skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You remember from what?

From illiterate journos or YouTube comments?

Apple sued Samsung for cloning.

Samsung has been copying Apple to the millimeter, they have discovered a book with ways they should copy Apple, and they were spreading misinformation to the consumer like "Samsung makes the iPhone for Apple", or "it's like the iPhone, but bigger and better", and other BS.

Also, there is no problem in making a rectangular phone, but making the edges EXACTLY the same radius as Apple's? That ridiculous.

Samsung more than deserved what they got, from their advertising, where they attacked Apple users and offended them. For that reason, I will never buy a Samsung device, even if it's 100x better and 1/100 of the price of an Apple's (or everyone else) equivalent.

And their unilateral comparisons to Apple on their product announcements? Ahah, ridiculous!
In my case I think I avoid HN video links because I know in advance that they will ask me to commit an exact amount of time to it without knowing whether it will be worth it in the end. With text on the other hand, I can easily start to read an article and begin to skim it once I see that it isn't as interesting as I thought it'd be.
Moderate inflation is in the interest of working people. While their incomes increase capital is eroded. That the minimum wage was not raised in line with inflation was a political choice.

The past 20 years have seen historically low inflation and interest rates. It's this fall in inflation and interest rates that has transferred so much wealth to property owners.

In cities where the supply of land is limited, the price of a home works out at about the level where your mortgage payments roughly equal what you'd pay in rent. Thus when interest rates are low for long enough house prices go up to compensate. With higher house prices the downpayment required also increases, making it harder to get on the first rung of the ladder. When inflation was high, people quickly built equity in their homes (since the mortgage principal is fixed but the value of your home rises with inflation.)
Tough luck you.

Apple wasn't barred after all...
I'd suggest this is more of an endorsement of free trade. (That is, no external party forced you to trade goats for seeds.)

Lots of societies have free trade that I don't think would be usefully described as "capitalist." (And anecdotally societies in which free trade is discouraged seem to end up with a lot of black market free trade activity -- it is just too powerful an attractor.)

To me capitalism is a more descriptive of a narrower and more modern development. Free trade is an aspect of it, but not sufficient to describe it.
"SinglePlatform is your connection to the top search engines, travel and review sites, online listing directories and mobile apps used by over 200 million people to find local businesses." (from website)

Sounds more like digital facing store front management, way beyond centralized menu management, which would be a clear value add for local restauraunts.
Opposing view? I worked there you stupid shit. Keyboard commander, email me if you want proof of the astroturfing. Otherwise fuck right off back to whatever game you were playing :)
> I like to imagine that person years in the future, now successful, having earned their way to a decent living

Although looking at the social mobility charts, they're actually far more likely to be even more poor. But hey, keep imagining you're right!

I do agree that there's lots of horrible legislation out there. One problem I see in the US legislation is the schizophrenia in trying to maintain the illusion of a free market. All your politicians want to say they're pro-free market. But nobody aside from some of the more deluded Libertarians is going to accept poor people being turned away from the ER, or pharmaceutical companies being allowed to sell tainted drugs. So the legislation keeps creeping in, but without accepting that maybe this one sector isn't really suited to keeping up the "free market" charade?
This is functionally similar to dplyr in R. Although the more SQL like syntax of dplyr is much more handy.
Email me if you want proof, don't be a little bitch and make me email you. Want proof? Email me
No one cooks anymore
Clunky and also unsafe. So easy for your card to be skimmed this way.

Always amusing to see confused Americans in Canadian restaurants, though.
http://chat.stackoverflow.com/
That's the spirit! Glad there's a few of you left! :-)

Your hostility is perfect!

For the record, I advocate for criticism of all systems and an intellectual honesty and integrity combined with a willingness to learn, listen, and an openness to being wrong about, well, everything.
The democrat party is so far to the left of JFK, that there's no real middle-ground between the parties anymore. America is at a tipping point right now. Things could get real nasty in the not too distant future. No wonder there's so many AR-15s sold and no wonder that the left wants to take them away.
The folks at Facebook are not stupid. This is likely setting the groundwork to ream more bandwidth through their Aquila project https://info.internet.org

More bandwidth means more money, which means convincing more of the public to invest more in Facebook.
Well to be fair, those were Michael Lewis's second hand telling. I personally know the author of FB:NSF, but haven't spoken to him in a while. I think I agreed with 95% of what he wrote. I think IEX will likely stumble, but will continue. The problem is not that IEX is doing something bad, but they're just not different enough to be meaningful. They have been very good at marketing though and brought up a lot of issues, but definitely raised some that are not accurate.

