skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The "as a service" model is useful for B2B, but many consumers hate it.

It has additional hidden fees everywhere, and in the overall view it often turns out to be more expensive than the classical model. From cheap Airlines (a 1€ flight with 40€ fee for using a credit card, and 5€ fee per kg of body weight) to "all-inclusive" Hotels (with extra fees per minute spent in the pool) to the cloud.

For example:

I can get a server with Intel® Xeon® E3-1270 v3, 32GB RAM and 4TB HDD for 70€ a month as dedicated server at Hetzner.

Or I can get a "Quad Core" with 8GB of RAM and 80GB of SSD for the same price at DigitalOcean.

The pricing of the "as a service" things is insane for the minor benefit in convenience they provide.

And a lot of the hobby users hate it – be it Adobe’s Creative Cloud (hobby users used to just buy one version and stick with it for years) – be it JetBrains new subscription model, etc.
> its not as if the current Turkish government is universally liked within NATO.

Credibility as a bulwark against Russia with Eastern European NATO members and partners, OTOH, is probably universally liked within NATO, and sacrificing one without sacrificing the other would be quite tricky.
So from slide 2 of that link:

Note, the green life along the Nile river and the dead desert elsewhere. When co2 is greater in the atmosphere, plants
need less water to thrive.
When dinosaurs roamed we had 3 to 5 times current co2 and planet was nearly all green, pole-to-pole
Near catastrophe when co2 declined to 180 ppm, since below 150 ppm plants, then animals die.
If you promote a green healthy planet, then you should lobby for a co2-fertilized atmosphere, not a co2-starved
atmosphere.

If that's the argument you open with, then as an engineer you have missed the point entirely.
Good point. If you're interested in living in the same place continuously, signing a longer lease is perfect.

I think a futures exchange is a bit more flexible though because:
1. Longer leases are often not available
2. People often want to move apartments after, e.g., having a baby
Thanks. Is this at the power rails on the motherboard or at the AC plug in the wall?

ADDED. the "300 Watts" in your (added) second paragraph makes me strongly suspect that the measurements are from the wall socket / power cord. OK, so did you disconnect the power to any disk drives or graphics cards? Anything special about the power supply? (There are special, "green," extra-efficient power supplies.)
This is really interesting, the full story is told here:

http://www.wfnmc.org/mc20101.pdf

During the years 2002–2004 I was visiting Princeton University with its
fabulous mathematics department, a great fixture of which was a daily 3 to 4 PM coffee hour in the commons room, attended by everyone, from students to the Beautiful Mind (John F. Nash Jr.). For one such coffee hour, in February 2004, I came thinking—for the hundredth time
in my life—about the network of evenly spaced parallel lines cutting a
triangle into small congruent triangles. This time I dealt with equilateral triangles, and the crux of the matter was a demonstration that n2 unit
triangles can cover a triangle of side n. I asked myself a question where
the continuous clashes with the discrete: what if we were to enlarge the
side length of the large triangle from n to n+ε, how many unit triangles
will we need to cover it? This comprised a new open problem:
Cover-Up Problem 1. Find the minimum number of unit equilateral
triangles required to cover an equilateral triangle of side n + ε.
During the next coffee hour, I posed the problem to a few Princeton
colleagues. The problem immediately excited John H. Conway, the John
von Neumann Professor of Mathematics. From the commons room he
went to the airport, to fly to a conference. On board the airplane, John
found a way (Figure 1) to do the job with just n2+2 unit triangles! (Area
considerations alone show the need for at least n2 + 1 of them.) Conway
shared his cover-up with me upon his return—at a coffee hour, of course.
Now it was my turn to travel to a conference, and have quality time on
28
Mathematics Competitions Vol 23 No 1 2010
an airplane. What I found (Figure 2) was a totally different cover-up
with the same number, n2 + 2 unit triangles!
Upon my return, at a coffee hour, I shared my cover-up with John
Conway. We decided to publish our results together. John suggested
setting a new world record in the number of words in a paper, and
submitting it to the American Mathematical Monthly. On April 28,
2004, at 11:50 AM (computers record the exact time!), I submitted our
paper that included just two words, “n2 + 2 can” and our two drawings.
I am compelled to reproduce our submission here in its entirety.
Mind you, since 2012 Turkey consider their airspace anything 5km south of their border with Syria, thus why they keep complaining of Russia invading their Airspace (even when Russia is fighting rebels inside Syria, they are inside Turkish airspace by Turkey definition).
To be fair there's nothing you can do in VB that you can't do in C# with an order of magnitude more available talent. Half my VS extensions are C#-only, to boot.
As you seemed to acknowledge yourself, QALYs don't really affect my original argument because unless you're ascribing negative utility to the remainder of the patient's lifespan, hastening a patient's death in the hope that it might have some effect on an incalculably small probability of future resuscitation still has a negative impact on QALYs. A fantasy of massively expanded future lifespan in perfect health multiplied by a probability best estimated at zero is still zero, to the best knowledge of all medics involved in the process.

