skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Clojure has the easiest learning curve I've ever experienced, it took 3 days to bring my co-founder (a Scala dev) up to speed. I am also a former scala dev, I flatMapped that shit, etc. That Scala coolaid tasted far better going down as a starry eyed 20-something than it did on the way back up ... Scala's own source code is incomprehensible, let alone the emergent monstrosities built by well meaning humans that aren't in the top 1000 scala experts on the planet... Scala, fundamentally, simply doesn't make any sense at all, it was a bad idea, you can't fuse OOP and FP without violent and polarized flamewars and fracturing the community into incompatible sects. The experiment failed.
I think you linked something that has little to do with the subject at hand in order to take a jab at Poettering. Lame behaviour.

The issue, as I remember it, is more complex than you suggest with your quip. Who is the vendor for a distributed copy of systemd, is it systemd or the distributor?
If you think about it, a 55/56 ratio (.98) is only commensurate with a distribution of mathematical talent by which the vast majority of women can't add 2 and 2 together.

Like, it would not even justified by women being "somewhat" less good at maths at the high level than men. Women would have to be really, really bad at maths for that to be a natural result.
Dragon's radiation-tolerant design (2012)
Clarification: 18 containerised services can absolutely be the right choice. It’s just my experience says the trade off between the costs of maintaining that versus a smaller PAASed system rarely come out in favour of it.
Is there a substitute for mac/osx?
An article about Poyakonda: http://kandalaksha.su/poyakonda/
That is not correct, 6 months support is for the releases that aren't LTS. LTS releases are three years.

Without generics, GUI toolkits, good quality SQL drivers from the vendors themselves, enterprise frameworks and the IDE quality of Java and C#, Go will never be an actual threat to them.

Go 2.0 might be, if it ever happens.
Anatomy of a clojure reducer
So how can we approach safety in a systematic manner?

Clearly 'blame' isn't an appropriate response. It has to involve tooling.
Aside from H3 I'd argue everything on that list is within our grasp if we tried to do so.
It's all over man, not just crypto. Banks, credit, games,...technology has progressed but up and coming talent has degressed.
Moralism and the Arts
I'm quite certain that wasn't what it was, given the flow of the conversation, but interesting idea nonetheless.
Instead of messing with the etf’s directly, take a look at the robo advisors. They auto rebalance, and can be much more tax efficient than ETFs as your portfolio grows.

The startups behave more reputably in this space than the incumbent players that added robos as an afterthought.

For instance, one big bank advertises zero management fees, but then keeps a pile of your invested money in cash (to invest for its own uses, I guess), and then lets a third party exercise the robo trades.

The third party pays to do this because they can make money from arbitrage by sneaking their own trades in before your trades.

(I have no affiliation with anyone in this space—just a happy customer. I’m going to great pains to avoid naming names, since you should do your own research.)
Rising Debt and Rising Rates
In theory you can make more by putting the money in something with higher returns. Plus, you get to deduct a portion of the interest from your taxes, and in theory putting the excess money somewhere else is additional diversification.

AKA instead of paying your mortgage at 4% interest, you invest it in something that make 5.5% and gain an additional 1.5%-a few percent in taxes+a few tents of a percent in taxes on the 4% interest.

Frankly, its a good theory, but given the volatility of the markets, its hard to guarantee your going to actually come out ahead. Particularly since interest rates are generally computed by people who are looking at the risk/reward factors, and the interest rates have to be high enough to attract the risk adverse capital.

The one thing that is for sure, is that you should never really be sending early payments to your mortgage company despite all the financial advisors telling you to to do so. If you want to pay your mortgage off early your better off putting the money in a low risk investment and then paying it off when the outstanding mortgage balance falls below the value of your savings. That is because overwhelmingly your just giving your mortgage company an interest free loan due to the fact that they apply the over-payment to the final payments and don't adjust the amortization schedule.
Economist downgrades USA to flawed democracy
If you aren’t capable of defending your claims, why even reply? You made a sweeping general claim with no evidence: the responsible thing to do would be admitting it and not repeating the process.
Since lithium is one of the lightest elements, it doesn't seem possible to create batteries that will have the same power:weight ratio. MinutePhysics explains it better than I ever could, basically all the options require lithium:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdPqWv-eVIc

Regarding recycling, you're right, lithium-ion batteries are 100% recyclable. However, the economics don't make it feasible, so it's not going to be done until the that equation changes:

https://waste-management-world.com/a/1-the-lithium-battery-r...

> Recycled lithium is as much as five times the cost of lithium produced from the least costly brine based process. It is not competitive for recycling companies to extract lithium from slag, or competitive for the OEMs to buy at higher price points from recycling companies. Though lithium is 100% recyclable, currently, recycled lithium reports to the slag and is currently used for non-automotive purposes, such as construction, or sold in the open-markets. However, with the increasing number of EVs entering the market in the future and with a significant supply crunch, recycling is expected to be an important factor for consideration in effective material supply for battery production.

