skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> More importantly, OPEX comes from next years profits yielding a business I can loan against. CAPEX comes from last years profits, increasing the amount of loans I need to get it together.

That's a very illuminating way to highlight the accounting fears mentioned in the gp.
While I agree that it helps for a manager to have experience doing what they are managing, I would frame it differently. I've experienced poor engineering managers with engineering experience and good engineering managers with none, to the point that I've developed a more nuanced opinion about what makes a good (engineering) manager.

Great managers can manage things they don't understand and probably never will -- their role does not require domain expertise. I would argue that the hallmark of a poor manager is that they can't manage unless they are a domain expert, which they often use as a crutch to overcome lack of basic management skill. One of the greatest failure modes for software engineering managers with engineering backgrounds is the assumption that they can or will understand every part of the design they are managing. Not only is this unlikely in many cases but this delusion encourages them to dictate elements of engineering design that they are not intimately familiar with, invariably to the annoyance of the engineers that are tasked with doing the work and may have far more technical skill than the manager on the task at hand. For mundane software projects, an engineering manager with an engineering background may legitimately have the domain expertise, which is why it still gets things done despite being suboptimal for everyone.

This is really brought to light when doing complex, high-end software system engineering. In these cases my experience is that most experienced engineering managers with engineering backgrounds fail; because it is impossible to understand what your team does at a technical level, you can't lean on that. It is often difficult for very experienced engineers, now managers, to come to terms with the idea that someone working on "their" project has technical skills that they can't master or at least understand with a 15 minute explanation and a couple hours of research. Engineering managers, especially ones that were previously great engineers, must resist the instinct to technically master everything under their purview -- it doesn't scale. The advantage of non-engineering managers in these environments is that their management style doesn't rely on the assumption that they can technically master any part of the project, so they don't even try.

A big part of being a good engineering manager is letting go of what made you a great engineer. It isn't an easy thing to do.
Had a DSL modem years ago that had this issue (periodically it would simply quit interacting with the DSLAM, resulting in no internet until it got power cycled).

My solution was exactly this (although without googling for a solution). A 24 hour light timer, set to power cycle the modem sometime in the middle of the night. Since it usually took several days before the modem got hung, a nightly power cycle meant that things were working properly at other times.
> Even today, on financial news feeds and Bloomberg, when economic observers talk about "good news on inflation" they usually mean inflation going up, not down.

Indeed, the sweet spot is believed to be 2%. It's good news because we've been under that for so long, not because the more the better.

> After the 2008 real estate loan bust, many economists hoped for more inflation so that the existing pool of loans would be a little more manageable for the debtors.

I'm not an expert, but I'll just point out that debt from a loan that you've put into a house probably doesn't have the same mechanics as debt from a company trying to fund its capital requirements. Not saying I agree or disagree with those economists, just pointing out maybe they're different.
Historically its about 9% but its been trending lower and many expect future returns to be a tad lower. Subtracting 2-3% for inflation and you are about correct for real returns.
The market is so volatile that if you take an average over a period long enough to get a meaningful answer, you are including data from the time Buffett was originally speaking.
iOS app written in Assembly
Reminds me of when I was generating uuids for user-uploaded avatars and putting them in url buckets like `/fc/cdcabe...`.

Of course, I would eventually have to track down why some images weren't loading for a lot of users. Took me a moment to notice the `/ad/...`.
In this case gastroenterologist goes to a patient and asks questions he is interested in. The point is that a patient doesn't have to tell the same story over and over again. The problem is that gastroenterologist would now have to have its own video, which would probably be time-consuming for the third doc.
I was recently a lead developer and asked to manage the team by the team. I noticed running the team can't be generalized in one size fits all, some people just want clear descriptions of projects to work and and some people want to over engineer and make a 1 day thing a 2 month job no matter how you say it should be done. Problem is how do you handle a engineer that says something can't be done in 2 hours? Well so far I have sat down with them and showed them it can be done in 2 hours, beyond that argue with me enough and I may be forced to rethink your employment. It hasn't come to that yet. most of the room follows my instructions and we are kicking butt, there's a small part of the room that wants to be dramatic about everything, their computer isn't good enough "needs 64 gigs of ram for their command line", the tools aren't good enough etc etc - basically they have management envy and that's my only struggle right now.
That answer is so silly that it's difficult to imagine that it isn't just very poorly phrased. Especially considering that Microsoft was found to have broken the law on Gates' watch (ok, sure, Gates probably wouldn't claim to be a hero).

Anyway, plenty of heros broke the law. Revolutionaries, civil rights activists etc. I'm sure Gates and many other rich people would agree that many such figures qualify as heroes.