The unfortunate problem (that's hard to resolve) is those executing on agency will always be at a disadvantage to those executing on principal. For example if someone wants to buy 5000 shares, they can route in a way that risks them buying 8000 to get better prices (by sending extra orders to dark pools, etc), someone executing on agency can never do that and so it might not make sense for them to route to dark pools, but almost all of the routers do that (fidelity, schwab, etc) so they disadvantage some of their customers (although they do advantage the smallest customers). Basically I think ultimately the reg-nms order protection is probably a little too rigid of a structure to fit the diversity of behavior into. I'm not really sure what they're long term hope is. I do find equities to be basically the most fair trading ground on the exchange (which is why they had any foothold at all). It would be nice if they were trying to disrupt the really expensive trading markets like fixed income where the spreads are much wider compared to the risk being exchanged and the dealers have so much leverage that they won't support anybody who is trying to cut into that spread.
I take the last quoted sentence to mean that the minimum wage "...would have reached $21.72...", not that it did reach that. Clearly, it didn't.

The author was illustrating the overall decline in purchasing power of the inflation-adjusted minimum wage, despite its nominal increase. Hence the economic decline experienced by minimum wage workers.
When I tried to poke around, what I found is lots of expensive clients and no obvious gratuitous alternative, except for some time, Google groups
Rate of return on capital is greater than the rate of economic growth over the long term, the result is concentration of wealth, and this unequal distribution of wealth causes social and economic instability.
A large part of the economy is still labor driven and will be. Many infrastructure tasks such as complex welding(possibly the job where automation has happened the most) are still outside the realm of full automation.
As CEO i can't recommend to do so. In most cases even when company have no traction or something can be pivoted to make revenue or gain user's attraction. Most of the employee usually can't understand this and make decisions too fast and you quitting can easily kill a startup, not lack of a traction.

Our company (Actor.im) was in such situation. And eventually we spent all our money and for a month we have nothing. During this we go open source (after advices on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9757243) and in a month we got our first customers and in a next year we was much more stable than before. We wasn't able to predict this. CEO have a chance (only small chance) to predict, but employee usually don't think about big picture long enough for this.

Try to think about people with whom you are working with, if you like it, stay with them. You will never regret working in dying startup with a nice people, but if you will quit...
Are you talking about the hard work of people like Bernie Madoff? Or perhaps Elizabeth Holmes? Or shit, maybe Mark Pincus?

Or maybe we just expect to get paid an honest day's wages for an honest day's work--you know, 8 hours, M-F, 9-5. Maybe we expect to get some actual equity in our companies. Maybe we recognize "experience" as mostly just the same self-serving sonofabitch getting away with taking credit for the accomplishments of those under them.

Dedication? To the companies of today? Don't make me laugh.
Well it couldn't possibly be all of the fabulously obstructionist Repubs in Congress that made it their primary mission to oppose the president on everything and refuse to compromise at all.
In twenty years, thirty tops, I guarantee you'll be dissatisfied with gravity too.

Source: My creaky joints.
Provide an environment that give workers autonomy, mastery, and purpose (see Daniel Pink's work title Drive https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc). You provide those three things and a sane group of people, happiness will follow.
So, if you "don't have good good UI skills" please stop your comments about QtQuick ...
You addressed my first 5 words and ignored my further 3 sentences to justify those first 5 words, here. Could you do me and readers a favor and engage the argument here?
So you are saying that deregulating finance that gave us 2008 crisis was a good thing ? I think there are industries that need to be strictly regulated because they don't work for the good of the whole market if they are deregulated. One of them is finance.
> No, printing money (QE, inflation, what have you) is absolutely NOT a capitalist tenet. Quite the opposite.

It may not be a capitalist tenet, but it's an unavoidable result of capitalism. Capitalism works great for a little while, but then some people amass too much wealth and pull the ladder up behind them.

This is the only logical conclusion. Money and power allow you to change the playing field. So even if somehow we could start everyone off with equal opportunity and let them compete in a fair capitalist system, the ones who gain money and power early on will simply follow incentives and change the playing field in their favor. You can call this unfair playing field "perverse crony capitalism" and argue that it's not capitalism, and you're right, but so what? "True capitalism" will always turn into "perverse crony capitalism" so returning things to capitalism is at best a temporary measure.
Volkswagen makes a huge shift to electric cars in the wake of its diesel scandal
Yes! Exactly. My (optimistic) suspicion is the users will get bored of it and stop looking at the river of crap, forcing them to change directions again.
For anyone on mobile who is confused, try viewing in desktop mode.
except IT DOES happen because Asus monitors support G-Sync, Samsung one dont. Yes it is insane, thank Nvidia for pushing proprietary crap and anti consumer features (gameworks working similar to intel compilers)
What does the left/right split have to do with anything?

