skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
While this is pretty neat; FWIW-- I've always been blown away but the summarization tool built into MacOS. You just select text, hit summarize, and adjust the length. It works wonderfully-- I used it college all the time for annotated bibliographies. To be honest, I've always found it good enough and it's a wildly simple tool (or so it looks) by comparison to using AI.
Welcome to the indie game.

The first realization is that despite you have 12+ yrs of experience it's only functioning as a tiny cog in a larger operation whereby most of the work was out of sight and out of mind for you.

Everything from advertising to marketing to sales to business management to account management to billing, to project management, to development to deployment to support now falls on your shoulder.

And guess what, engineering for most businesses are the least expensive line item.

You probably want to match your last salary, so say you were making $150k/yr then really you have to find $200k for 2000 billable hours. That's $100/hr.

In terms of contractor rates that's pushing towards the top end of the market when most devs are hovering around the $25 to $60/hr range.

So really, to make that $100/hr billable rate you will have chase a lot to deliver that kind of value.

Most small-medium sized business aren't interested in nursing an engineer/developer/consultant for $16k/mo. They'll only be interested in maybe a half-day or day rate.

Even then the only value add you can bring to the table is to reduce costs for them. No one cares about how much effort or work you put in. You're not an employee to them. You are the consultant. They're purchasing an end product.

You either get real quick at being efficient or you're gonna wash out.

Large sized business would rather hire unless you possess some specialization they lack or is under market. So you have to punch above your weight class. Are your skills really worth $200/hr? If so, then you have the means to get those jobs by offering $100/hr. But, then again, if you were able to get that type of pay you would have just gotten a job.

To be independent, cashflow management is now the most important thing. Followed by your sales management. To then lastly your engineering skills.

All in all, it's likely your first 1 to 2 year you'll be making far under market until you've established a roster of clients.

The inevitability is that you'll have to turn to an agency model and hire others to scale. Which presents another series of problems to your plate. At that point you might as well just be another business manager hiring out technologists contractors who are trying to convince you that they're worth $100/hr that you then have to flip and sell for more than that.

Good luck.
Wouldn't the more right wing desire to slash funding for government handouts be a more likely cause of stalled programs? Neoliberalism's weird incestuous desire to have 20 different planning committees write papers on the viability of public works makes things take forever, but also, constant arbitrary slashing of budgets every 4 to 8 years by those on the right puts a bullet in the head of these projects. Blaming the left misses at least 50% of the problem. Also, the left is far more into the concept of redistribution of wealth through public works, even if the centrist democrats filter that through moronic means-testing and bloated committees. Framing this as some lack-of-patriotism issue is completely missing the issues both sides cause in this situation, that would be solved by a party to the left of the useless neoliberal democrats.
The drm is probably a requirement to stream many of the videos. I would rather Netflix with drm than not being able to stream legally
> Torrenting is a small niche now (at least in the US)

Could have fooled me.
> The share of U.S. economic output that's paid out in wages in at the lowest
> point since the government started keeping track of it. In 1964 AT&T was worth
> $267 billion in today's dollars and employed 758,611 people. Google is worth
> $370 billion but has only about 55,000 employees -- less than a tenth the size
> of AT&T's workforce in its heyday.

I think this might be an interesting statistic to look at but I can't find it. I can find Gross Domestic Income (GDI) and the GDP which the Bureau of Economic Analysis (http://www.bea.gov) seems to think GDI has been about ~50% of GDP for a long time. I'm also having a bit of a challenge evaluating your numbers, yes Google has a high market cap relative to its workforce, but its contribution to GDP is only about $90B/year (not the Market Cap, but the revenue) and its 55,000 employees accounted for about a third of that. So its pumping into the economy. AT&T had revenue of $164B, not quite double that, and higher employment costs as well. It certainly has been remarkable how much money Google, Apple, and a small number of companies have pulled out of the economy and into cash. Depending on how you measure it you can make an argument that is the entire source of unemployment in the current US economy. I expect at some point various governments will note this impact and construct the Tech equivalent of 'windfall profits tax' (maybe 'unproductive capital tax' or something) in order to liberate it into the economy.

> If you had a functional body, you could get a good job.

If you are saying that you only needed a functional body to get a good job, that has not been true for at least 50 years. The amount of education and training needed to be employable has gone up steadily as new job creation happened in industries that were growing.

