jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
> Talking technical stuff to non technical is an enormous pain. The levels of dumbing down is near endless.

It's rare that a non-technical person expect that they will be able to understand lots of technical details after one conversation. More likely, they aren't especially interested in technical details.

They likely want to talk at a high-level about requirements and development schedules. If a software developer is unable to communicate effectively with people who aren't software developers, that's a skill they should work on.

Lawyers, accountants, architects, and doctors, for instance, are expected to be able to speak with people from outside their profession. (I see wfme already mentioned doctors.)

> Not everyone has to be able to explain their product to the masses

That strikes me as unambitious. If software developers have earned a reputation for being unable to communicate effectively, that's unfortunate. The answer isn't to invent a whole new profession to fill the gap.

The only line of work I can think of that outsources communication with 'the masses' is science. I suppose there's an analogy between scientist/science communicator and engineer/marketer, but I imagine science communicators tend to be more technically literate.
Love that this is basically a huge 'potato gun'.
Deep Channel | Full-Stack Engineer | Remote | Full Time
Deep Channel is building the next generation of tools for data professionals (data engineers, data scientists, etc). Our mission is to reshape the toolchain of the modern data team, building the most advanced tools across the analytics lifecycle.

We're a fully remote team and are looking to bring on Full-Stack engineers - our stack revolves around Node.js, TypeScript, and React.

We are well funded, offer competitive compensation, equity, and a four day work week!

You can read the more formal JD here:

https://jobs.lever.co/DeepChannel/b11ba2a2-b922-4152-9b8c-f8...
Hey, that's really useful/helpful info! I'll endorse TestDisk/PhotoRec as a mechanism for recovering deleted files, should be appropriate for most (though you might want a trusted tech savvy person to execute this recovery). The System Rescue CD includes these packages.

http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/PhotoRec

http://www.sysresccd.org/SystemRescueCd_Homepage
I didn't take it as disingenuous, I just found the sentence funny.
I don't understand the benefit ???

This seems like unnecessary overhead for any startup software companies, costing both extra time and money while overloading your server right out the gates.

Instead of expecting 100 requests per min from say like 20 users, I can now expect 1000s+ to my server because I'm sending every keystroke to the server ???

That means I'll need a super expensive instance to handle all those users and this is in the extremely conservative use-case of 20 users at once.

No thanks.
God forbid people be allowed to invest their money the way they want. Maybe we should also ban lottery tickets. Also we should make gambling illegal in Vegas. I hear alcohol, cigarettes, and other vices are also bad for people.

You're right, there are uninformed people buying into the hype. But who are you to tell them how to spend their money? Why are you such an authority on their autonomy?
Pinkerton are the corporate security company of choice for a lot of organisations...including Facebook
That's an interesting thing to consider.

Unless they subsidize, New Glenn will have to be quite expensive. As the announcement says, they spent 3.5 billion just on a factory and a launchpad, and they are years away from launching.

Amazon, as such a high visibility public company, may have a hard time justifying a 2X+ price difference versus launching on Falcons, and for Starship the difference could be significantly more.

It's also questionable if Amazon is willing to wait 3 years to get any significant amount of sats into orbit. That will give Starlink a big advantage.

Of course SpaceX also has an incentive to delay Kuiper, so they might not bid for it at all, or only provide very limited availability.
Well we did just have a congressional hearing where it was suggested that people should be able to get refunds on their stock purchases for 30 or 60 days so.....

It seems people have seen the "Socialize the losses" that the government has been doing in many industries and instead of recognizing it as corruptions and advocating its elimination they say "I gotta get me some of that"

Of course that is a game of musical chairs and when the music stops the dollar will be worth less than toilet paper but.....
Well not immortality but really really good cyclists for the Tour de France.
This ties into the whole issue with bloated valuations [1]. VC's are paying for preferred shares and other deal points that make all classes of shares appear to outsiders to be vastly more valuable than they are. Employees then wind up paying inflated taxes on value that doesn't actually exist. The valuations are mostly made up, but the taxes are very real.

[1] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-17/the-fuzzy-...
But if he doesn't hold the stock for at least one year, he gets short-term capital gains rate of 35%, rather than the long-term one of 15%, which might tip the scale the other way.

But then again, if he exercises in one year and does not sell that year, he gets the tax bill in the exercise year, potentially with no way to cover it.

It's a lot more complicated than it should be.
Good or bad, to some extent, 'conspicuous consumption' in the form of saying 'Hey, look I can afford it' led to the rise and mainstreaming of more natural farming, aka 'organics'. This is arguably a good thing. In addition we get avant garde chefs who can improve our diets by popularizing better food choices and preparation methods, initially at the expense of the reviled trendsetters and overconsumers.
Not just leverage over their employees, but they (ie: not pinterest, but most companies) also get to claw back all the options left un-exercised by employees that do quit.
I think it's fair to say that pithy ways of explaining the point and mechanism of currying are important. The terms you've been exploring here are definitely in that bucket.
> Why do some people like to pretend to be anti-consumption while engaged in an economy based on consumption?