That of course doesn't mean that everyone who breaks the law, every revolutionary, every civil rights activist is a hero, far from it, and crucially does not get us any closer to deciding whether Snowden is a hero.
A List of Resources for Learning Type Theory
It sounds like it’s likely to be subsonic, since whatever it is, it’s maintaining a low profile in every way beyond simply being a highly visible white paint job, and appearing on radar at all.

The ATC commentary suggests a fast relative speed, in reference to other traffic only. So, in the 600MPH to 700MPH region, it would be going faster than most air traffic, but wouldn’t cut the noisy wake of a sonic boom overflight, which means, in my mind it wasn’t going “very fast” or fast enough to put it in the same league as what qualifies for fast for any fighter or other fast military plane.

The “large” description is also vague, but suggesting as big as a passenger jet is my estimate. Perhaps not freakishly large like a KC-10 Extender, C-5 Galaxy or a C-17 Globemaster III [0,1,2]. Large, in aviation, often means “not a 2 passeneger Cessna,” to evoke not scale relative to other humans, but scale of catastrophe if it fell into a neighborhood or if a pilot had to think about colliding with such a thing, which would “win.”

That said, the white paint job sounds uncharacteristic of military/government (especially skunkworks) operations, and the expanding attention of the incident, points to unexpected events.

Another hypothesis is high level leadership asking questions about actual preparedness for something that fits the profile of a sudden terrorist hijacking incident, based on peered civil aviation inputs alone, along with an undisclosed fire drill.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_KC-10_Extend...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_C-5_Galaxy

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_C-17_Globemaster_III
Even Singapore's PM was given a popular mandate via parliamentary elections. Singapore and the PAP has some aspects of authoritarianism, but it still believes deeply in the rule of law.
That works very well and is used in many countries. What didn't work well is a state-owned economy. Two different things.
How about no managers with no management experience. I've seen countless senior devs promoted to eng/dev management roles who were either clearly not ready for the role or were simply not the personality to "lead".
>MIT Media Lab wrote a responsible disclosure report

Pardon my ignorance but I am confused with engagement of MIT Media lab in this. Was it volunteer or there was some formal engagement between IOTA foundation and MIT Media lab?
I felt similar to the first paragraph, that Dijkstra's algorithm was elevated in so.e way.

Then I found out that Dijkstra's algorithm is 'just' A* where the heuristic function is zero. :| Which is both incredibly simple and intuitive.
I second this, especially since I have been burned by single-purpose raspberry "distros" multiple times in the past in the audio sector. Maintaince is more work than people often realise.
> The Medicaid population excludes those who pay any portion of subsidized ACA policies

The ACA subsidy minimum income in Medicaid expansion states is the exact minimum amount that fails to qualify for Medicaid expansion in the first place, so such an exclusion is irrelevant to the expansion population (the ACA minimum is lower—100% of FPL—in states that don't expand Medicaid, but that's obviously immaterial to the effect of Medicaid expansion.)

Medicaid cost sharing is, in case you are unclear, also a completely different thing than the recipient paying a subsidized ACA premium, it's being on Medicaid and paying the first $N/month for Medicaid services, where N is income dependent, out of pocket.
This assumes that humanity will not find a way to reduce, recycle, convert, or find better uses for trash in the next 100 years.

Coming from a country where nearly everything that can be recycled gets recycled, and having seen this change take place in a span of less than 30 years, your assumption does seem a bit too pessimistic.

The same kind of pessimistic assumption underlines the ridiculously high death tolls that people often predict will be caused by global warming. Most of those deaths are attributed to infectious diseases such as malaria. This assumes that humanity will not find a way to prevent and/or cure such diseases on a large scale in the next 100 years.
> an "arrival mode" for their lighting,

Which can be obtained with a basic 'motion sensor' light switch for one critical light near the door, with no need for internet connectivity or smart-phone apps.
The main takeaway for me is that is Buffett encourages investors to invest in companies that reinvest all earnings in resource saving capital investments. He argues that is the proper way to increase standards of living, and not with distributions of earnings to investors or redistribution to the government in printing money. That is, stocks that don't pay dividends, and require the government to have a balanced budget.

My argument against this, and is one he has made in later years, is the greed of modern management discourages investors from long term investments in a company. Specifically, outrageous salaries for subpar results, golden parachutes, or acquisitions of questionable value. Wells Fargo's management either lied or was not doing their job, and yet their CEO was paid compensation of $20 million in 2014 (did a quick google search for a figure). Meyer's spent Yahoo's money on acquisitions that people she knew owned, enriching many friends in her network. I really don't feel like subsidizing a connected person's cash grab.

