skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Aadhaar has nothing to do with you web activity. It's used as KYC - Know your Customer - for getting the JIO connection. It's optional, and as an alternative you can submit a xerox of any ID documents for your KYC.

You forgot to mention that if you take xerox you will be charged 200 rs and a delay of at-least a week and if you provide Aadhaar you will get almost immediately.

"Also JIO will not use Aadhaar for spying on users browsing activity" is based on trust and not by design. Not everyone trusts Reliance or any corporation because it is run by many people and one human is sufficient to abuse.
>In other words, why is okay that there inequality is so great and progress is applied so unequally?

Because inequality is the result of competitive capitalism, which allows some people to become extremely wealthy by providing value to others. Almost all of the advances in quality of life have come around because enterprising people were able to profit from providing them.
Yes, from a material point of view, Bill Gates can buy exactly the same Coca Cola as a poor fishermen.

What more money buys you, now and in 1916, is social status. And that's always good for your subjective quality of life.

It wasn't always so---economies around the globe really only took off once the bourgeoisie could buy their way into status.
Without a shadow of a doubt I'd rather be a billionaire in 1916 than middle class today. It isn't even close. The only way I can self actualise today is in the smallest of spheres, the most local of effects. I can command the movement and labour of very few people.
When I switched from Ember to react what I missed the most was the two ways binding, the computed properties and the router. From dabbling in Vue.js it seems to have incorporated the best of both worlds. I read over some of the technical implementation and it seems pretty sane. It seems too good to be true and I am honestly wondering what is the catch. Everything I have read about vue has been very positive so far. I am curious what are some of the cons of using vue
I guess you didn't get the metaphor "first world problem".

Go back a couple of decades and you'll find central authorities and organizations with agenda to manipulate the public could easily do so because the rest 99.99% didn't have access to information.

People who wanted truth had absolutely 0 way of attaining the truth back then. Now you're complaining about how it's "hard" to search for accurate and unbiased information. It's not even THAT hard, you just need to google a bit more, sure it's not easy for everyone, but at least there's a way.
Very interesting and somewhat unusual blog story. Congrats.

I too have been blogging for some years now - around 9 years. Enjoying it. And I get work inquiries and training inquiries because of it - I know because some of my clients have told me that they found me through my blog.
>The real culprit is land: we don't accumulate any more of that, so it's rates of return don't vanish.

An interesting point to this is the land value tax, advocated by Georgists (whom Einstein was sympathetic to).

> It's good: capital competes with capital to lowers its rates of return. We need more capital.

Can you expand on what you mean by this, please? Why does there need to be competition?
If you're interested in reproducing, and most people are, then it's relative wealth that matters. Sure, working in a factory in 1916 sucked. No air conditioning, long hours, terrible safety standards, frequent illnesses or debilitating injuries. On the other hand, today you can't even get a job sweeping floors without at least a high school diploma. Many people have been laid off and they'll never get a job again.

Would you rather risk life and limb to bring home the bread and keep your family of 5 happy and well-fed in 1916? Or would you prefer to be alone and addicted in opioid county, Ohio, today?
While there is definitely some truth to the effects of the value Euro being "too low", I don't think that is the "main reason" for the number of German middle class manufacturers which the article is talking about. This is rather a historical artifact and did not develop in the last 17 years since the introduction of the Euro.
I would also like to mention that currency value is not simply a banking vs. industry result in my opinion, there are many up- and downsides to "currency surpression" and Germany does not decide about the value of the Euro but the members of the Eurozone do.
Do you have access to his e-mail account? In that case, simply request a password reset and it would be send to his e-mail account.
In the US, the big three automakers generally don't acquire small companies. A lot of work in the industry is done by companies like Delphi (who also have sites in Germany)
Hah! I assumed it was a bot at first. But then it started responding to me all humanlike. Very nice.
The term "Hidden Champions" though usually refers to "boring industry" companies like part suppliers, not actual manufacturers of consumer products.

Like the one company that practically has a monopoly on manufacturing the plastic part that goes on the end of flat roof drains -- not exactly something to write home about, but still a massively stable market creating plenty of jobs.
I'm pretty sure Rockefeller would have turned down the offer to instead be a single mother living on $10,000 in rural Mississippi. And would I prefer to have the wealth and status of Rockefeller in 1916? of course.