If patients are making decisions to shorten their lifespan it should be on the basis of suffering less pain rather than subscribing to pseudoscientific twaddle about unforeseeable sufficiently advanced technological magic. The OP seemed to think the latter should have been prioritised if legal.

Its rather tiresome when people accuse me of being "unwilling or unable to address a point" after they've already parenthetically acknowledged it doesn't really change anything.
I count 14 words (11 in the title, 1 in the body + 2 times "figure"), not 2. And 14 more if you count the authors names and affiliation as words.
> How well-known is SAP in the USA?

Extremely.

SAP runs in almost every industrial, manufacturing and consumer goods company in the US (and around the world).

ABAP is an important skill to those companies running SAP (in particular: running SAP ERP, because ABAP is not the stack for SAP's other products). But unlike Java and .NET, you will never see companies hiring ABAP programmers in the dozens, because the ERP platform is driven by extensive configuration rules rather than just coding.

ABAP is not the tool to drive major custom development - and chances are, such large-scale custom development has already been done in the early 2000s and now they are all in support mode.
That's fairly ad hominem. Can you give some examples?
The alternative is a system in which you aren't penalized for earning slightly more. The current system disincentives work in all sorts of silly ways. Just give everybody money directly (i.e. a basic income).
I've been waiting for a while to implement my algorithms on Quantopian without having to pay IB, this is great!
When it comes to real climate change data - nothing can substitute glaciology data.

This is a good graph for you. Holocene temperature variations. Ironically it was quite warmer just 8 thousand years ago. Look, no cars, no cows, no industry... and it _was warmer_.
Thanks. Looks like jquery's not loading. either it's because of load, or perhaps you have javascript blocked? (more likely somehow load related. I'll take a look)
A framework abstracts away common patterns so you don't have to reinvent the wheel all the time. That being said, not everyone agree on what are the same common patterns or the best way to solve them, hence why there's so many frameworks.
I have a controversial opinion on this topic: I don't think it is morally ethical to use inefficient languages in high duty-cycle applications. By "high duty-cycle applications" I specifically refer to environments which consistently consume the bulk of available CPU resources: big web servers, caching intermeddiate servers, etc. The common rationale is to trade off engineering time for CPU time. But that trade also means trading engineering time for carbon emissions, too.
You're absolutely wrong. Here are two examples of human activity having global, negative effects:

1. Our use of CFCs caused global ozone depletion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_depletion#Antarctic_ozon...

2. Our use of leaded gas caused global lead poisoning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead#History_of_cont...
Nuclear is low-carbon, but it's not renewable. Earth has a set amount of uranium that is destroyed when creating energy.

Currently we have about 200 years of uranium available for economical extraction. But if we tried to replace all coal with nuclear, we would be out within a few decades. Then we'd need to move to other non-renewable materials (thorium?) or start mining astroids.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-long-will-glob...