You are so right, hold on a sec while I just step out of the economy we live in, into a the next economy. Because it is so easy to do. Why bother trying to change anything, when all we have to do is to take a single step into the new better economy?

Because we have no choice. If I choose not to pollute, I am still going to die from everyone else doing it.
Europe: http://www.hetzner.de/uk/hosting/produktmatrix/rootserver and http://www.1and1.co.uk
Hi everyone, I'm the founder of StoryWorth, AMA!
Slide deck from the lead author introducing his diagrams:

https://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/ss2014/programme/Bob.pdf
I feel like they could take an anti-censorship, pro-privacy stance and target the 49% that is being de-platformed. Could partner with the Ben Shapirbros of YT getting millions of followers to download Firefox to avoid 'socialist google'. Maybe fund a decentralized, privacy-focused social network/messaging app. Maybe jump on the crypto hype train.

Mozilla's lameness is really the result of privilege and possibly a lack of incentives. When execs get 10m/yr for writing blogs about sexual socialism and BLM, why innovate?
What are the other options you would want to replace those proven technologies with? Sure, there are better semiconductor materials but they're expensive and already used where it makes economical sense. Nanotubes or graphene can't be handled at scale yet. Superconductors need huge contraptions for cooling. Using organic molecules is messy, see OLED.
Optical parts might help, but that is difficult with silicon which brings us back to the other semiconductor options. Spintronics are already being put to use but those things have eye-watering prices.

Look at intel, even incremental changes can go wrong and cost you competitiveness.
Why don't you read at least the abstracts of links you post? None of the links says that. One of the links mentions epigenetic changes which can propagate, that's something quite different from mutating genetics.
>"The World If <my pet policy was implemented>">"The World If <my pet policy was implemented>"

http://eduard-heindl.de/energy-storage/energy-storage-system...

Well, we would get cheap energy storage and cheap energy. No promises of a superior future, just a cheaper future.
Linux is software, Linux is economically worth a lot, Linux isn't artificially scarce.
> It does one thing well

The importance of this engineering principle cannot be overstated. It applies to everything - from home appliances to spacecraft to software.
I don't see how the ability to automate drawings of the figures in your Concepts example makes either a student's or teacher's life easier. If anything it just overwhelms a reader with excessive visual information.

Typing on a smartphone, using a word processor, or drawing on a digital tablet hasn't produce better communicators, typists or artists. People today can accomplish tasks faster, but not necessarily better. If you and I were having this conversation 100 years ago, I'd be typing these words on a mechanical typewriter, on a piece of paper which would reach you in a couple of weeks. If anything, the quality of my writing would probably have been better in that scenario. Same goes for tablets: there are lots of "learn to draw" apps on my iPad - but do they make it easier to learn how to draw? I'm not sure. The things I need to learn don't change significantly whether I draw on a tablet or on paper. The apps can certainly help me draw something, or even draw something for me, just like a human teacher would. And that's great, but it does not lead to any significant changes in how I learn or how I think.

If you want to change how people think, you should focus on that, on the thinking part, not on the tools. When you succeed in that, you end up with something like this: http://worrydream.com/LadderOfAbstraction/ To me, the visualizations there is an ornament that makes the ideas a little more entertaining, a lubricant that makes the material a little easier to follow. However, if you remove all those diagrams and animations you don't really lose much - everything in that essay is described in words well enough to get the idea across. In fact, if you try to read it carefully while deliberately ignoring any visual information, you might actually get more out of it! That is not to say visualization are useless. Sometimes a picture is indeed worth a thousand words. Sometimes it does make learning dramatically easier. This has been true for thousands of years, and the recent technology you mentioned does not really change much in this regard.
Please don't do this here.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13862350 and marked it off-topic.
Entertaining University department page (with link to publications): http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~ulf/levitation.html
It doesn't matter how many people you test, because you can't establish a credible offer of that much money. Can you describe a situation that you could actually set up in which a woman would think she was more likely to get a million pounds than to get dragged into a basement, tortured, raped, and murdered? Of course both of those scenarios would be far outside chances compared to the chances that somebody was just trying to play a humiliating joke on her or steal her identity.

The question a woman's brain is really engaged with in these scenarios is, "What's the safest way to deal with this situation?" That applies even if she actually knows you and is a modern liberal woman, because she's got to walk a line between seeming prudish or dishonest and triggering the insecurity thats lurk in every male breast.

[Edit: sorry for all the unacknowledged edits; since HN has no "preview" button I just post and edit.]
Why in 2015 are we flying paper half-way around the world?