> I think right now we have an absolute glut of educated people;

We need to be careful about terms, there are many people who have college degrees for which there is no career path other than perhaps teaching people who would like to get that same degree. They are 'educated' and essentially unemployable because the number of teaching positions is small relative to the available candidates. But working it backwards from the job to the employee does work, there are unfilled jobs available for people where there is also training available to teach people to do those jobs. Some are 'college' jobs and require STEM training, some are trades jobs and require skills training.
What's to stop Netflix from uniquely forensically watermarking each user's streams? If anyone person starts to rip their streams for redistributing, then it will be easy enough for them to determine which user it was and block that account. The small number of people that would be able/willing to rip would be easy enough to track down.
The thing is, I don't think this will end well for the US as long as its politically feasible to maintain the huge "investment" (political/economic) in military infrastructure that will provide nothing that will look like returns compared to a huge economic push would.

I'd say China benefits the longer the US is "forced" to spend what amounts a little more than half of this infrastructure project every year.

At best, I think the military expenditures the US puts out is good for protecting economic assets for all interested parties in/through volatility high areas, but it's not exactly something that all parties contribute to maintaining in proportion of the benefits they receive from it.

I don't really know what war in the 21st century will look like (I have some ideas), but so far it doesn't seem like its benefiting many people outside of those who get the contracts to enable such war making. So it seems like in stalemate that's present now, and arguably has been in place since ww2, it seems like non-state actors have more to gain.
Have you heard of the 'patriot act'
I can see that, but "competitors" is often defined so vaguely that it could apply to essentially anyone.
Average customer doesn't care about DRM. Netflix became popular because it was convenient. Yeah, DRM is inconvenient for us geeks, but that won't matter for a while.
He's saying that no geek has introduced blockchain tech into their own day job in order to solve some pressing problem that they met in the context of their day job.
Ehh, I wasn't saying being a world power is an excuse for concentrating power at the top. It was a more to show how it's hard to compare because so much has changed in the US since before WWI. Back then most people were considered poor and we had no social services or welfare to speak of, the "middle class" wasn't a thing yet, we still had segregation, and women couldn't vote.
I don't think the things you listed, even when combined, are sufficient substitutes for well-written documentation.

The fact of the matter is that, for humans, plain English is always much easier to understand than computer code. The more complex the code, the more true that is going to be. You can use all the friendly function names and object names and file layouts you want. At the end of the day, it is not going to be enough for someone who is not familiar with that part of the system to understand it quickly and to the appropriate level of detail. This is especially true if you have junior-level or intermediate-level people on your team. It is also true if you ever end up coming back to some piece of code you yourself wrote a year ago.

Furthermore, documentation can provide additional value by including examples of code usage in different settings that you may not have covered in your test cases due to not being immediately relevant. It can contain links to other websites and have embedded images of system diagrams or data flow. It can also describe third-party systems your code has to interact with and various bugs and unconventional behavior that may exist in those systems that your code has to account for.

Yes, documentation involves more upfront effort. IMO the correct way to deal with that is to include that in project estimates, and to not mark tasks and features to be "done" until their documentation is written. Same with revisions and bug fixes. I understand the feeling that it duplicates logic already expressed in the code. But look at it this way: code is for computers. Documentation is for humans.
This is blatant FUD. Using the GPL does not 'taint' anything and is not 'viral'.

>As it was once put to me, if a single GPLv3 binary accidentally makes it onto the OS image for iOS, Apple would then legally be required to release the master signing key to the whole world, completely destroying the whole security model of iOS and screwing everybody (not just Apple but also Apple's users who rely on that security).

Not at all true.
A great course that. John Lions was a very good teacher.
It mentioned she was seen sitting next to two German naval officers, but not talking.

Pretty tenuous but I guess some support for Germany.
I really don't think that this article makes a very good case for nations to focus on happiness over economic growth. It is apparent that the nations that the article states are the happiest are highly developed nations which have had decades of growth which has given them the means to keep their population happy. With regard to the point about China's growth, I believe that given how rapidly China is growing, there will be a significant lag between the rate at which GDP grows and the time when the Chinese people begin receiving the benefits of this growth.

Of course, general well-being is a better metric of whether the incumbent gets voted in than economic growth in developed countries because well-being is far more tangible to the common man than the abstract concept of economic growth. OTOH, in a developing country, I'd argue growth is a better indicator of the probability that the incumbent will win since developing countries have growth rates which are in general far higher than developed, and since these high growth rates result in visible, tangible changes: bridges get built, schools are opened, and people get jobs.

Perhaps, the new thesis of the article should be that developing nations should focus on economic growth, while developed ones should focus on the happiness of their people.
My ramble above isn't all that clear, but I wasn't confident at all, I didn't understand why I had the amount of pain I did (hence going to the ER in the middle of the night).