And the mining of uranium looks awfully similar to the mining of coal. (Of course you need far fewer uranium mines for the same amount of energy.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_mining#/media/File:Ara...
thanks, and it led me to find Turtle Geometry which looks like it could be an interesting book.
An idea, maybe it makes sense to cut the key video parts into gifs and put it there to have a visual feedback on what "Code Intelligence" actually means.

Just my opinion. Code Intelligence and smart search are just too vague and a bit buzz sounding so my in-brain buzz-blocker ignored it.

Once you see the video, all is clear. This looks awesome.
However, in practice nonfree software is often malware, because the developer's awareness that the users would be powerless to fix any malicious functionalities tempts the developer to impose some.

Speaking as a professional software developer who typically does not write free software: [expletives inappropriate for HN deleted]

The allegation that any developer who does not share the FSF's views on the advantages or otherwise of free software is inherently more tempted to screw their users is not only wrong, it's offensive. I have never imposed any of the kinds of malware listed in this article on any user of any project I work on, nor would I be happy to do so in the future. This is more than can be said for several popular software products that also happen to be FOSS.

Also, the idea that Microsoft, or any other commercial software provider for that matter, should be responsible for supporting its software indefinitely, entirely at its own expense and regardless of context, is just silly. I think it is sensible to expect and if necessary legally require a basic level of support for commercial software products that were defective when first supplied, for some reasonable period that will probably vary greatly with context. In practice, actual regulation or legislation has rarely been necessary as most major software vendors have volunteered such support anyway, though the unwelcome trend is for this to change and so the regulatory/legal framework may need to change to match. However, Microsoft has, at least until recently, gone far beyond that industry norm in terms of long term support for its older software, and far beyond any major Free Software project. It might have been fair to say that Microsoft was the last very large software company that should be criticised on this score, but for their recent shifts in policy to much more user-hostile terms.
You need to interview at better places, I think :)
Ironically when this site was built in 2011 a designer was used http://99designs.co.uk/web-design/contests/fast-growing-web-...

Let's just say it's not aged well.
> HN readers will be unhappy to read ...

> HN readers will probably thrilled to read ...

I'm unhappy to read this, which does not help the tone of the conversation, and is a counter-productive rhetorical maneuver. It attempts to pre-emptively pidgeonhole people who disagree rather than to learn about what they really think and, gosh forbid, value their opinions and learn from them.
If you're an engineer and you want to help enable sustainable deployment of solar power infrastructure, my company Genability is hiring for all kinds of roles right now. http://genability.com/careers/work_with_us.html
I would have never imagined that salespeople deter customers from buying electric cars. But I think this could be used as a great selling point: The cars are so low maintenance make less money on more expensive vehicles.

Also, this situation is yet another reason why companies like Tesla need to be able to sell direct-to-consumers.
My goal has always been to support a wide-variety of devices.

As for the name, I cannot take credit. There is a good story behind it though. ;)

As for the need, I sort of explained the motivation this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10622675. Data management would drastically reduce the development effort associated with data-intensive applications for smaller devices, in an IoT setting or otherwise. I've actually recently travelled to the University of Michigan to talk about this work, and got lots of good feedback. One of the professors invited me and has asked me to study with him, because he feels there is a need. One of his graduate students there is working on integrating LittleD into some of his work already!
Problem is that their old place will go back to the market on a new lease and, in popular areas, twice the rent.

Also, if you've been in your current apartment for 5+ years, changing apartments effectively means double rent for you. Everybody I know who has an OK apartment in Berlin stays there, because an extra room etc. would mean 500-1000 Euros rent increase.
I wonder if the $100,000 machine cost vs $100 sensor cost is mixing apples and oranges. Maybe the $100 is just hardware, while the $100,000 represents hardware, a repeatable process to manufacture the hardware, the costs of certifying the design, the particular instance hardware and the process that manufactured it, etc...