Doesn't Amazon (and others) have a print-on-demand service that would be more cost effective and not waste the fuel of flying 20lbs of paper across an ocean?
> The type of person that stormed the capitol will perceive this as an escalation. I’m sure that’s not what we need, but I’m also sure that there is no good way out of this mess.

I actually think that the reason we are in this mess is because there have been zero consequences for terrible behavior, so far.

Of all the terrible things Trump has done, it has taken inciting a riot, an attempted overthrow of our democratically elected government, for him to loose his megaphone. Why was incarcerating children at the border not enough? Or encouraging those "fine people" in Charlottesville who murdered a woman? Or one of the many other instances of him spewing hate?

We need more accountability. Actions have consequences, and it is long overdue that those people who take irresponsible, harmful actions, either out of desire for personal gain or sheer idiocy, start feeling the consequences.

The right is supposedly the side to which "law and order" appeals. Trump and his people are exactly the kind of people who need to know that they will get punished to the full extent of the law when they misbehave. That's the only thing that will keep them in line.

Because it's not like they have a moral compass to fall back on.
It is natural for journalists to have the notion that the rest of us much care about how they got their information. The curious thing is that sometimes they are correct. Mostly, I'd like an assurance that the information is accurate.
The Times intentionally left that out. Notwithstanding earlier inflammatory language, this is the exact quote:

“I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard today.”

You may believe that the word “patriotically” was a dog-whistle, but none of the headlines characterized the statement correctly.
What percentage of modern "news" articles use tweets as the primary source of research?

I'd guess the average "news" article today includes at least 1 tweet.

It's dumb, but Twitter has become where journalism happens.
Except in Texas ;)

I wouldn't be averse to depth charging a fiber optic cable (more specifically - damaging their ability to operate the great firewall) so long as there are no human casualties. Even better if it could be done without disrupting Chinese Internet.

Unfortunately, most people's response would be "What's a GitHub"?
Because something hasn't happened yet it can't is your claim?

In no way are worst case scenarios for nuclear better than coal/oil. For example, we don't have the capability to evacuate nyc or san diego.
Problem is, without thinking about
the likely meaning, at first glance
it's not clear what 'gradually' modifies,
that is, it may modify 'wants', that
is, her wanting is only gradual and
not yet full; such are some of the
possibilities of subtlety of meaning
with the English
language!
To be fair, the real issue here is 'strncpy', whose destination argument does _not_ operate on C strings, despite that it's name starts with 'str'.
I am pleasantly surprised to find a Chinese sentence on the TARDIS Go website :) That sentence - "请发送一份汉语的电子邮件到作者" - is a perfectly comprehensible, but you can sound more Chinese. For the amusement of the Chinese-illiterate, I have included a word-by-word English translation of each sentence.

* Put the preposition phrase before the verb, which is the usual order. That turns "请发送一份汉语的电子邮件到作者" (please send a Chinese email towards author) into "请向作者发送一份汉语的电子邮件" (please towards author send a Chinese email). I have also changed the preposition from "到" to "向".

* Drop the unnecessary quantifier and "的". Chinese defaults on "a" most of the time, and "的" is often not needed for noun phrases. That turns "请向作者发送一份汉语的电子邮件" into "请向作者发送汉语电子邮件" (please towards author send Chinese email).

* Use "写" (write) instead of "发送" (send). The latter is a direct translation from English and not very native. Also "电子邮件" (email) can just be "邮件" (mail), especially when on-line. That turns "请向作者发送汉语电子邮件" into "请给作者写汉语邮件" (please towards author write Chinese mail). I have changed the preposition again, from "向" to "给".

* Prefer composite verb phrases over adjectives for describing means (here, the mail is written in Chinese). That turns "请给作者写汉语邮件" into "请用汉语给作者写邮件" (please use Chinese towards author write mail).

That's pretty it. Actually, "请用汉语给作者写邮件" is how I would write the sentence, and I figured out a path from your version towards mine :)

PS1. About the preposition changes - yes, "到", "向", and "给" all mean "towards" in this case, and I cannot really explain why I changed them. I can probably point to some literature if you are interested...

PS2. Another tiny detail: since you are already using the Chinese period mark "。" I recommend you also to use the Chinese question mark "？" in the previous sentence for consistency.
Was the Atlantic slave trade about race though? I don’t think that the tragedy that was the slave trade enslaved people because they were black, but because they were sub-Saharan Africans. I think it would have worked the same with any race that had been in those cultures.

There wasn’t a law or practice of enslaving people based on their skin color. As evidenced by the free blacks in other areas of the world that weren’t enslaved.

I think the racial stereotypes came about based on the race of the slaves, not the other way around.
That's not universally true, and by subscribing to it you limit the flexibility possible for remote work to similar 9-5 constraints regular work has. In many businesses, remote work doesn't have to be regular work but at home, and for many of us who have been doing it since before the pandemic that is actually the big draw.