The point is the doctor wanted to check for an abscess.
The idea that atrocity is aligned with ideology, rather than orthogonal to it, needs significant defense before being trotted out like that.
They wouldn't be able to recoup damages from lost (potential) revenue from the cat (content) coming out of the bag (walled garden), even if they identify and go after the rip sources.

You can't expect to be able to collect a 9+ figures from a random individual
Also, as the article describes, it is common to be presented with such agreements when you have little leverage.
Each one of those governments were dictatorships with communism as a name.

If they were communist, then there would no political party, no "more equal" military apparatus, and egalitarian spread of goods. It would also be a democracy, given that all are equal and have equal right to the means of production.

Robots could be the shifting value for this, when looking at this and Universal Basic Income. It too is a form of communist thought which many economists believe to be necessary.

Edit Those pesky Communists, like the USSR - United States of Socialist Republics..
I'm intrigued and curious about why they download your 1Password databases…

I wonder if that's speculative - or if offline bruteforcing them works often enough for it to be worthwhile for the malware authors?
Ghost cities:

http://www.dw.com/en/what-has-become-of-chinas-ghost-cities/...

China is a unique place. And an amazing place that has executed an unimaginable transformation. Obviously they embrace capitalism, but they have a central planning edge from their Communist roots.

Saying that Chinese growth is "fake" is obviously ridiculous in its face; but the metrics almost certainly are -- comparing China to Germany or the US is an apples to oranges comparison.

There's no adjustment accounting for the Chinese government saying (and funding): "go build a city there". You also don't have bullshit state enterprises that are essentially big works programs propped up by loans that will never be repaid in the west.
Obviously I don't know the implementation details of how Netflix is detecting rooted devices, but my guess is they're using Play Services's new "GMS Certification".

This involves using signed hardware that helps determine if the execution environment is trusted. So, users can still root the device, but Android + Play Services can still determine if features (such as DRM) can be relied on.

It makes sense for Google to develop these features, especially as it wants to move Android to new devices (Cars?), reduce risk for mobile payments, in addition to giving stronger security features to content distributors. This also lets Android devices compete with security features like Apple's secure enclave.

Honestly, if you are going to root your device you must accept you are not using it in the supported way the vendor intends. Therefore, you should not expect all the features of the supported configuration. I think that's a fair trade-off. Rooting your device is awesome!
Well your work looks great congrats :-) .
This gives me a lot of ideas
Ancient Burial Chamber Uncovered in Egypt, with 17 Mummies  So Far
A Brighter Future
Here's another news flash - Netflix without content ceases to become worth their subscription fee. What did you really expect Netflix to do? Ignore the demands of their content providers and then have the content taken away?
People don't walk around with bt for no reason though.
> Beyond that, Smalltalk isn't file based, you don't edit some version of the code that gets compiled (and macro expanded) into some runtime version of the code you can only see through introspection; rather in Smalltalk you're actually editing the runtime version in a running image.

That's not really true. Smalltalk is text-based, too, but hides it behind an integrated source management system. When you edit a method in a Smalltalk IDE, then you edit TEXT. The text then gets compiled to typically some byte code which gets interpreted by the Smalltalk virtual machine (which also might have some way to convert it to machine code).

If the text of the source code is not available, then Smalltalk needs to disassemble the byte code. But the disassembled byte code is not equal to the original source.

The sources are EXTERNALLY kept as text, outside the running system.

Just download your favorite Squeak and check out the contents. There is a huge sources file and there is a changes file. Those are text files with the sources and its changes.

This is actually different from some Lisp system, where the source actually is data inside the running Lisp and the Lisp interpreter runs this data. If you edit this code, Lisp then presents you a structure editor, which works on this data - not on text. It's not what a typical Lisp system does today, but it is still a possibility. Xerox' Interlisp used to use a structure editor for Lisp source code as data and a source code management system based on that.

This is different from Smalltalk, where the 'Interpreter' runs compiled byte-code and the byte code is generated from source code, which is actually text and stored outside the Smalltalk image. The Smalltalk image has then source code management data, like an index in each method which points to its external source.