This doesn't mean that in the end a lower cost imaging capability isn't possible.
Army ant algorithms to make deliveries more efficient
Sourcegraph CEO here. Thanks for the feedback. We are working on making this smoother/clearer, but the way it works is that the license refers to the posted pricing. The posted pricing on Sourcegraph.com says $0 for teams of any size for the non-enterprise features. When you exceed 15 users, there is also a license you'll receive that explicitly says that, but we wanted to keep it simple when you are just getting started (and not require people to click through a EULA).
> It's like saying: "I don't want anybody else to buy a car, because they might get a Mercedes, which I cannot afford."

It's funny how often envy is a motivating factor behind socialism.
How needlessly pedantic.
For manufacturing defects, there are no doubt processes you can do to make them manifest more frequently so you can detect them. I imagine a lot of defects are temperature-dependent, so you're probably testing hot chips to force that. Errors while reading and writing can be made to happen more often by repeatedly reading and writing in a tight cycle. Errors from radio interference could be tested with artificial radio noise. The idea, I imagine, is to try to test the equivalent of X years of real-world use in only Y days of lab time.

But cosmic rays are just a constant background thing. If an errant cosmic ray flips a bit, that doesn't happen any more often if you hammer on the chips or heat them up or expose them to radio waves or whatever. The only way to simulate X years of real-world use is to use them for X years, short of setting up a particle accelerator or something. (Technically, you could simulate X years of real-world cosmic ray exposure in X/N years by testing N sets of RAM in parallel, but then that requires you to have more ram under test than you give to your customers!)

All the same, I'm sure more mundane explanations are behind the vast majority of errors, as you say.
The C/C++ client, will that be librdkafka? If I need a high-quality client for another language, would you recommend building that using librdkafka or the rest proxy?
> There are only so many people capable of dropping 200,000$ on an hour-long thrill ride.

You obviously haven't been hanging around wealthy people. Even just being a student in London you witness nights out costing spoiled kids more than that.

Ok, slight hyperbole. But there is no shortage of nouveau riche in this world ready to spend on some high-status thrill.
People pay a premium for the currently 50+ other integrated services in the AWS ecosystem they can leverage vs. spending time and money doing it themselves if they went with another provider, dedicated hosts are no different re: pricing.
It's funny that the behavior that caused the author to blow the interview is also perfectly demonstrated in the article. The author moves from a specific issue (not correctly anticipating what the the interviewer wants to hear) to generalizing in a much broader context ;)
I think it's great that there are self-hosted options like this. But what's with the blatant copying of github's design? (Especially the icons... they're not even good icons, just kind of randomly chosen by github for various actions)
Blue Origin has announced an orbital booster, and will be using at least the engine from New Shepard for its upper stage (presumably with some tweaks for improved efficiency at high altitude). They've hinted at much grander plans, although not with the specificity of SpaceX's "we're going to Mars". So it's reasonable to grade them on the same curve.

For suborbital space tourism, BTW, that New Shepard engine is phenomenally over-engineered. Even the fuel choice is surprising; liquid hydrogen is the highest-energy chemical fuel you can get, but it is nasty stuff to handle. (For starters, it diffuses right through the crystal grids of many metals, making your piping brittle and creating an invisible fire hazard outside of it.) So even the design of the current vehicle hints at building tooling for a much grander vision; if a large suborbital sounding rocket was all they wanted, they could have gotten it much more quickly and easily than by building what they have.
Currently #2 on Product Hunt!
https://www.producthunt.com/tech/teleport-86008a3b-c3eb-4cae...
I just cited history rather than ignored it. That included Burrough's and LISP machines as examples past my linked essay in this thread. However, your side is ignoring all historical examples of proprietary OSS and even how non-proprietary OSS operated then vs now. Old model of academia varied from MIT/BSD-style to paid w/ source model.