Asynchronous by default means everyone is free to work when they are most productive and capable, and it really doesn't matter so long as the work gets done on time.

Funnily enough, remote work for everyone has meant some remote positions have actually gotten worse, as the line between remote lifestyle worker and regulr employee working from home has been blurred.
Reading this list just gives me a head-rush of joyous giddiness. Take that, craven old conservatives and naysayers!

"Men might as well project a voyage to the Moon as attempt to employ steam navigation against the stormy North Atlantic Ocean."

- Dr. Dionysus Lardner (1793-1859), Professor of Natural Philosophy and Astronomy at University College, London.
Based on my experience with 1and1 as a registrar and as a host, I recommend not depending on them for anything, ever. They have atrocious customer service. Which is fine, as long as everything works (and if they're just your registrar, things should be fine, most of the time). However, when things stop working is when you need good customer service, and that's the point at which 1and1 will fall flat on their face.
Thinly veiled ad for a hosting company, and a lot of unclear or just plain wrong bits ("25 terabytes = 1,000 gigabytes"). Flagged.
I am thinking more system wide. It was not uncommon for people to hit the home button as a sort of "escape".
If you want to give it a try, I'd be happy to work with you (contact me off my blog)
Maybe I'm old, but 424kbps does not seem like a low data rate, particularly for a passively powered RF device.
If you're counting peak annual rate rather than total deflation then part of 1920-1921 was worse than 1929-1933, but if we're talking about momentary deflation then neither was the worst deflation in US history.

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Historical_Inflation_An...
We provide free web-based accounting software to FaceCash merchants. http://www.facecash.com
This is the exact same thing as believing in God and the afterlife.
I thought the author was trying to get at the old Babbage quote on confusion of ideas.

FWIW, I use git-svn to handle complex merges in svn because git has a better merge algorithm. While this particular situation doesn't affect that use case - I think it could, but it should be rare with (svn) branch discipline - the fact that it might is something to keep in mind.
This is great! Here are my takeaways from that article.

1. Easy writing makes for hard reading; invest in editing and treat your reader like a customer

2. What’s the biggest difference between great writers and all the rest? It’s not talent, it’s treating the process like a product

3. Make it skimmable; expect that your reader is busy

4. Every word should serve a purpose

5. Your points should fit like a jigsaw puzzle, each connected to another
Is it illegal for them to hire me (or ask me and direct me) to shovel their sidewalk for free or not? Does the legality depend on their making billions?

I think you’re crossing legal and moral arguments. I might decide to shovel my fixed-income pensioner neighbor’s sidewalk for free while deciding to not shovel Larry Ellison’s sidewalk on the other side of my property even if he asked nicely (which I doubt he would).

That’s a moral/ethical choice on my part, but the law everywhere probably allows that transaction.

If you don’t want to contribute your time, skills, and attention to open-source, I don’t see anyone suggesting that you be forced to do so. You are the one claiming that there’s something that ought to be illegal about it, with which I disagree.
FYI, the CEO’s salary, including all bonuses, is $650k. Charity navigator says only 17% of donations to this specific charity (sesame workshop) would go to administration. https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/132655731
I thought this was going to be about xxHash, which is awesome
But would you have trusted your secrets on a 3yr old linux?
> Have you considered the logical endpoint of your line of reasoning?

In fact I have. In my estimation, if we adopted a model of interaction that emphasizes consent, the incapable and unfortunate among us would rely on charity to have their needs met, as they have for most of history. This seems much more ethical than to rely on force through taxation. It can't be compassionate to impose your idea of compassion onto other unwilling people.

It is also worth noting that as long as we consume goods made by people in conditions we don't tolerate domestically, we're being wildly hypocritical. All we've done is offshore the suffering, and in the process massively harm the environment shipping things to and from more lenient jurisdictions.

> In a world that worked so hard over centuries to create modern healthcare, we should only use it for people who barely need it. We may have literally figured out how to transplant organs and save lives, but nah its too expensive so why bother?

It should be reserved for those who can afford to pay for it. If you want a modern operating theatre, filled with expensive equipent and highly educated people, someone has to pay for it regardless of whether it's for yourself or for your horse. I'm only saying that the person who pays should do so consensually.

Likewise, if all you can afford is a street dentist with rusty tools, then I don't see from where one derives entitlement to anything else. As mentioned earlier, we already buy things made by people who live in such conditions, so the point is moot.

> Anyways, your worldview is fucked. Hope you think much more deeply about it. Or just grow old in the world you wish for, maybe one day you will need surgery, insurance will reject you, banks will not loan you the $200k it costs, and you will die for the sake of the algorithms and profit maximization.

This all may be, but I will be dying with my dignity intact, not greedily reaching into the pocket of a stranger, deluded into thinking I'm entitled to what's inside.