skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think the counterpoint is that for some people, the more human experience is not a selling point, and actually a fairly large negative. Beyond the points laid out before, I have multiple children and multiple pets, and I'm the some person responsible for the technology stack at my small company which (means I'm on call for somewhat infrequent but not unheard of issues). Not being allowed my phone might just mean "eh, it's irresponsible of me to go" depending on the situation, and that's with my phone safely ensconced in my pocket except for an emergency.

Also, let's not let this "human" experience stuff slide, what it really means is "a late 1990's to early 2000's experience". It's not like pyrotechnics, large screens and giant electronic speakers are anything you would experience prior to 100 years ago.

If you don't want people doing certain things with their phones, then make it clear what is and isn't acceptable and combat it directly. For example, give everyone a wristband, and explain exactly what it's for. It's your one warning/get out of etiquette jail free card. If they have to come and tell you to stop doing something you were already warned about, they take the wristband. If they have to tell you again, you're out.
Yes. There's actually a financial incentive, and pays out only if very aggressive goals are reached.

Jobs wanted to make the very best computers.

Musk is trying to open Mars to humanity.
I've been looking into buying an EV recently. The only thing comes close to anything I want is the Chevy Bolt. But, they don't seem to have launched a 2018 yet, it's a hatchback (which I don't want), and it's wildly expensive for the value delivered. I'd rather just get a Model 3/S honestly, even with the expense differential.
What to Do If iPhone Won’t Connect to iTunes for Invalid Response?
My favorite (somewhat) obscure C feature:

puts("Line one\nLine two\nLine three");

and

puts("Line one\n"
"Line two\n"
"Line three\n");

mean the exact same thing. This can be a godsend for making complex debug/log output more presentable in the source.
No. Most banks can see the difference between an ACH and direct deposit. M&T doesn't, but Chase does for example.
You would think that if they have the ability to audit at that level and with such prompt responses they would have the resources to lock down the systems properly and to implement a consent policy that works. Allowing everybody access is a bit like binding the cat to the bacon and then getting upset because the cat can not be trusted with bacon.

Better to keep the cat and the bacon separate, the temptation to peek is large and if there is one thing I know about people then it is that curiosity is a pretty common affliction.

And that is assuming that those accesses are on purpose, people can make honest mistakes as well and they will also look like unauthorized access.
For me, this is a no-brainer. Free-market is an extremely powerful tool, but Free-market itself does not have heart or any respect for Human Rights whatsoever.

If we want to create societies where Human Rights are respected, Free-market need to be operated under constraints. Yes, those constraints will slow growth and, maybe, some rich people will be less rich, but the other option is Neo-Feudalism and Barbarie.

So, the question is: how much injustice are we willing to tolerate for the sake of growth? Every society has a different answer, but you can easily see different models in Japan, US and Europe.
I don't think everybody is every purely anything. Self-interest is one of our motivators. Altruism another. Fear of getting caught a whole other. Fear of alienating our peers another. We're extremely complex animals.

But self-interest is why modern capitalism survives despite, on the face of it, seeming like a terrible system. It would be very hard to convince people who had never heard of it to adopt it by description alone. But if you take away their source of food and clothing, and then offer them a wage by which they can purchase them instead, then you have yourself a participant.
1. Tesla can always enter into the ICE market with ease, not that they will do it, but they can and probably will succeed.
ICEs are much harder than electric engines.

2. Tesla is the new cool factor. Undeniably.
Tesla had the cool factor. Now they're 2 years away from being just another electric car.

4. Tesla's marketing machine is immense and enormously efficient.

99% of car buyers don't pay attention to social media when buying a car. Tesla has one of the smallest marketing machines in the industry; it's heavily reliant on social media to bring in buyers, which limits its customer base. Moreover, the reliance on social media is also its weakness, as it is subject to the whims of the online mob.

I remember Elon writing a blog article about a journalists negative review of their car and the discussion about Tesla dominated social media for a few weeks. No one even bothers about the management at the big 3, but Elon is a celebrity who is given geek god like status.

I remember that coverage as well. It was uniformly negative about Elon's blustering response to the review, and raised significant concerns in the market. If a single negative review is enough to tank Tesla, it's got no chance of surviving Model 3 mass production.
It doesnt matter how cool their marketing is, if they cant scale their product manufacturing. You can't really sell a box of air, that is supposed to be a car.
It sounds like he tried, and determined that he was unable to sufficiently influence the outcomes on his own. It's conceivable that, by drawing attention to his concerns, his resignation can prove to be more productive than remaining on the committee.
So have I! I'm glad that there's a handful of people also obsessed about this. It just seems so important and surprising how few people talk about it.