So, your rendering of open-source history is false both in academia and commercial sector. It's always been a mix with proprietary favoring closed source due to financial incentives, especially lock-in. Nothing precluded more paid OSS strategies aside from culture of organizations involved. As dual-licensed projects and proprietary w/ OSS benefits like this one show.
Good God. I joined a startup this year after over a decade at Fortune-500s. It is eye-opening. The founder convinced us to hire our friends as contractors, then constantly pushes out payments. One time, he tried to have me talk to my friend "we're doing you a favor by paying you both payments at once (at the date of the later payment) -- now you only have to go to the bank once."

The unethical nature of management is a problem, but trying to get me to sell the snake oil is even worse.
The point is reuse of a core stage of a launch vehicle. Both Blue Origin's vehicle and SpaceX's are launch vehicles, one is sub-orbital the other is orbital. Reusing either makes their respective launches cheaper and easier, but because the launches themselves are vastly different the implications of that reuse are also vastly different.
As usual with this kind of thing, I've spent about five minutes looking round the site just to get a general feel of the thing. Here are my first impressions:

1. This is a great idea. I'm /always/ looking for book recommendations and I find that Goodreads doesn't do the job for me.

2. Thank you for giving me a 'Not yet, I just want to look around' button. This turned a potentially irritating moment to a moment of 'Huh... that's a nice touch'.

3. I'm afraid I say that I think the design is horrible. Not necessarily layout, but more the CSS, e.g. the background colour, the style of the buttons, etc.

4. I think there's too much stuff in the navbar at the top. This includes a few things that I don't really know what to do with. It's all a bit cluttered, and that makes me a bit anxious. Couldn't this be stripped down a bit?

5. The menu is absolutely full of options, some of which seem a bit repetitive. I've got 'Edit my authors', 'Edit my channels', 'Personalise', etc. Isn't there a way all this kind of stuff can be put in one place?

6. When I click 'Edit authors', I'm not really sure why I have to do this on a separate page (or indeed why I'm telling you about /authors/ I like). Can't I just tell you which books I like?

7. I don't really know what 'My Articles' is. I wouldn't mind something that /only/ dealt with books.

8. Loading times are a /bit/ on the slow side, especially on the 'Recommendations' page.

Conclusion: Interesting idea, so I've signed up. For me, the biggest thing that needs to improve is the general look of the site (not necessarily layout, but the CSS), followed by the fact that everything feels a bit cluttered.

This is all just my opinion, though...!
And whose solution was simple (even if not immediately easy to achieve).

[Edit for focus: And whose solution was obvious.]
It's gotten a lot worse in the past two years, more like 60 people showing up for attractive places and the whole job / income / vouching paperwork dance even for small apartments in the 500 Euro range.
What are the russians going to do? Start a nuclear war over some ego smear?
They could have not done that. It's been an issue for months.
Unless there will actually be a major conflict now, I think it's the best thing that could have happened. The russians are now in a corner - whatever they do short of going WWII Japan will be a loosing move.
My dad just did one of the NASCAR/Indy car race experience things. There is no {tach,speed}ometer in the cockpit. I gather they don't want you looking anywhere but the track.

Related: target fixation.
Weather resistant building design, for example, concrete dome construction.
It's pretty obvious that there is a clear bias from the beginning, and the tone is revealing as well.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10622660
The Fair Source license is an interesting innovation. Will individuals within large companies try out Fair Source software like they do open source software? Will teams adopt it without knowing whether there are other users at the company, opening themselves to violating the license terms? Will anyone look at the source in depth and contribute back?

I’m all for (ethical) innovations that enable companies to be built more efficiently... Ideology aside, it’s often practical matters that attract users and developers to open source software. They've chosen a different point along in the “how much to give away and under what restrictions” space to try out.

Thoughtful experimentation = good. That doesn't mean it will succeed. But failing to try new things will lead to less efficient innovation in the long run for our industry.
Thank you for the candid response.