So, given that bit of common sense, what makes this argument pointless and/or irrelevant? Should I just descend into complete and abject despair over the nice stuff we'll have in 2116? There's something obviously wrong with this line of reasoning.

Maybe it's the fact that regardless of how much nice stuff we have today, our class and wealth still largely determines what we do with our lives and our relations to others, and those can be arbitrarily hellish regardless of the material comfort involved.

This sort of argument is as miserable as that Fox News segment a few years ago that tried to downplay how miserable poverty can be by citing refrigerator and microwave ownership rates. Not surprising that a paleocon pseudointellectual like George Will would latch on to such a shallow and frivolous argument.
>The movement, focus and light aperture mechanisms of the human eye technologically outstrip this description so ridiculously that I have to assume you're joking. Try designing and building a system that can change heading and focus as rapidly as the human eye, while handling nearly as high a input dynamic lighting range. Not even considering the physical space efficiency and impossibly low power consumption of the human eye relative to to do its job compared to any manmade sensors.

and I'm sure the majority of what you described is completely unnecessary for the purposes of self driving cars. I hope you enjoyed the few moments of pointless outrage you had when writing your comment.
Measures of happiness are nonsense. They are largely determined by by expectations.

Also happiness isn't necessarily the outcome that everyone in society wants. Some may want to maximize happiness -- others may want to maximize something else.
Yes, for most people.
>The Hartz IV reforms that added flexibility for companies

The Hartz reforms suppressed wages and made the average German poorer:

https://ideas.repec.org/a/wej/wldecn/557.html

Germany's industrial success was evident years before they went into effect.

Hartz is like trickle down economics and a lower minimum wage: the wealthy have good reason to love it and the wealthy will make up spurious reasons why you should love it too - which many people will believe.

>A highly educated workforce

China achieved a similar measure of manufacturing success with an education system that was a great deal worse while the UK has an equally good education system and did not achieve anything like Germany's manufacturing prowess.

The difference in the British and German education system probably has more to do with the industrial pressures than it does the nature of the education systems themselves. If the UK followed a similar export-driven path, they would probably have more apprenticeships and fewer people going to Uni to study English lit.

So no, I don't think it's that.

>Inflation-adjusted wages have actually declined in the last ten years making german products even cheaper for other countries. That' terrible for everyone.

Not everyone. German industrialists (like the guy who wrote this article) love lower wages.
Sounds like you should do them a favour and offer to switch places with them
Missing real value can be the same as showing potential value. If you have conviction there is real value, then you're banking on many misses, some capturing most of it and a fewer number using it to it's potential. From there things like commoditization come into play. However, you should be mindful of tying capability to value, just because something is capable does not also mean it must be adopted as valuable. Plenty of things that are not particularly capable are overvalued, and many things that are incredibly capable are under valued. I think the important part to look at is does this capability accessibility solve very many problems. If so, then you can start to think about a few solutions, but it isn't meaningful to try and understand all the applications of the solutions (because you typically don't understand that abstract customer). Cloud is a good example of this.
You are right on the structural reform part, you should not be downvoted! There were massive changes in Germany (Hartz IV Reformen)
Everything We Learned Building a Backend-As-a-Service
I like the idea. If you are around in 5 years, I'll take a look.
I would recommend knowing one phone number of a person you trust. Type it in when you call them and you will remember it in an emergency. If you get into a spot where you don't have your own phone and get to make one call, you will be very happy to know a number of someone who will help.
I don't work a lot. But have more energy. And you can use the energy for whatever you want I guess ?

Have you fixed food ? Only eat best food for your body (no meat, alot of vegs, fish, chicken) + supplements (fish oil etc).

Don't drink coffee and only use it for special occasions (to push more hours).

Exercise: swim for overall body health + running to fix bugs in your head and get high/relaxed (8-10km).

Quit drugs legal & illegal (or only on weekend).

Fix sleep.
I've heard the argument that, with high inheritance taxes, the heir of a family-owned company has to sell parts or all of the business in order to pay the tax. I don't know enough about the issue to say whether there is some truth to it.
Historically (since about the 1700s) didn't large numbers of Europeans from all over the continent go there for the conveniently located scientific community and trade crossroads?
As the above comment says, the problem is if you want to write a server that handles a lot of concurrency and shared state.

If you write a server and it uses threading as the concurrency model and its workload is primarily CPU-bound, the GIL will be a problem for you.

Take away either of those conditions -- use a model other than threading, or have an I/O-bound workload -- then the normal background overhead of the GIL is not something you'll notice.