Dividend stocks are a way to get some control over management that tries to pocket the earnings for themselves. Investors flee a stock that even looks like it could cut it's dividend which avoids some of the wasteful acquisitions and compensation (management is forced to buy in as an investor to get the dividends). If the stock goes down you can reinvest the dividends. If it goes up you can sell the stock and reinvest in one that has a better yield.
As siblings have pointed out, borrowing $30trn then having to pay $39trn in 2048 in deflated 2048 dollars is a pretty great deal.

> Japan inflation

https://tradingeconomics.com/japan/inflation-cpi

"Japan Inflation Rate at 34-Month High of 1.4% in January" - wow, feel that debasement.

https://www.ft.com/content/e26d36e6-918b-11e7-a9e6-11d2f0ebb... "The fears about Japan’s debt are overblown": "The real interest rate Japan pays on its debt has fallen steadily. With short-term interest rates now negative, the country gets paid to borrow for short periods."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35436187 : Japan's rate went negative. The government can "afford" people paying it to take their money off their hands all day long.

The trick to all this is to remember how much of that debt is ultimately owed to pensioners - not all of it but a surprisingly large amount; paying about 1/3 of tax revenue to pensions in a country where 40% of people are over 65 suddenly doesn't look so unreasonable.
I suppose this is more about reading another texture than the one you are supposed to use. GPU memory is flat, and there is no concept of process memory up there.
This is a good rundown of the basics of ML modules, the syntactic aspects, if you will. But it doesn't really give you the important insight:

Abstraction. is. powerful.

if you consider the IntMap module provided in the article, you notice that the type `t` is not defined. It is kept "abstract". One defining property of ML modules is that you can indeed keep the definition of types hidden and nothing can break abstraction. The rest of the program can only manipulate the type `t` through the functions provided by the module.

This allows, in practice, to encode pretty much any property you would like. In the case of maps, you can use BST and never have to worry about users breaking the invariants: the user can't even see it's a BST! You can provide any form of validation and be sure that the data you manipulate will stay validated (as long as the module is correct, of course).

Functors allows you to rely on this by giving you a way to abstract away a whole module. This gives you excellent guarantees: if two modules behaves exactly the same, swapping them is semantic-preserving. Said in another way: if I can prove that sets-as-lists and sets-as-bst are functionally equivalents, then I can swap one for the other, and the rest of the program will behave the same!

Refactoring becomes a breeze.
Functors (and modules) makes all the Javaesque reflections and dependency injections completely redundant: modules are (in OCaml) first class objects that you can manipulate and apply as you wish.

It also gives you separate compilation! A lot of people say that the OCaml compiler is blazing fast: this is precisely because OCaml's module system ensure that each module can be typechecked and compiled incrementally.

It pains me that modules get so little appreciation. Many ML programmers get a sort of selective blindness: just like fish in the sea, they don't realize the power of what they're swimming in. Proper modules with actual abstraction are, in my opinion, the single most essential feature for "large scale" programming.
1) Why is it their money? Were the processes that funneled all that money to a single person, fair? Or are they overcompensating certain individuals? Even if we think "the deal is done" in this case, should we change things for the future?

2) We impose many restrictions on use of money. Some things can't be bought at any price; others already have restrictions (e.g. campaign contribution limits). Are all of these inadmissible?
I've found that professionally it can be a mixed bag as well. I'm in pretty good shape physically and I take care to wear clothes that fit me well, even going so far as to have my shirts and blazers altered. I've found that displaying what would otherwise be considered positive and confident body language, coupled with a fit, muscular physique tends to make people assume I'm arrogant and overconfident without having exchanged a single word. In the average workplace where your ability to do your job well takes a back seat to being able to deftly navigate a politically charged environment, this will cause you to be isolated very quickly. It took me a very long time to understand what was happening, because I just couldn't believe it. It made absolutely no sense. Still, I wouldn't change a thing.

just to be clear, by "politically charged environment", I'm referring to office politics, not politics in terms of our government

-- edited for clarity
This is one of my "favorite". I often remind junior developers who just started coding in the last few years about stuff like this since a lot of our client's still insist on IE8 support (thankfully not IE 6 or 7 anymore).

Another fun one was dangling commas in arrays, which breaks IE 7 and lower.

It used to be somewhat common to put something like this at the top of scripts:

if ( window.console == undefined ) { window.console = { log: function() { }; }
The cost of switching including? What’s the percentage of saving?
I think the point is, we're extraordinarily lucky that he is choosing to use his money for good rather than for evil (for whatever definition of good and evil exists). The idea that the public should not be involved with determining what counts as "public good" is super risky.