The rent is too damned high, the wages are too damned low, and none of us stand a statistically-significant chance of getting a return on the value we would bring to a company in this economy (mostly because that's not how equity is split, anymore).
Someone who is personable or eager or hardworking (or the opposite) is as much so because of the cards they are dealt by nature or their upbringing as a person who is intelligent (or the opposite). When you get down to it, everyone is exclusively a product of their genes and the environment, and they are in control of neither.

A just society judges and rewards people based on what they contribute. Racism, sexism, ageism, and the like are unfair not because they select based on something "outside your control", but because they deprive a person of the opportunity to succeed or fail based on merit.

Intelligence is a direct factor (though not the only factor) in a person's success at performing just about any job. If it is not a fair criteria by which to judge, then there are no fair criteria.
Show HN: Land your next development gig in 30 days guaranteed
Yea but they were not building Teslas, they were doing some app/site for restaurants...
I wonder what they spend 100k a month on.
To be honest, it's really confusing. It's not so much that I worship financial success, it's that I'm scared of being financially insecure. It feels as if the only way to secure my future and the future of my children is to become the best. Perhaps some of this insecurity is translated into aggression toward anti-intellectualism, which I see as an attempt to make me feel guilty about wanting to be secure.

There's also the larger concern over foreign competition. I know that social well-being is important, but when faced against countries who don't value social well-being, it feels as if America is at a significant disadvantage. After all, who could have competed against China's manufacturing prowess when the Green Movement was unique to the West? If America enacts strong protections for unintelligent people, will we see intelligence be outsourced?

I know that my fears are selfish and childish and irrational, but I don't know how else to be. On one hand, I know how absurd it is to believe that intelligence is the solution to all of my problems. But if being smart can't solve my problems, what can? It seems equally absurd that being compassionate is the answer.

I don't know. I'm sure none of this makes sense, but it's how I feel. Sorry about the rant.
On Pier Paolo Pasolini's “The Long Road of Sand”
Thank you for the link. I think the numbers quoted don't indicate a collapse in the wealth gap around 2008.

The WSJ article includes this observation: "The world is still staggeringly unequal, with the tiny sliver of those with $5 million or more in assets (we don’t have the exact number but it’s clearly a select club) owning more than the total population of those with $100,000 or less."

Perhaps there was a small inflection in the evolving wealth gap curve around 2008, but it seems minor and transitory. The article's numbers seem consistent with that.
Improper VR causes real nausea and real (often long) headache. They are curating experience.
At the end of the day say that you paid everyone the same amount of money regardless of whether they worked or did not. And there was no additional way to make money. Maybe there was an additional barter economy where you could work for things that you could then trade for other things. How would that change things. Because now no one would have to work and would only do things if they wanted to do them. And everyone could enjoy their lives rather than be treated like disposable machines. I think that sort of future is one to look forward to. One without class or coercion. Where everyone literally has the same power over everyone else and the little trinkets and things that they produce themselves are traded by individuals with other individuals not for money but for things that they themselves made which then determines their worth.

Even supposedly technically superior well paying work usually treats the workers like tools. Management which is often staffed by not the most intelligent has the most power in an organization. They stress coerce and harass people in order to get work out of them, work which is often earning the company multiples of what they are paying people. And that's how the whole economy is structured. It is still not is possible to be a technical person who is well paid yet still not feeling happy, pleasant, or even healthy. It can still be a somewhat miserable way to live your life. Not as miserable as being not intelligent and employable, but still can be problematic.

The economy is general is not a healthy place for mental health or physical health, especially things like getting fired or layed off. You have to go out of your way already exhausted by work to find that.
How corrupt is your country?
I had the strangest problem with Swedes where they'd seem to speak perfect English, but repeatedly mishear me as saying something offensive and never stop to make sure.

Actually I think I mentioned "cutting myself shaving" to someone and they apparently to this day believe I'm suicidal.
Get a Chuwi 12-inch Windows-Android hybrid tablet for $249.99
The vue-mdl getting started instructions suggest linking directly to git master javascript files on github from within script tags.

Sounds pretty dangerous to be.
One of the least corrupt countries was populated by prisoners: Australia.

How did Australia do it? Starting from a clean version 1?
The Global poverty might be lower, but at the same time there are more people in poverty since the middle class is dying out on every continent. Pretty sure the average American/European has more debt and is worse off than 30-40y ago.