People who deploy Python applications as network daemons tend to use pools of worker processes (not threads) and have I/O-bound workloads, which is why the assertion that Python is somehow "bad for servers" is not one you'll typically hear from people who actually deploy Python on servers. Much like the comment you're referring to, which is from someone who seems to primarily have type-system complaints about Python (i.e., they wouldn't touch a dynamically-typed language to begin with) and is throwing in "oh and the GIL probably makes it unsuitable for a server" as an additional (but factually incorrect) reason not to use Python.

Meanwhile, if you are writing a server which uses threading and lots of shared state which will be modified concurrently, you're in for a world of pain no matter what language you choose. There's a reason why there are multiple up-and-coming or even moderately-popular languages now which have as a design feature the inability to do such a thing.
For me, it seems that liveness and literacy are in some tension because liveness allows acting without the intent of producing a document and literacy facilitates an intent to produce a document.

I think the tension may revolve around scope. For example, liveness allowing a document's text to be translated from Hebrew to English seems more likely to be consistent with the an author's intent. Liveness that allows changing "In the beginning" to "Check out my new website" seems less likely to be so. The tension is that the scope of liveness which is appropriate in a particular case will vary. An author may want to allow the transformation to "check out my new website" but not "The future is already here."

In a truly live system, the rules for what is and isn't alive would also be alive. It's turtles all the way down...until you get to StackOverflow or something something static. The tension, at least for me is that the system has to decide where the liveness stops and like abstractions, adding one more layer of liveness is always attractive to a systems architect.

The alternative where liveness is added by the author and things default to dead may be better for many use cases and perhaps what is needed are better tools for adding liveness. Some of the use cases I am thinking about are situations in the same class as an Excel spreadsheet executing malware. Part of what makes this plausible to me is that this --interactivity enabled explicitly by the intersection of author and reader permissions -- is the way Emacs org-mode works. And org-mode is relevant to this particular video because it was used to prepare the interactive presentation {mentioned somewhere between 40:00-45:00 in the video}.
If you think material wealth is what matters, then being middle-class today is better. If you think relative social status is what actually motivates people, then being a billionaire in 1916 is better.

May as well take the argument to its extreme - would you rather be a lower middle class person on welfare and no career prospects, but who has access to air travel, smartphones, Internet, etc...OR would you want to be emperor of Rome in the second or third century AD?
> That along with the bombshell assertion without evidence that the inheritance tax is the greatest burdens companies face today removes any credibility from the rest of the article.

You disagree with one point [1] and question another, so for that reason you discount the entire article? If you can't align new information with your existing mental model, then the new information must be completely wrong?

This attitude has become so pervasive and so pernicious. Somehow even information has become partisan.

[1] BTW, do you have enough familiarity with Germany to make this comparison, or are you holding the author to a higher standard than yourself?
> A lot of people that voted for Obama, including me, were very disappointed that Wheeler headed the FCC and voiced the anger of essentially a lobbyist taking the reins.

Those people did not do a very good job researching Wheeler. His two telecom lobbying positions (head of main cable trade group, and then later head of main wireless trade group) were far in the past (over 30 years for cable), and were at times when those industries were the disruptive outsiders taking on the big entrenched near-monopolies to provide an alternative for consumers. Working for those industries at the time was being pro-consumer.
don't worry it won't
Land? You'd think it's machinery that is the means of production and ownership of that becomes more concentrated.

Back then you would give a manuscript to your secretary who would type it, hand it to the typesetter, and it would go to the printer, both skilled tradesman and unionized. Now you yourself submit camera-ready copy to the publisher and pay a subscription for Office 365 year after year. You ask yourself why the price of scientific journals hasn't dropped, but the missing land tax isn't the reason.
I have to admit that self driving cars are not better in all circumstances. They don't have to reach that bar for me to prefer them though. If they do better in enough situations to outweigh the situations where they do worse, they should displace non-self driving cars. The biggest advantage I see is that they always perform to their standard, whatever it may be, instead of wildly deviating as humans tend to since humans are often drunk, tired or distracted. Their biggest disadvantage is dealing with real life context clues like you mentioned, or times when the road is different than what the map suggests and you need some common sense.
I am assuming that, yes. Websites with mass appeal should probably think about this. Yeah, I develop on a MacBook Pro with Chrome on a massive network connection, but I do an awful lot of web browsing on my phone from resteraunts and offices where there is somewhat crappy data coverage.
People reasonably described as "middle class" in the US have decent access to healthcare.