What have you found? What do you think the most promising options are? If you (or anyone else reading this) would like to send me an email about this, I'd love to talk more about it, my email's in my profile.
I'm at GitLab but not on the Gitaly team. I think we are using libgit2 but that it doesn't contain all the calls we need.
Why not? I'm serious. Please don't say "don't use C". We all agree on that. I'm asking why one should not use clever macro tricks -- I know many codebases that do, and I'd not shy away from it when I have to use C anyways.
Just to be clear, Safari 11.1 will support Service Workers, which is available in the currently beta versions of iOS 11.3 and macOS 10.13.4.

Safari Technology Preview has had Service Worker support for a few versions now, which doesn’t require a beta version of macOS: https://webkit.org/blog/8084/release-notes-for-safari-techno...
As a believer in Jesus, I agree. Within the larger atheistic framework of the world, who or what are these authorities of which you speak? There are no moral absolutes in such a world. Heck, look at the Bill of Rights. It's predicated that there is a god that has made it manifest in creation that humans are a) special, and b) have intrinsic rights that Bill of Rights simple enumerates.
I can sympathize with some of the poor people who had accidental expenses that they could not have planned for. But I'm really having trouble understanding how this article makes it seem those fees are hard to avoid as poor person.

When I was living under $1000 budget, overdraft fee was unheard of, because when you have very little money, it's easy to manage, you only need a few hundred dollars in your account for daily spending. And bigger purchases (>$100) are planned so they can be actually paid for. I also never knew there were consequences for paying electricity late, because renting my own place is out of my budget.

Funnily, I only ran into those "poor people" issues like expensive credit card interest, overdraft fees, predator car loans after getting my first full-time developer job, because I stopped managing my expenses.
I hate that word "Staffers", immediately makes me think of politics.
Technical solutions are great, but ultimately this is a human problem. Not every firm has the resources or know-how to do all that, but any firm can have a clear policy of termination and lawsuits for anyone found abusing access to customer data.
The gas is valid if they only want to negotiate $3/hr or something like that. It's always more, of course.
Historically scientists rarely agree either but you can't say that by definition they are rarely correct. Most economists probably agree on more core concepts than they disagree on.

I have no horse in this race, just thought it's a funny reason to dismiss an entire field.
Not saying you're wrong, but could you provide an example?
That statement is only true in a very narrow context.

Much of your DNA is silenced by being formed into dense chromatin - DNA that is tightly packed onto a protein scaffold. However, the regions that are silenced change throughout development, and these regions are not strictly inaccessible. This is seen with CNSes, conserved non-coding sequences. As the name implies, these are not traditional genes that make protein products, but are usually small regulatory sequences that often affect chromatin state, and sometimes at a great distance. I've had colleagues attempt for years to identify a mutation, only to find it that the causative change occurred many kilobases away from the relevant gene. This is partly the reason why DNA is not 'plug and play', as the genomic context of a particular sequence often matters.

Which is why DNA isn't really linear, at least on a genomic scale. The processes of transcription and translation (DNA -> RNA -> Protein) are linear to be sure, but the regulatory networks that determine gene expression are happening all at once on a massively parallel scale. These molecules are also 3-dimensional and can fold back on themselves and cause modifications. Essentially every fundamental process in gene expression is able to be regulated, whether it's enhancers and repressors affecting transcription, RNA-mediated silencing, RNA splicing, RNA modifications and stability, histone modifications, protein modifications, protein stability, phosphylation or any of the dozens of other post-translational regulation, and on and on and on.. And there are thousands of genes which can impact all manner of other genes at any of those levels, either directly or otherwise. It's a wonder that we're able to tease anything out of it that makes sense.

Generally speaking, I caution against computer analogies for biology. Biology is messy! It rarely works how you want it to. Even relatively common and basic techniques in molecular biology require a great deal of troubleshooting, and even in the best labs with loads of experience, sometimes things simply refuse to work how you'd like them to. You don't hear too much about synthetic biology anymore (it's still going, just less hype) because the premise was incredibly naive; you were never going to get bits and pieces of DNA to behave in a predictable manner. Just about everyone with wet lab experience suspected this.

For context, the current hype about CRISPR is almost entirely based on how well it works, not what it does. We've had a few different techniques for modifying DNA for a while now, but none of them worked quite well enough to practically accomplish all the interesting things that CRISPR is now enabling.
Nokia still sells millions of phones...

The market got bigger. Nokia did not.
PropTech – FinTech's Next Frontier
Everyone's privileged over someone else in some way unless you are literally living the worst life on the planet. That's how life is. I don't even understand how that could possibly change.
Everyone keeps saying that EV's are a huge paradigm shift, but they don't explain how - in the end its a car - and not much more inherently high tech than many other cars - replacing the method of propulsion, does not fundamentally alter how you build it, or how you source the parts to build it.
> What was "cool" to the parent's generation is often considered "uncool" to the children's generation.