Capitalism is based on debt/interest, which by definition is broken and only follows a downward spiral.
After 40 years swinging hard to the right I imagine it will take some time before brash liberalism makes a dent in living standards.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11923240 and marked it off-topic.
There's another two stories currently on the HN front page about IEX becoming the 13th stock exchange.

IEX uses k.
"Previous attempts to combine RL with neural networks had largely failed due to unstable learning. To address these instabilities, our Deep Q-Networks (DQN) algorithm stores all of the agent's experiences and then randomly samples and replays these experiences to provide diverse and decorrelated training data."

... so, made the machines dream. Fancy!
I'm no economist, but my understanding is that QE subsidizes capital for banks (by lowering interest rates) with the intent to lower interest rates set by those banks and encourage investment. This first most benefits banks, which are obviously not staffed by the poorest Americans, and secondarily benefits those who will take out loans against those (mostly commercial) banks, namely large businesses (the "corporations" in common discourse, though I hate misusing that term). Eventually I suppose these lower interest rates will trickle down to other banks, allowing middle and upper class Americans to take advantage of loans poor Americans usually can't -- refinancing mortgages and home equity loans, for example.

The argument that this helps the poor seems to rest in the conclusion that eventually QE will speed up recovery for everyone, but even if they do "benefit" from QE down the line, they will now be paying for QE the same way the rest of Americans do -- through their taxes (at some point down the line anyway).

Also,

> And isn't QE ultimately beneficial to the poor, in that it's funding labor that would otherwise go unused during a recession (for example)?

In the case of commercial loans I guess this is possible, but that's certainly not the point of QE, which is to stop businesses and people from pulling out or the markets at a time when that would have catastrophic events for the economy at large. I would assume that whatever portion of QE eventually trickles down to the lowest income brackets is largely offset by the corresponding inflation QE has caused, which is another way of saying that in real terms QE really helps the rich get richer, while the poor do not all that much better.

I suppose plans like the various stimulus packages that were proposed over the years would have had the opposite effect though (if they were effective).
In a capitalist economy there is almost nothing worse than a monopoly. Maybe this is the issue of capitalism too. It is a monopoly for over 20 years now. There is nothing anymore to compete with.
Gameworks utilizes features that are faster on nvidia cards similar to code using AMD's implementation of async compute.
> And if the "hacker" loses, it invalidates code as contract completely.

I don't think it does. You've replaced expensive legal fees with an automatically executed contract that costs you nothing after initial setup. As long as most people end up satisfied with their outcomes, then there's still great value in smart contracts for this reason alone, even if some unhappy customers still end up in court.
I believe that just about all newsgroups, except the binary ones, are available via Google Groups. Many years ago, Google bought archives going back to more or less the beginning.

Thunderbird is an OK news client.
One way to read it is "people are increasingly preferring video over text, so that's where Facebook is going". I think what it really means is that Facebook sees more ad money in video than in text, so that's where they are steering the ship.
CodeNewbie Slack community. http://www.codenewbie.org/.
Well produced video is magic. Think of a movie that was impactful to you -- done well, video can tell a story in an almost magical way.

The reality is that the average video is drivel and not nearly as good as a similar written piece. The FB is either living in a reality distortion field or thinking about high quality ad/infotainment content that produces $ for Facebook.
No country in Scandinavia has socialism, it's a mostly liberal states with extensive welfare programs.
CEO of America–Should we care about a candidates previous experience?
Gotta love hacker news: I think I just lost half my karma points near me for asking a question, suggesting that maybe, just maybe we shouldn't rush to judge people so negatively. Haters gonna hate...
> We've oscillated a lot on the matter, between the gilded age, the new deal, the postwar years, and the reagan years into whatever the heck is going on now.

What matter could you possibly be talking about that spans a century of Western economics? What are you even saying?

> QE definitely benefitted the rich much more than the poor.

Agreed.

> Obama seems to have favored it because it was the only demand-side (sorta) stimulus that he could make happen with the politics being what they are.

Eh, who cares what Obama favored? That's not really even on-topic.

> But nothing happens in a vacuum and it's not a definitive statement about capitalism vs other systems.

I felt that I responded to this sentence well enough given it's not a definitive statement about anything, but if you'd rather I quoted it and responded to it separately, here's my response:

"Really? Why, in a capitalist system, would the upper middle class and rich, who are the only people with money to invest in assets that grow proportionally to inflation, not invest in assets that grow proportionally to inflation? Isn't the entire basis of capitalism that people act rationally in self-interest?"

In the future, if you want me to respond to your whole posts, maybe try making your whole posts make a coherent point.