So once the price of lithium increases 500%, recycling will become feasible.

All I'm saying is that my intuition on the numbers isn't as optimistic as others. There are diminishing returns on all our natural resources once we pass the peak price for extraction. Lithium is just one of those resources that I feel we're being relatively careless about.

In a world where economics favored long-term sustainability over short-term profits we would be increasing the price ahead of time to slow extraction and increase incentives for recycling the invention of lithium-sulfur or lithium-air batteries now, while there is still easily accessible lithium in the ground.
How else would you power a moon base without getting stuck sending up material forever?
Decide whether the hourly rate offered is good enough to make up for not having cofounder level of equity and influence.

If it isn't, work on something else.
There is a chat group in Telegram, called "BitGrail Trollbox". It doesn't have a direct link, but one can join when searching the group name through client application. The Bomber dude is there, and it seemed like there is a discussion about what car to buy with all that money.
I was removed from it the instant I joined, maybe someone can join and quickly dump the chat log?
Based on a wide range of ability testing we see fat tails (edit: more black swans than expected), it would be more surprising if they where skinny.

Granted, we can't measure very high ability very well due to sampling bias. I am simply saying even if there is a modest bias that's not enough it would have to be huge to account for these numbers.

So, I am bringing up something else with the kind of distribution we are talking about which has more accurate data. Women live ~ 5% longer both looking at the average lifespans and oldest examples which is a very significant difference. Yet, the oldest population has more men in it than you would think.

Edit: Math: 6 year longer lifespan + 50% risk of death per year = you would expect ~1% of top 100 oldest people to be men.
Why can't it make sense on economic grounds? I would imagine that once there was a moonbase there would be a number of rather wealthy people who would like to visit.

After all if Blue Planet can cause interest in luxury $4m submarines[0] I don't see why the moon would be an exception.

Who knows, seeing Earth from outside might even trigger some activity to keep it viable for us!

[0] https://www.slashgear.com/aston-martins-next-luxury-vehicle-...
This is also true for stocks.

As a buy pulls the latest price up, all of the other shares are worth more, and the opposite is true: for every sale, the price might slip down a bit; in the event of a large sell-off, you end up reaching zero value a lot earlier than everything can be sold off.

Market cap is a bit of a fantasy metric, but has utility - just less so for crypto where you can't make any comparisons to tangible assets, liabilities or even market potential.
Hilariously enough, the only people to reliably not completely biff cryptocurrency service implementation have been illegal market sites. If they didn't plan to run off with the money in the first place, sites like these managed to operate for years at a time before (inevitably) being crushed by the long arm of the law. Talk about do-or-die code correctness and validation!
> because I would be the first one to buy a self-driving car where I could fall asleep behind the wheel. I would love to take a trip from SF to Portland or LA like this.

You likely wouldn't be buying a car anymore when this becomes possible... this entire video series is about the replacement of individual car ownership with fleet based systems.

This is the big thing people don't factor in:

- the AI "problem" gets easier and easier the more cars talk to each other

- the average person won't need to 'afford' self-driving cars or buy add-ons for their cars, they'll just use Uber/Waymo and save money

- mass produced smaller fleet cars designed specifically for the job reduce costs per car

- fleet subscription prices to become cheaper and cheaper than owning a car (via competition, technical progress, etc), further increasing adoption

- 10x more developers/designers/traffic engineers start focusing on the problem (with real life/death consequences)

- 100x more real-time data is shared, thousands of new unexpected events become optimized each day

- AI cars get safer and safer, creating great social and altruistic pressure to not drive non-AI cars

- creating public health incentives as less traffic fatalities and law enforcement reduce expenditures

- countless businesses get wealthy off it (Waymo/Amazon/etc) and reinvest in the industry and R&D

- hundreds of billions in capital gets poured in rather than tens of billions

- traffic/infrastructure begins to be designed around them, dedicated lanes are built, further increasing the utility of using fleets/self-driving > manual

Once it hits a certain inflection point of adoption and utility it will be explosively exponential rate of adoption, just like smartphones.
Both threads are exactly about the subject of the discussion. How does it have “little to do with the subject at hand?”
>The Moon meshes up well with industrial space activities around Earth, which we'll need anyway, and which'll create plenty of demand around itself for missions and resources.

This is essentially my argument. Short term it doesn't offer many advantages but without it, it makes the really big and cool industrial space projects more difficult.
The secret weapon has a (serious) flaw on Linux though: you can't run strace on programs that use strace. That's because the Linux ptrace call is not re-entrant.
I have also read and heard from different financial articles and podcasts that there is no known upper bound to amount of sovereign debt a country can have before keeling over - it is more important that creditors and investors have faith that the government can pay it off, or that the country is good for the money.

