skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Given the possibility of remote work, [...] urban centers.

Even HN doesn't yet seem to be discussing the impact of coming VR/AR on people's geographic distribution.

Perhaps it's still too low profile? Eye tracking; facial expression tracking (researchy); foveated rendering reducing GPU requirements; inexpensive laptops with discrete GPUs; HMDs with monitor-like angular resolution; inexpensive finger tracking (hopefully)... perhaps it's easy to not notice these if you're not tracking the tech? Easy to think "remote work, so video conferencing, so limited impact - far better to do open plan offices"? Instead of "the practice and spatial constraints of software development will change dramatically over the next half decade".
Right: like with horses[1], the problem isn't that humans will die out entirely, but that only a tiny subset of them will "earn a keep" beyond subsistence -- i.e. be able to sell labor whose market value is more than the amount needed to keep them alive.

The only horses that stayed around were the ones that could perform a novelty (racing/entertainment) or low-demand-niche role (short trips on rugged terrain).

[1] A really, really underappreciated and overdismissed analogy.
"I have [ailment]. I do X. I feel better."

"Totes in your mind dude. Feeling better could not possibly be evidence of improved physical health."

This line of thinking makes me crazy and I don't understand why it is considered acceptable in any environment that remotely considers itself to be a space that values logic and science and the like.
Its a free way to test he knows how to use SSH w/o a SSH server to talk to on the other end.
it's the only thing you can use if you want to write imperative style within pure FP. Obviously a simple example like that makes no difference, but with a giant app, if you eliminate mutations you get many benefits, and in such apps, sometimes you want to express things imperative, but still not mutate. So in other words, Monads are obviously useful, because the first assumption is that mutation is the root of most bugs, so you eliminate it but still use Monads to emulate it.
With some key information, I can help with writing the mission statement and with proofreading and editing the text once it's available. Contact Vic at victomlinson@proofpapers.com.
they being compared because they fall into a similar price range. 100K for a Model S, is higher than the vast majority of 5s and E klasse
https://wiki.debian.org/WhyTheName
I sometimes walk in but since I only work in the winter I never get to do it in the summer so spending 30 minutes in cold, wind and rain is not that nice. On the odd occasion I do walk I bring the dog with me and kill two birds with one stone, his walk and my commute!
You can do that, and often times debt providers will attach those sorts of provisions: "we'll lend you X and you can keep it as long as you achieve Y or maintain Z". One of the challenges with that is that you can set up domino effects where you miss one goal, and then as a result you don't get the money you need to hit the next and it spirals downwards.
"Fake it 'till you make it," is a statement of pure wisdom, at least with regards to success in America. Especially in IT.
What about academia? You mean new algorithms can’t be invented unless they can be immediately commercialized and profitable?

Also the Foundem guys tell a good story, but where’s the Hustle? If they had such good technology, why didn’t they pivot? Why didn’t they try to sell to Amazon or NextTag? In 1998 I met people that created a price comparison website scraping engine at a conference, they failed to get significant traction and sold for a ton of money to Amazon. The technology they created VDB or treating the internet as a virtual sql database, turned out to be backed by none other than Anand Rajaraman and someone most people will be familiar with Peter Norvig.

I mean, honestly, if these guys had something truly innovative, I’m pretty sure they could have arranged an acquisition.

Is there any scientific evidence at all that innovation is being crushed? This seems like an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence beyond a few anecdotes from losing startups. 95% of businesses fail to be viable for a host of reasons.

If you’re doing product search your main competitor these days is Amazon anyway.
It's always $10. It's a trick udemy uses (always on sale)
That is the scariest business model I've ever seen.

Imagine if it was used on coding... Learn how to code by coding companies projects for FREE.

Don't pay a gym to work out, work a shift at Amazon for FREE.
Got hit by a car banged my head on asphalt 1986 then wore a helmet all the time every time and never ever ever ever needed it again.. 30 years of riding. now I take my helmet off when I am on a trail but wear it on the street because of the iphone babies.
No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.