Yeah but the "parent generation" is the one which has the cash to buy a Tesla. My generation, unless made rich by bitcoin trading or stocks? Lol used VW junker it is.

For my generation, I'd bet that access to (autonomous?) car sharing will be the cool thing - and, guess what, Tesla has the upper hand there. Every vehicle transmits data back to homebase... and that data is why Tesla is so hyped and highly valuated, not the cars or the patents, probably not even Elon Musk himself.

They may sell the car at a hardware loss, but gain so much data for which they'd have to pay test drivers instead and still get a dime of the percentage they now get. Hell Tesla could close down shop today and I bet there would be waaaaay more than enough cash from companies willing to buy that data.

The only exception I can think of is Google with its Maps/Streetview cars as these have enormous, probably even better, sensors by design and in theory Google could get by just fine - but the amount of data is a blip compared to the miles already driven by all the Teslas out there.

Further adding to the value of Tesla is that they are trying (and often have succeeded) in breaking down the "dealership" structures... while the "old" car makers are more or less stuck to that structure (they don't want to piss off existing dealers), Tesla can react way quicker to demand.

edit: oh, and "modern" infotainment? App connections? Nothing the big car makers have to show comes even remotely close to what Tesla can do - their entire model is different. Digital services are at the core of any Tesla, so deep in fact that Tesla can dynamically "unlock" more capacity in the batteries, with frequent software updates - while even a top-notch VW has to visit a dealer to get a de-stinker firmware update. And don't get me started about the quality of the software in any non-Tesla car. No one comes remotely close to that level, and no one comes close in development speed/agility.
Plenty of businesses operate off the principle of losing money on one product SKU while making it up on others. Think Dollar Shave Club, game console sales, etc. I imagine banks could take a hit on low-income accounts and make it up on high-income accounts. But apparently they just don't have the financial incentive in this situation to do so. I just wish the moral incentive was enough.
Alan Turing and Buddhism
I don’t know the breakdown, but it’s: banking software, mailed account statements, debit cards, phone support centers, websites, bank branches, compliance, ATM networks, check processing etc.

Obviously some of these costs scale very cheaply, but there is quite a bit that goes into a modern bank account+ some customers are costlier than others (lost of call center calls/lost debit cards for example)
That's you. It's not particular to any industry.
What level of guarantees will Redis Streams have during power failure? Can I configure if events are close to immediately persistent to disk VS served from memory and occasionally paged to disk?
Tsk tsk, if you're going to know about label values and other GCC C extensions, you might as well know about statement expressions (another GCC C extension). `({ <statements> })` is an expression.

Naturally, Clang also supports statement expressions...

EDIT: I highly recommend spending some time reading about all the various GCC C extensions, and what compilers support them (typically Clang, but also Sun Studio, if that's still around..., and maybe others). There are quite a few very useful ones.
Thanks for taking the time to respond.

I can certainly see how you could interpret my remarks on disrespect as "perceiving it (...) as a threat to one's dominance", but this was certainly not my intention.

My context is of never having had a 'bad' manager, they have always been agreeable and pleasant with a good technical understanding and (I can only assume) high self-esteem.

I think I have used the word respect in two slightly different ways: one when describing employer/employee relationship and one where describing manager/managed.

When I talk about disrespect in the context of a manager I mean it on more of an interpersonal relationship level, not as a struggle for dominance in some sort of power structure.

> "...As an employee I would see that as weakness, especially if combined with technical incompetence."

Adding the bit about "technical incompetence" sound to me like you are projecting certain other attributes on the hypothetical manager that we are discussing. What has been your experience with managers?

> "It's funny, an employer actually asked me that in my first job and I shrugged my shoulders and I said I probably wouldn't notice, which was an answer that clearly infuriated him."

When you have few bills to pay and/or other obligations then this attitude is fine, but I think for a large group of people (e.g. with families to support) this would be a real problem.

The point I was trying to make in the paragraph about "programmers acting any way they like" was that this may be an accept/successful strategy in the short term, but it may not be optimal long term. However indispensable you are now there is someone somewhere out there looking to optimize your job or make your skill set irrelevant. It's certainly possible that you are the exception and that no one will be able to do this to you, but I don't think that it applies to the majority of people reading this thread (I know it doesn't apply to me).

It seems like you view the employer/employee relationship in a very adversarial way, rather than an optimal way for both parties to get something they want. I have had jobs in the past (mainly part time service worker type jobs) where I feel that this attitude is valid. However, most companies I have worked for as a programmer have been small/medium level and started/funded by the same people (no VC money, no faceless career CEO or public shareholders). In these situations I have found that there is no calculated malice or attempt to 'enslave' you, just a few motivated people putting their own money and future on the line to try and make something of value and better themselves.