However, I tend to agree with your comment. There may be no upper bound to sovereign debt, but economic good times can't last forever, what goes up must come down. And should creditors ever need to collect that debt there must either be high inflation or high taxes, or not pay back loans and risk sanctions.
Are you "still working on prototype" or they are "still working on prototype"?

Are they paying you now? Are they going to pay you now in hard green cash that you can use in the grocery to buy bananas? (Not IOU, not equity, not an internal ICO, real dollars.)

Also, for YC a founder must have at least a 10% of equity. It's not an official definition, but it is a rule that they use.
Greenland is also a nice parallel for an entirely different reason. The land is at the extreme margin of habitability, definitely for the Vikings who settled there. And when the traders of the North Sea stopped visiting Greenland, the colony disappeared within a few generations. (Most historians now believe that the loss of trade is what killed Norse Greenland, not the Little Ice Age)
This is a good point. Single founders fail when the single founder has problems. Relationships fail when both individuals have problems.

The value of a co-founder is that they can cover for some of your problems. But likewise, a co-founder can also introduce problems, and if their problems interact with your problems, then the relationship turns sour and you suffer a divorce, which can be its own problem, and tear the company apart.
They added some useful stuff in subsequent versions... my recollection (though this is going back a while now) is that even only 3.81 was a worthwhile upgrade over 3.80!

However I have better things to do than try to figure out how to build GNUstuff myself on Windows.
This isn't meant to question your experiences, but to provide an alternative story, just for the sake of readers who might feel discouraged.

I'm a senior SWE at a major tech company. My background is definitely toward the lower end of the middle: my family went without health insurance at times, we passed down clothes from sibling to sibling, and most nights of the week our usual meal was pasta with canned sauce or hot pockets (we never went to bed hungry, so we were privileged in that respect). I went to public school and got subsidized lunches. I got a full ride on need-based aid for college, and I didn't get a BS in CS. I'm smart, but far from brilliant.

I'm acutely aware of class in a way most of my colleagues aren't. But most aren't from "rich" backgrounds: I'd say the most typical background is upper-middle, with at least one parent who's a working professional.

Have I had to work "harder" than most? Probably, but it seems like a really messy and ill-posed question. Getting a job at one of the big tech companies is a combination of preparation and luck of the draw. It's easy to read conspiracy into the fact that most people from poor backgrounds get rejected, but the reality is that most people from rich or middle class backgrounds also get rejected.

Everyone brings a different set of privileges into the job hunting process. But you have as much agency as anyone, and you're doing yourself a disservice if you trade that sense of agency in for despair or bitterness.
That source is absolutely wrong though - it originated from a report from Bankrate which only counted money in people’s savings (not checking) accounts. With rates under 1% for the past decade many people haven’t been even using a savings account.
i think it's telling that you assume i have 'investors' to please, and that they will somehow punish me for my unjust mean words and actions that hurt someone's imaginary feelings. like 'investors' are somehow the arbiter of moral virtue in the world. maybe they are in your world, and that's why you are so shocked at my simple telling of the truth of how people operate in a company hierarchy.

i think what that just means you worship venture capitalists and fluffy language they espouse (in a cynically false way, i might add) over real world descriptors.

i started my business specifically to dramatically mitigate the possibility that small concentrations of people will have any financial leverage over me.
Surely, the same people who rejected vending machine outlets instead of 24/7s on every corner, will embrace this new driving vending machien outlet.

We used to make things in this industry, build real software, that enhanced peoples lives and added value to there existance or gave them new abilitys, new senses. Now we are supossed to sink our claws in the next best industrys pocket, to disrupt it, which means just hijack and put the same boring industry in place, with new overlords.
And that is supossed to be visionary.
Maybee with enough venture capital they will build a machine that can applaud to such endavours and cheer them on.
MITM proxies are like port scanners - open secrets, trees full of low hanging fruit. Every developer should play with one. It's eye-opening.
December Bitcoin price spike caused by airdrops?
> Social Security existence is based on the state ability to extract taxes, and voters rejecting candidates who want to dismantle it.

You need to watch the discussions around "entitlement reforms" that's being promoted currently. Voters can't reject candidates after the fact, who won't seek re-election after passing (or being the lightning-rod of) unpopular legislation, opting instead for cushy "jobs" in the industry they legislated in favor of against their consituents interests.
If you define it as "building infrastructure on the Moon to do so," no, it is not available with current technology. Where are you going to get your acids for refining, for example, if you can't scavenge from old piles of organic goop?
Those tickers mentioned are mutual funds.

