I could handle all the questions, personally, since I like to wander about randomly. As it happens, I think my sister and parents have me on "Find Friends" but they've given up trying to understand my life...
I'm going to start simulating buys/sells with history. Any reports that you feel would make it more amusing, let me know and I will add them ;)
By the way, such confusing issues (pun intended) can never arise in a system such as https://loom.cc/faq . There each asset type has a specific hexadecimal identifier, and the only way to create a liability is to issue a brand new distinct asset type.
Just to follow up, though I'm not sure if people keep up with threads this old. I actually found that video surf didn't give me recent enough videos for what I'm trying to accomplish with the internet search.
There's a way for me to make some money, but it requires that I setup a fairly complicated spreadsheet to monitor several variables.

A "complicated spreadsheet" isn't a requirement, it's a roadblock.

You're making it harder for yourself by putting obstacles in front of yourself and then wondering why it's so hard to make progress.

I want to be rich. Filthy rich, even.

Getting rich isn't the goal. It's a byproduct.

You never even mention what your startup is going to do, who it's going to help, or why you absolutely positively must do it. If you have something you must do, identify it and focus on it. If you don't, find it. Everything else, including money, is just a detail.

I take a break to 'clear my head'.

Clearing your head isn't a necessary step, it's an excuse. Again, if you have something you must do, you head is already plenty clear. If you don't, then what are you clearing your head for?

In summary:

1. Find what you must do.

2. Start doing it.

In case you don't have something you must do, then just do something, anything. The process of doing will probably help you find your mission. The processes of thinking, preparing tools, and dreaming about money probably won't.

A couple of minor pointers that have helped me:

1. If you have 2 computers, make one for work and the other for internet and put them in different rooms.

2. Throw your TV set into the dumpster.

3. When you have code to work on, be at your terminal, working on it (Mode 1).

4. When you don't have code to write, by anywhere but your terminal with pencil and paper handy (Mode 2).

5. Start every day in Mode 1 and end every day (probably in bed) in Mode 2. Ending the day in Mode 2 in requisite to being able to start in Mode 1 the next day.

6. Take care of yourself.
It sure is, I'd be rather worried having no disclaimer. How is this a bad thing?