Price is a far more significant from of differentiation than random specs. The average person buying a Honda Civic can't afford a Model S, but the average person buying a Model S can afford to buy an S Class. People talk about market segments because they are meaningfully different.

That said, taxes, maintenance, and fuel differences do make a Model S cheaper to own and operate. So they arguably have significantly different prices.
I went looking for a replacement to escape Google, but I'd definitely disagree FastMail is "just not as good". On the contrary, it makes Gmail feel old and poorly maintained in comparison. It's better written software, before you get into the fact that you can get real human support for it.
Or just use actual SSH certificates instead of public keys so you don't need to have authorized_keys file at all.
what do you mean? from my experience, agents/recruitment agencies trade meat for money - they don't really care for anything than placing a candidate into a position and cash in.
Same here, I've biked to work pretty much every day since I moved to South Bay (except for rainy days, I'm not hardcore).

I'm lucky because there is a nice trail that I can ride on for the majority of my ride. But it's a little sad that the South Bay has so many built-in advantages for bike commuting (good weather year-round, mostly flat) but so little good bike infrastructure.

At least these guys are trying: https://bikesiliconvalley.org/
I could easily see that! :-O
My advice is not to worry about it (unless the itch bugs you so much that you're willing to invest a lot of time researching the answer).

I don't think you'll ever get a single, straight answer that satisfies you. Just reading this discussion, I'm sure you can see that people describe monads in wildly different ways. Some descriptions are minimalist (perhaps a bit reductionist): it's just an algebraic data structure, nothing to get excited about. Many rely heavily on metaphors: containers, "programmable syntax", and yes, even burritos have been used to explain them. Some conflate monads with properties that do show up often in monadic code, but aren't themselves inherently monadic (immutable data, pure functions, sequencing of evaluation). Some are very language-limited, in the sense that the description invariably turns into a debate over the semantic fine-points of the language being used (this will almost always happen when Haskell gets discussed, because expression evaluation is a very subtle thing in Haskell). Frankly it's a mess. The only safe ground you have is the algebraic definition, but that's not terribly useful for building an intuition about how one might use them.

I think that you (and me, and most everyday programmers) would use them in your code only if you were using some library that was designed in a monadic style. In Haskell, so many libraries use monads these days that it's a given: using Haskell for any practical purpose means using monads, whether you want to or not. In Ocaml (about as close to Haskell as you can get without being purely functional), they show up mainly in third-party libraries, mostly when you want to do something tricky like asynchronous I/O -- again, you use monads if you want to use the library. But in run-of-the-mill imperative languages, though, monads don't tend to show up very often, and when they do, they usually are very specific to one library or another.
Yup. I'm an entrepreneur who ran a sole proprietorship software business since 2007 or so. I've been at the top of my game to the point where I now enjoy a reputation as a key DSP guy in my industry (pro audio, recording studios etc) but I watched the income of my business collapse over the years, and got knocked down by that.

I observed that my troubles exactly tracked the Labor Share of wages as tracked by the Fed: I was impoverished to the exact proportion that the country (and the world: I did and do a lot of export) didn't itself have money. If labor boomed, so did I: if labor took a downturn, so did I.

I retained such a high reputation that I was able to withstand a switch over to Patreon when my payment processor went out of business owing me months of payments: from my observation if you transition to a patron model it literally decimates your earnings, but they become steady and may grow.

I am also typically American in that I figure if I double down and work ten times harder and don't die, it'll all work out, and I'm getting up to what would be minimum wage for a factory worker (this is 97th percentile of Patreon accounts, by the way: I'm in the top 3% of all Patreon and trying to get into ITS 'one percent') and doing things like releasing all my existing products for LinuxVST and methodically open-sourcing it all under the MIT license.