I wouldnt put too much trust in robo advisors as they are very new. Unless, we're talking Schwab's robo advisor which benefits from the scale of being in an already bigger place.
Two things I don’t get about the robovisers: first isn’t there an ETF which does equivalent for any given risk profile? If not why not? And secondly whenever I look at a roboviser I check all of the risk happy YOLO boxes and they still recommend a very hedged portfolio, ie don’t get near the risk of a basic sp500 etf.
am I weird in that I'd prefer to host a known version of a dependency than effectively hot-link like this?
Avoiding this sort of attack is a just a side-benefit to the main premise of knowing that its always going to work consistently.
Kids must have made those somewhat unevenly shaped jars and bowls, each easily held within a child’s hand,...

I feel a certain knowing connection with these parents of 4,000 years ago, when I imagine them also with a shelf of inexpert yet earnest pottery.
This article misses the point for the Scientist in data science. HPC will not support docker, Singularity seems to be the winner: http://singularity.lbl.gov/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airdrop_(cryptocurrency)
This wasn't a very good article.
I feel slightly uncomfortable with a blanket allocation such as this one. Being 80% equities usually works for someone just starting out their careers in life. Typically as you get closer to retirement you would want to move the balance of your money to lower volatility fixed income products.
The first post in that thread was made 2017-05-03.
I’m obviously biased but I thought it was a decent O/S. App support was minimal but with the WinOS2 support you could run most Windows code. I thought the TCP/IP stack was years ahead of Windows, not quite comparable to what you'd find on SunOS/Solaris or whatever DEC ran on the microvax workstations.

IBM, being IBM, charged an arm and both legs for the development kit, even to internal employees.

I managed to use it until June 1998 when I found it was getting to be too much of a pain to dual boot to Windows to open Netscape (there was a Netscape browser for OS/2 but it was web years behind what they were distributing on Windows and *nix).
That helps, but in my experience it’s much more useful to be able to decouple deployment from _delivery of features_.

Want to change the layout of a page? Normally this would require at least a little coordination with, say, customer support or marketing teams. We don’t want to hang around waiting for schedules to line up, so it’s often easier to simply deploy the feature behind a flag - it means it can, for example, be rolled out to some customer cohorts before others (beta testers?), easily rolled back, made live by the product team rather than engineering - that sort of thing.

Though of course a dev environment is _also_ incredibly important!
The title is misleading. The store is not self-driving:

The system is also designed to restock itself automatically. In a city, one Moby could self-drive to a warehouse to replenish itself while another takes its place (the current model can be controlled remotely or driven by a human; the designers are still finalizing the autonomous technology, and it’s not yet legal for it to drive itself on Chinese roads).
Good question. In short, no, funding didn't change things for the worse.

In fact, for a while, it made things better - when the investor took a more active role in the day-to-day of the business, he provided a much needed buffer between us. Our relationship was never necessarily bad, but the dynamic was toxic for the business, as it impeded communication. Literally having the investor (or his highly business-skilled minion) in the room helped no end. It was when they went hands off that things went really funky, as while things around us in the business had changed for the better, as well as our abilities to grow and manage it, our interpersonal relationship still had the same problems. Having an extra head in the room was a massive help, and was actually the principle reason I'd been so keen on the deal - we didn't need the cash (a whole other story over differences with him as to how to manage finances) - but only when it was there. A monthly board meeting just wasn't enough.

So - I can't say for absolute certain, but if you already have a good relationship, it's unlikely to change. Just ensure you continue to be open with one another.

Also, if they're good early stage investors, they won't dictate - they'll advise.
Rule of thumb: 100 - your age = % of your portfolio you should have in stocks.
Shameless plug: I found the complex type/macro/implicits mixture in scalajs-react hard to work with and made a wrapper that’s simpler to use:

https://github.com/Ahnfelt/react4s
> So you think it’s a good idea for employees to go to the board with a position out of sync with management and bypass the management chain?

he just didn't like the language i used (it's blunt, and describes a social dynamic he's probably upset about). he forgot all about what's actually being discussed here, which is an IC-level employee vocalizing to the co-founders/executives and board about the direction/strategy/highlevel leadership of the company.
Dtruss: https://opensourcehacker.com/2011/12/02/osx-strace-equivalen...

Also, on OSX you have access to (mostly) the full power of dtrace, so you can do diagnostics on closed-source, debug-stripped running programs that make strace look small by comparison.
Cynical view would be its a good way to force unified accounts across your various verticals - a-la google plus, and in that case you can sell as one entity as opposed to seperate.
What you're asking for are "target date" ETFs. Similar (non-ETF) products exist in some shape at the big money managers like Vanguard and Schwab...

Why don't they exist as ETFs? This is a good question. It's probably only a matter of time before we see such products. Especially that given the current pace of things, there is a new ETF everyday in the US. I've personally looked into building target date ETFs through my work as well.