Perhaps even because it is tautological, that someone lacking decent access to healthcare isn't reasonably described as middle class. But probably because while healthcare does cost a lot, people with decent jobs tend to be able to afford the cost.
You need to add uglify to your webpack.config.js.

https://webpack.github.io/docs/list-of-plugins.html#uglifyjs...
Likely difficult to get proper data on that but two things make me doubtful that increased military expenditure would boost its economy:

- it's likely that significant part of the spend would go to the US and hence not really help the German economy

- recent European (and also US) military projects were pretty much a disaster (the A400M being a point in case). Not that this would be much different in other countries but it leaves you wondering how effective it really is to spend money on the military rather than proven ROI-positive investments such as education

Edit: Also, it's not like Germany would really struggle economically ;-)
Reunification had the Ostmark valued at parity with the DM, even though it was clearly worth a lot less, so essentially it was a large money printing and subsidy.
Visual mode is a crutch! I'm used to vi so I never use it. There are faster, more flexible ways of doing anything you'd do in visual mode with plain vi commands.
Ahhh I feel like kind of a dick - asked about the same thing wherein I could have just read the comments here first >.>

Still, that's fascinating.
Route to Air Travel Discomfort Starts on Wall Street
But almost none of the inventors of said advancements profited from their inventions. It seems to me there should be an upper and lower limit that all people regardless of circumstance live within.
I think the reason this is downvoted is that the situation in Germany is relatively unchanged since before the Euro was introduced. Saying German success is mostly based on the Euro is a great narrative but completely ignores the reality that Germany's economy was already strong and getting stronger in the decades before that.

That's not saying Germany doesn't benefit from the Euro today or that it wouldn't be profoundly stupid for Germany to abandon the Eurozone but it's not an explanation, just a contributing factor.
I often think of this kind of thing when I buy things for practically nothing or see things which contain what we consider basic features that quite literally did not exist a few hundred years ago.

For instance, yesterday I remarked to myself when seeing colourful flag advertisements along the road for a new condo that the colours on the flags were at one time never possible to manufacture, the way purple was reserved for royalty and was impossible to reproduce until we managed to find an animal that produced the dye [0], and even then it took 9000 of the animals to produce a gram. Today, you can buy anything purple for pennies and throw it away without a second thought.

I wonder that if a King from the 16th century were to visit my (to me) basic apartment, the first thing he would notice before anything else would be how colourful everything is.

[0] http://www.livescience.com/33324-purple-royal-color.html
yes because apple stock doubles or halves every 6 months and is routinely stolen.
Someone else asked the same a month ago, still no answer: https://github.com/slap-editor/slap/issues/393
Well, and that's part of the problem no? When the economy improves why is not the welfare of the Germans improving? If not that their people have a better life, what it means that an economy is going well then?

We read about micro-jobs and how some retired people have to work again in one of the richest countries in the world.

What is the point of a stronger economy if the life is harder for their inhabitants?

I think that part of the answer is that this is a fight between countries only in appearance (or only as an excuse).
> And would I prefer to have the wealth and status of Rockefeller in 1916? of course.

You would prefer to live in a world without penecillan if it meant being richer than everyone else?
If you've got a camera facing backwards looking for cars in the other lane than evading into that lane might be safer in many cases where you can't count on the car behind you stopping in time. That's only a good plan for computers with sensors looking in every direction at once, nothing you or I should ever try when we're driving on the highway.

And yes, the car was too close. But the automatic systems don't kick in until they're necessary to avoid an imminent collision. Hopefully autonomous cars won't make that mistake.
Penn Jillette said there are two certainties:

1. The world is always getting better.

2. Everyone thinks it's always getting worse.
Just because Facebook is big and supports something isn't necessarily a good thing. Their goals, resources and accepted trade-offs aren't likely the same as your own. For a large company like Facebook, handling large changes to a library aren't a concern because they have essentially limitless development resources. For small operations like mine (and maybe yours) these breaking changes can reduce the time you spend actually improving your product significantly.

For me, the instability and unopinionated nature of the group of technologies that loosely define "React" have been a real turn off. When answers to questions like "What language should you program in?", "How should you store your data?" and "How should I handle routing between pages?" all have no specific answer, it leads to a fragmentation of knowledge that in my past experience usually leads to a technology's demise.