I figure even as an open-sourcer I will not succeed unless I can be ruthlessly exploited for my work, and even as a patron-supported person I'm still subject to the power-law factor of 2018 life where unless I'm exploding in success, I'm failing. So my motivation can only be: exploit and crush the world, or out-give the most generous people AS IF I was already that millionaire, a Bill Gates just looking for ways to give it away again.

So I'm doing the latter, and we'll see whether I literally live to do more of it. Any little financial thing crushes me and breaks my spirit for a while, costing me valuable work time. My only recourse is to charge off entreprenurially into new prospects and hope for the best. The funny thing is, that's the same recipe for if I was trying to prosper with new commercial products, and I do free everything now (increasingly including ideas).

In an America with a saner Gini coefficient, I would probably still be close to broke, but I'd have a much huger cash flow and would probably be employing people. I know I can't do everything I envision, and I would absolutely be hiring if that was remotely possible.
A troubleshooting story: Running images with mismatched” Linux kernel versions
JAMstack PWA – Build a Polling App with Gatsby.js, Firebase, and Styled-Component
> Consistently, if a VC sends a follow-up email asking factual questions, they’re already emotionally uninterested. Many entrepreneurs get caught up in this process: they send the VC a fact and citation, which the VC nitpicks, etc., but it’s already too late.

One million times this. Especially for entrepreneurs (like myself) with an engineering background, this is something that’s hard to grasp intuitively at first. If you’re asked for financial projections, for example, it’s already over. You can win that investor over more reliably by following up a month later with, “[famous Angel investor] joined our round,” than responding with a spreadsheet.

I’m nowhere near Justin Kan’s level of experience and expertise, but another favorite piece of advice it can take some time to internalize is: “if you didn’t get a term sheet, it wasn’t a good meeting.”

This doesn’t mean investors dislike you or won’t invest if you don’t get a term sheet right away. It’s that when you find an investor highly aligned and / or motivated to invest, they will move quickly, like sub-24h quickly. The easiest way to burn yourself out as an entrepreneur is getting too attached to “not good meetings”, with “but I really like that firm!” Or “and they were so nice and understood our business!” You’ll drive yourself nuts wondering why everybody says nice things and yet nobody wants to invest.

The saying is not that it’s a BAD meeting if there’s no term sheet, just that it wasn’t a good meeting. Stay grounded. It can be a long journey.

Remember: actions speak louder than words, always, and the fundamental action an investor can take to show support is to invest.

[Edit] I will add that, in my own experience, investors can be all over the map and there’s actually no such thing as “one size fits all” fundraising advice. Fundraising is a hyperpersonal activity that’s just as much about relationship building as anything else, if not moreso. You’ll want your first checks from investors that don’t fuck around (see above advice) and who are willing to bet on you. As you grow as an entrepreneur and become more confident in your ability to build relationships and “bullshit detect”, you’ll become more comfortable with long term relationships. In my admittedly limited experience, the people who spend time with you and learn to appreciate you and your business before they invest are the most valuable to both your bottom line and personal psychology.

But, hey, the above one size fits all advice is still a good launchpad :). If you’re starting your fundraising journey, good luck, it’s a hell of a ride but if you’re deeply passionate about your business it is more than worth it!
I was wondering if the slippery-slope argument really held. There's a fairly simply public-interest argument that could be made against gun ownership (see: dead schoolchildren all over the US), and this argument has been successful in many other countries (UK and Australia have both made firearms illegal in most circumstances).

I don't think you can make the public-interest case against abortion: a very small number of people would argue that mass shootings are a good thing, but it is not clear that a large proportion of people (in the UK at least, the US is a bit of a mystery to me) would argue that the act of abortion does any damage (or at least, nothing like killing someone).
I can't say this quote (from the article) inspires a lot of faith.

"This story confirms our government's commitment to taking action to crack down on money laundering and criminal activity in B.C.," David Eby said.