> "By his definition, you think programmers are "too free", no?"

No, I think a lot of programmers think that they are "too free", but are in-fact only "short term too free"
"2014, Jack White criticised people at gigs who spend more time on their mobile phones than watching the artist perform.

White suggested that he is “wasting time” performing for people who “can’t even clap” because they have a phone in one hand and a drink in the other."
The fact that the risk is comparatively low is no excuse to disregard it. Furthermore, any number of emergencies can be exacerbated by a lack of phone access - medical emergencies, fires, or any other major problem might have significantly higher fatality rates in the absence of telecommunications.
Had a similar experience with a relative that did some time in prison.

The conditions of parole required weekly visits to a far off parole officer visit that had no public transportation access.

So, no prospects to get a job because of (now almost universal) background checks. So, no income. And a defacto requirement to either have a car, or have money for a 15 mile Uber trip every week.

It basically means that if you are a parolee, you beg friends and family, or violate and return to prison for longer than your original sentence. The trip is a 3 hour commitment, so begging doesn't work well unless you have a really flexible friend or relative.

Oy. Guess what cycle that creates? People turning down parole just to not have that monkey on their back. Trading 5+ years of their lives because they can't satisfy an impossible ask. All for drug addict type issues... possession, shoplifting, public intox, loitering, driving with no insurance, etc. No violence, no real palpable victims other than themselves. US problem if you didn't guess already.
That’s exactly what I meant by cross selling - many bank accounts are actually priced at a loss with the hopes of also getting you to sign up for a credit card or car insurance
It's a luxury brand that has yet to reach profitability. If you cant be profitable in a luxury good market, you're doing it wrong.
I spent about 6 hours in a local credit union finalizing a loan for a new car I purchased early last year.

They had made some mistakes, specifically saying they could extend the initial certification beyond 30 days when they could not, and couldn't disperse the funds without having the loan re-certified by a loan officer. Unfortunately, it was a Saturday and there were no loan officers on-hand. Double unfortunately, they needed the original bill of sale (pink carbon paper) to certify the loan.

Every single bit of the process of getting this loan was like pulling teeth. That said, they pulled it off even on a Saturday. They realized they had made a mistake, they called in a loan officer who came to the branch on a Saturday and certified the loan. They even stayed open about two hours late so we could drive to the dealership and get the pink-slip and drive back.

While the whole process was kafkaesque compared to dealer financing, unlike dealer financing these people were friendly and genuinely seemed to want to help and they did genuinely everything in their power to actually help.

And, I got a crazy-low interest rate on my loan too.

If they just spent a bit more time on their process, say, a PDF with a list of information on what you need to provide for a loan and when and things like approval expiration timelines they could make the process so much more pleasurable.

In any event, A+++ would credit union again.
I think you're misusing the term "anarchist". Anarchy is to hierarchy what atheism is to theism. It means nobody uses coercive force on anybody else, it doesn't mean people don't work together. There are a few anarchist communes in the US; the people living there carry out construction projects and so forth, so they do work together on things that are mutually beneficial, it's just that they do it without any specific person being in charge.
Do you use PuTTY? Because PuTTY does crazy C macro things. Actually, maybe not that crazy. It just has C functions that a thousands of lines long, using macros to turn them into fancy Duff's device co-routines.
If this is not a robot, then what is a robot?
About two years ago, my credit union started taking lessons from national banks. Charged late fees on a two loan accounts that had never been late (auto-drafted payments from a direct deposit destination); charged me for a replacement debit card when I reported one stolen; can't figure out that "wiring money" is actually free and points me at a third-party service they've hired for transferring money between banks - there's a fee for that; converted my free checking account into a fee checking account without notice.

In all these cases, I could not get the fees reversed on the phone, but had to visit a branch in person, where the branch manager was indignant that I had the gall to rob the financial institution of their fees. I did get the fees refunded. And two weeks ago, I closed all my accounts with them.

I am fortunate to have a community bank that acts the way my credit union once did. The only quibble I've ever had with them is with the staff not knowing the rules on overdraft fees.
> replacing the method of propulsion, does not fundamentally alter how you build it, or how you source the parts to build it.

There are fundamental changes in car design. No need for a huge tunnel and axle in RWD cars, and no huge, loud, hot and vibrating engine in the front. In addition the battery pack shifts down the centre of gravity (thus making the car way better in handling curves), and the now free space in the front (what Tesla calls "frunk") is a huge crumple zone.

Also, with the engine there goes a huge complex part with many different highly specialized suppliers - granted, it's replaced by another set of parts, but fundamentally it's orders of magnitude less parts, and easier to install.
It would be an ideal standard if it supported browsers.