Typical Lisp systems are doing the same. They record the source code location for functions and other things. If you edit the source for a method in a typical Smalltalk environment, it will retrieve the text for the method and in a text editor you can edit the text then. In a typical Lisp environment, the Lisp system will present you the whole text file and just jump to the definition using the editor...
The key to understanding macros is to be quite clear about the distinction between the code that generates code (macros) and the code that eventually makes up the program (everything else). When you write macros, you're writing programs that will be used by the compiler to generate the code that will then be compiled. Only after all the macros have been fully expanded and the resulting code compiled can the program actually be run. The time when macros run is called macro expansion time; this is distinct from runtime, when regular code, including the code generated by macros, runs.

http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/macros-defining-your-own.htm...
It should be fixed!
Huh...I actually did this when I got out of a developer bootcamp in 2014/2015. I come from a family of lawyers; redlining a contract is second nature. Data point of one, but I think it's more a cultural norm - there's a strong norm in American society, in particular, against negotiating. Funny how well that works out for the people who control the capital and don't have any issues ignoring that norm. They should be illegal, but more people should start more conversations with a negotiating mindset as well.
You know that technical reviewer's past it. Thirty years ago he was planning world war three from bunkers underneath volcanos, and holding the world to ransom with diamond-encrusted lasers in space. Whereas last year all he could come up with was a grand scheme to become a multinational government IT contractor, while moonlighting a side business clearing derelict buildings for redevelopment.
Sadly, "right to work" laws have absolutely nothing to do with non-compete enforceability.
No, this is incorrect. The syntax and the AST must be isomorphic for a language to be homoiconic. It's not enough to expose the compiler/AST as a first-class library.

Wikipedia has a nice entry on this. In short, "homoiconicity is where a program's source code is written as a basic data structure that the programming language knows how to access."

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homoiconicity
What made Bell Labs special? (2012) [pdf]
All those poor slaves who were earning over $300,000 a year in the 1960s United States, and had to pay a 91% marginal tax rate on the extra.

It's entirely reasonable to debate the appropriateness of such rates, but claiming that "slavery" is even close to a legitimate comparison demonstrates a shocking disregard for the plight of actual slaves, both past and present.
Of course he wanted to check for an abscess - an abscess into the sinus cavity can be a very big deal. Whether or not to perform that diagnostic is not his decision, it's yours.

I think we're speaking to different things, though. I'm simply saying that there are ways for people without health insurance to obtain a prescription for an antibiotic without going to an emergency room and incurring a large debt.
Thanks for the background. That's why I thought it was interesting but had some skepticism and want to look more into it. I don't think the average person (including myself) knows enough about our history to be able compare things 50-100 years ago in the US to now. I remember hearing the US has benefited quite a bit by having oceans between us because after the World Wars we didn't have our cities destroyed. I believe that's one reason New York became a financial hub, picking up the slack from London.

Is it a fair comparison to say a more egalitarian policy made us "happier" when we still had segregation, women couldn't vote, and much smaller welfare/social services?
could you give more info for a newbie trying to learn more/get into using these?
Actually, even in California, in the limited instances in which a non-compete is enforceable, being fired has no bearing on the non-compete's enforceability.
General rules-of-thumb (IANAL):

- Sign the minimum of documents

- Don't provide full, personally-identifying information unless it's absolutely required

- Negotiate terms of boilerplate agreements if they're too unreasonable / don't apply

- Don't sign a binding arbitration agreement, BA is a worthless/corrupt system that nearly always favors the employer. [0]

- For CA-headquartered companies, refuse to sign NCAs because it creates legal liabilities (ie, could they involuntarily transfer an employee to another state and then fire them to make an NCA apply?)

0. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/business/dealbook/arbitra...
After all the technical details, I'm more and more convinced that Intel very badly wanted to shake off AMD, so they grasped at a too-thin excuse to do so; their eye was really on how much more coin they could shake out of everyone's pockets once they'd established a true monopoly just at the historical moment when monopoly law was being most thoroughly ignored.
Keep defending netflix if you want, they are not innocent victims of content provider threats, they are content providers.

MPAA did not come in strong arm Netflix, Netflix is a willing and eager participant in the development and spread of DRM
But it seems to work out that way, doesn't it. It's not a matter of logic, but of human experience.
Malwarebytes Premium 3.1.2 Crack Full Free Download [HERE]
Designing Distributed Systems
I agree with everything but:

> They are not being pressured

I'm sure they are; but they are becoming aggressive and they are no longer a cool upstart company battling against a big media monopoly that everyone hated. They are that monopoly now
Watching the whole video, you can safely overdub everything Steve Jobs said with the phrase "My words are meaningless, because by the time any of these ideas represent credible threats, I'll be long dead."

Seriously. Everything Steve Jobs says, whatever point he argues in favor of, listening to it is like letting the dead sell you cigarettes.

"Here, try this amazing thing! Yes it's bad for you in all the ways described by critics, but so what?! I need to live an incredible life right now, before a terminal disease kills me (just as the bad times begin), so give me as much money as possible."
Lambda, map and filter function in Python