I'm not even sure how to parse it. In my mind this story does anything but "confirm" the government's commitment to stopping this; in my mind it confirms that someone was asleep at the wheel. Perhaps he meant to say "this story has inspired us to crack down..." but the cynical part of me thinks that a politician would never admit there was a problem that they did not already know about.

In any case, I will pay more attention to what David Eby does than what he says.
Hi VP of Engineering at Wallaroo Labs here.

At this time, we support Python 2.7 and Go (preview release is out).

Python 3 and JavaScript are on our roadmap.

Java/C# would be things we'll be considering for the future.
The inside of one looks and feels like a Prius, with a Kindle for a center console.
On Russia, Facebook Sends a Message It Wishes It Hadn’t
Keep in mind, most Udemy courses are just like that. They "cost" around $100-$200 dollars, but are all basically permanently priced somewhere between $10 - $15. The price usually changes every couple weeks or so too.
>Base price for the Tesla in Germany seems to be about €69k

I think it's quite hard to consider 69k€ to be the base price. They placed it at €69k to get subsidies for electric cars, which are only granted up to a sales price of €70k.

If you want to customize anything (different color, different interior), you have to get the "Comfort package" @ €13k. You also have to get the "comfort package" if you want basic stuff like navigation or radio.

€82k seems to be the fairer price point, especially considering this was the regular base model price until the government started providing the subsidies :)
1st gen Tesla roadster does not have autopilot.
>>>If you don't wear a helmet, don't worry about it, it doesn't mitigate that much risk. The exercise benefits of biking do way more to increase your life expectancy than skipping a helmet does to reduce it.

I'd read somewhere that up until some fairly high speed (40 kph?) that a helmet doesn't measurably lower the risk of injury. (Citations, pro or con, welcome!)

And as the Vox piece points out, merely wearing a helmet induces drivers to reduce their caution, making the need for a helmet something of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I still wear my helmet when I commute or do longer rides but I'm beginning to put my toe in the water by going helmetless for short trips to lunch, the nearby park, etc. It may be my self-awareness about going sans helmet talking, but I'd almost swear that when I ride 'au naturel' drivers make more eye contact and generally seem to acknowledge my presence more than when I'm fully kitted out.

Also: Schwalbe Marathons are the shiznitz. I have 42-622 Marathon Supremes on my new urban bike, and they grip like ... something really sticky ... and are like pillows, to boot (esp. coming off 25-622 road tires). More dough, but worth it for me. Zero flats in over two years, btw.

(me: occasional bike commuter here in West LA for about eight years)
I feel like media has become more monopolistic than tech and needs to be dealt with first.

I'm personally worried about the dominance of big newspapers. It seems that the field of "trusted online newspapers" has narrowed down to only the New York Times and Washington Post. Most non-Tech Hackernews submissions come from either Nytimes or WaPo.

I worry because these newspapers seem to increasingly be setting the political and social narrative for the entire country. That's a lot of power to give Jeff Bezos and Carlos Slim.
> If you don't wear a helmet, don't worry about it, it doesn't mitigate that much risk. The exercise benefits of biking do way more to increase your life expectancy than skipping a helmet does to reduce it.

What a bizarre contrast. If I'm inferring your point correctly, you're addressing those who would otherwise ride a bike to work but don't because of a helmet requirement? Is literally anyone in that position?

I get that biking + no helmet > no biking, but why is that relevant? Anyone commuting to work should have a plan to deal with a helmet, it's such a trivial thing to plan for and deal with compared to maintaining your bike, having parking for it, arranging showers, etc.

For the one off scenario where you don't have your helmet on hand, then it's more of an interesting question: "should I chance it and ride the bike without a helmet this one time?" But in that case, your statistics about life expectancy aren't going to be relevant in the health case; one bike ride is not going to make you more fit or not, but it's very relevant in the chances of getting hit by a car case.
I think Tesla will eventually have to decide on a direction for the S, to drift higher or lower in its competitive target, in line with inevitable changes to tax credits.