The problem with relying on philanthropy to fund the public good is that we the people are counting on the philanthropist to have goals that align with our goals. Imagine a world where the top two richest guys, instead of deciding to use their wealth to fund vaccines and education, used it to fund warlords and dictators. We could have just as easily gotten that dice roll instead of the Warren Buffet and Bill Gates world.

This is ostensibly one of the reasons "we" choose to democratically organize a government to fund the public good: So that we're not so reliant on the whims of a few rich people. It's to avoid the nightmare scenario where the worlds richest person decides instead to use his money for evil. Not saying that government can't use their power for evil, just that, at least in theory, we can vote in new government. We can't vote for different World's Richest People.
The trouble with being a wage-earner in inflationary times is that you constantly have to argue for pay rises, which are far from automatic. This is partly why there were so many strikes in the 1970s.
If it becomes cheaper to pay Sysadmins then it is always a good choice to move to your own.
This is offtopic, but seeing ACM made me think about my long-lapsed membership.

Are you a member of the ACM? What do you get out of your membership?
i don't know color management, but it sounds like the situation is analogous to complaining that VLC on linux doesn't have volume controls (for example; of course it does in reality...) when the solution is to reach over and twist your hardware volume knob.

it's good to know that you've found the controls sufficient on the systems you have adjusted!
There is an argument that the tax breaks mean that some portion of the money is really the public's and should serve the public interest. When you give a million to a charity and get a tax break for 250k or 300k or whatever, is that money really yours? If you hadn't given it you would only have 700k or so, not 1m. You would not have all of it if you hadn't made the gift.
Sure, but isn't the REAL other selling point of AWS aside from an elastic virtual datacenter that it automates away sys admin tasks and ultimately people?
I called out white, middle-class women. A demographic that Hillary is a member of and probably assumed she had a sort of rapport with. Women, in general choose her by 12 points. Her own demographic chose Trump by a 10 point margin and it was even worse with non-college educated women.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-couldnt-win-ove...
> it is very undemocratic for the wealthy to solely pick causes they care about

In this case the cause they 'care about' is getting the most good out of each dollar. We have to ask why democratic/government giving does not have the same goal. Answering this question may very well lead to the conclusion that having some non-democratically controlled donors is better for everyone.
So where did they go? 8% is a lot.
Dimmable, color adjustable bulbs (assuming they exist)? Oh. Didn't think so either: an analog dimmer will resume operation right where you left it, no spontaneous resets to 100%.
OK give a single example that is not related to raw material extraction or power generation. (A company receiving massive government subsidies to not go bankrupt would not be considered a good example at least in my opinion.)
What? Modern cryptography is based on proofs and definitions. Sure, we can't prove that SHA2 is cryptographically-strong (that imply P≠NP), but we can show that it resists certain kinds of attacks.

Furthermore, assuming certain properties are satisfied by SHA2, we can order that different constructions based on it (eg a Merkle tree) are secure.

Cryptography is highly mathematical.
Contrary to what you think, they activately encourage this style of usage.

AWS has a product called Direct Connect [0] to reduce bandwidth costs between AWS and your infrastructure.

[0] https://aws.amazon.com/directconnect/
>I mentioned that approach, yes. But it can backfire if the team member is makes big mistakes. The non-technical manager will have a hard time identifying bad decisions before they blow up.

Why do you assume an out of date and no longer practicing manager will have a better chance of catching errors than causing them? There is a reason you hire experts and that reason is not so you can ignore them. If you're afraid of a single point of failure then you foster a collaborative blame-free culture where the engineers cross check each other.

I've had managers who would agree with you and generally they were bad managers who hadn't realized they were no longer Senior ICs.
To add to your point, the affect of the amount of animals bred into existence coupled with how they are treated is devastating the environment.
My company has people hired (production assurance) especially for this. Being on call is part of their job description. I suspect it's a common arrangement.
It's so trivially obvious and endlessly discussed that things are taken away from individuals by the society for the greater good, for example with taxes, that your comment has no substance and gives no insight.
I can do the same. Although the 'open' or 'lock up' door in total darkness skill never fascinated my wife, ever. I always got the "just turn on a light..." whine instead.
That's an interesting idea. Kind of a simpler HashiCorp Vault service offered as a SaaS. I guess you would also be competing somewhat with any cloud provider that offers secrets management, but they are probably going to be more expensive and not as focused on this use case. The closest thing I could find to this is https://secrethub.io/, but looks like they are in private beta still.

The only downside I can really see here is clients are dependent on remotepassword.com being secure. (which is inherent in any SaaS model) For example, if remotepassword.com was compromised then all passwords could be deleted rendering downstream scripts dependent on those secrets temporarily inoperable and of course someone could start logging the password inputs on the website.