It'll be interesting to see if they try to move down to compete with the BMW 5 category over time. Or whether they attempt to push quality higher, raise prices and fully compete with the next tier up.

The Model 3 is very clearly going to stay focused on competing with the BMW 3 (and equivalent from Mercedes et al.) over time.

Perhaps Musk will push a new sedan into the mix eventually to more properly align with how the BMW 3, 5, 7 series is set up.
> the substitution suggested here implies the engineer mindset is only present in engineers.

Not at all. I've known many people with an engineer mindset that don't have a degree. And the opposite too.
I think he's referring to the fact that most traffic jams occur during rush hour, and if everyone worked from home traffic would be much more spread out over the course of the day, instead of the two usual peaks around 7am-9am and 4pm-7pm where travel times double or triple in most big cities.
Pure FP is just using math as its primary source of programming patterns and techniques, while most other languages, like OOP, use arbitrary conventions to abstract code. Because mutation gives you tremendous flexibility, you can model many kinds of patterns, give it some analogy like inheritance in animals, and then write a language that has it out of the box. Haskell on the other is using math to construct its patterns, so while the learning curve is higher, eventually you realize this is the ultimate abstraction (category theory), and it cannot go more abstract than that. This is useful in some scenarios requiring more logical rigor, but I agree it's not always the best tool.
Actually, I noticed YouTube's recommendations seems _heavily_ biased towards what you watched recently. This is likely due to how people watch videos - much like people binge watching TV serials, they are very much likely to continue watching videos from the same or similar channels.

In most cases this is harmless - play a song, and YouTube will automatically create a playlist of songs in the same genre. Watch a cooking video, and it'll give you a dozen other recipes by the same chef.

Unfortunately this doesn't work for political videos, as you've noticed. But there is absolutely no incentive for YouTube to insert videos from opposing viewpoints into the recommendations. YouTube is just giving people what they want.
I've biked heavily for 30 years... advising people to wear a helmet never works. What works 99% of the time is the first freak crash. Not a crash where they felt like they were speeding, or not paying attention, or drunk... then they think it was avoidable. It takes a crash where you hit a rare little crack in the road, or a bump hidden in the shadows, or a car doing a u-turn out of the blue... then it 'clicks' Or, in my case, you witness someone take a minor fall and tap their skull on a curb and seizure and not be quite the same from that point on. If you're reading this and don't wear a helmet, you should consider experimenting with mind altering drugs as well, may as well enjoy the moment.
Igor, if you need some with writing or with proofreading and editing your work, please let me know. I can be reached at victomlinson@proofpapers.com. Sincerely, Vic
To add a note of international confusion, in some parts of the US I believe it is legal to turn right through a red light.
I don't mind him toying with an idea of immortality within his lifetime if it takes an edge from the pain. You can even argue that it can be considered as a some kind of a personal religion, albeit more scientific.

What I'm not happy is so many folks calling him a prophet and jumping this magic-nanothech-30year-singularity bandwagon.
How is Google "crushing" them? They just aren't getting as much exposure from Google as they'd like to. There's always going to be people unhappy with where their product shows up in search. Without a search engine, they'd have no chance at all in the first place. I agree that it's unfair for Google to prioritize their own products in Google search, but they aren't doing anything malicious.
knees.. they like you I think - your knees. I love my bike my knees dont
Which options aren't better than G Suite? Many of Google's antiprivacy features are enabled even if you're paying for their product, and in addition to that, you get an outdated version of Google services that can take months or years before Google supports. Almost everything Google launches won't work with GApps accounts until some point in the future.

I have regularly seen people moving from Google Apps to personal Gmail accounts just because the integration with other Google services is so bad.

It's understandable Google wants it's business customers to have well-tested robust software, but more often then not, the support cycle can leave them excluded for years, with no way to opt in.