skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> People who can actually afford this will just go on holidays by themselves with no thoughts about the “influencers” whatsoever, also because by the time you can afford such lifestyles you widen up to the obvious commercial intents of these influencer “recommendations”, making their “review” purpose moot.

Isn't the idea to follow people who, for example, travel to cool places that you might not have considered?

Perhaps seeing one of those pictures pop up where influencer X spends a while in a Maldives resort might actually get you interested to go check it out yourself?
Yes, that’s what I meant, and it’s too late to edit :(

The US does have the 1 series (finally), but just the coupe, and it’s still marketed as something sporty.

I liked the 118d hatch, but no dice in N. America (except Mexico).
> sometimes without even asking.

How do they know who she is then?
We need good news reporting in the US right now (I’m an expat) and losing easy access (I have a VPN to bypass) to sites like LA Times (#4 in the US by circulation) may not seem like a big deal, but I believe is a harbinger things to come.

It’s also just one example (search for “shutdown because of GDPR” and there are many more tales) and doesn’t account for future companies that now have to factor GDPR into their business plan and may not (likely won’t?) bring their services to Europe.
Personally I have to be careful of this....it’s easy for me to focus so much on the solution that the problem is never even clearly articulated to the developers (who may have a better solution that I came up with once they grasp the problem).

I ran across an interesting essay on Medium recently on this topic, advocating a new approach to roadmaps focused on the problems: the problem roadmap. Instead of saying what new features the team will be working on in the future, map out what problems they’ll be working on.
Cheers...fixed!
Right, which is why I would love to see a browser that is both web-based and also offline. If either Sublime, VS Code or Atom get proper web-based support, that would be amazing. You can use your offline version on your computer, then jump to a web version when you're on a different computer, while still having all your settings and even extensions.
Hello fellow 30 year old!

I just climbed over that hump a little less than a month ago and have similar feelings. My tech/internet journey started where lots of others probably began, with games. I remember picking up the magazine Maximum PC and being awed at the stories and reviews of different computers, video cards and games. I couldn't have been more than 10 or 11 at the time and was just beginning to understand how computers functioned and could be built, piecemeal, so the magazine felt like a major discovery.

And at about the same time I learned that a game called Diablo 2 was in development by the company whose games I already adored, Blizzard. I learned that there were websites that speculated on and followed the game's development, so I started to visit those sites (namely diabloii.net) to satisfy my curiosity. That ultimately led me to the forums and to creating my first website, which I put together well before the game ever came out, devoted to a guild I wanted to create.

And then I started to follow Warcraft 3, which led me to more forums and IRC. IRC was the big one. It was like stepping into an entirely new universe. A universe of people from around the world that could talk in groups and communicate instantly about any topic. That was a real eye opener, which led me to just about everything else in nerddom. I co-created websites, setup servers, worked on a game mod, talked with programmers and artists, learned about linux, dabbled with scripting... The floodgates were open!

There's no question that the internet played a major formative role in my life and has had a huge impact on what I believe, who I've become and how I understand the world. But when I look at today's internet I see a very different place. Since 2016 I've been giving a lot of thought to how its popularity has changed the way that it operates. The promises of commercialization and politicization have brought many elements to bear that simply didn't exist to the same extent when I was growing up. The ongoing war for users and messaging seems to encourage cloistered spaces and inner-facing pairings (ie: exclusive instead of inclusive).

Then again, maybe I'm just joining the ranks of old dudes yelling at kids to get off their lawn and reminiscing about the good old days. I'd love to hear from the people that are growing up online today. I'd like to know what their experience has been like and if they've found their own fonts of wisdom and information that I have never seen.
> I think you vastly underestimate "influencers". Just replace that term with advertisers

I think you are wrong, they are more rock stars or sports celebrities.
Uber Tech Day: Advanced Technology in Risk Management
>Whether these videos are deliberately malicious, “merely” trolling, or the emergent effect of complex systems, isn’t the point.

That's an extraordinarily naive statement and it's baffling that the author even questions the obvious intent and, worse, reaches the conclusion that intent isn't important here. He then goes on to say the problem is with the platforms, algorithms, etc. While these have their issues, I think he overweights them by a good bit, and they are secondary to this particular subject. That is, if the algorithms weren't being abused, then they would be just fine for their intended purpose. The problem here is that the content they are working on is problematic to say the least.

Specifically, someone is clearly and deliberately targeting children with disturbing videos that promote extreme violence associated with themes and characters they think to benevolent and loving. He then completely acknowledges this in the following nugget:

>Previously happy and well-adjusted children became frightened of the dark, prone to fits of crying, or displayed violent behaviour and talked about self-harm – all classic symptoms of abuse.

So, the harm is specific and clear. How can he then dismiss this as possible happenstance of secondary importance? We also live in a culture where people are being radicalized online and children are now being murdered in schools en masse, frequently by other (slightly older) children. Does the author not see a thread here?

Now, broaden the context further to consider the armies of troll-bots, etc. on our platforms that we know are being weaponized against us to incite anger, division, etc. There can be no other conclusion except that we are under a sustained attack to divide and destroy our society, and now children are being included on the target list.

This is not some randomly generated content to game platform algorithms for ad revenue that just happens to be disturbing. It is specifically effective in damaging children and is rooted in a very particular line of psychological attack.
Oh, well yes OK. I wasn't thinking of the creators of the content as human beings available to be blamed because they're so anonymous and unreachable. While morally, they might be the right target of blame, blaming them seems to be about as ineffective as blaming a cat for upsetting your kids by dying in the street where they walk. Other commenters seem to be aiming their criticism at either YouTube or parents, probably because those are more available and softer targets.
I would say: Don't tell.

It will probably be felt as a threat (do what I want or I'll make you hurt), and no-one likes to be threatened.
Ah, I see now - sorry for the misunderstanding. I was so surprised by the post that I didn't stop to consider alternative meanings.
Maybe the best explanation of history to teach, if not the most correct, is "history happened the way that it did because of trillions of choices that people made."
Comparison of OLAP Systems for Big Data: ClickHouse, Druid and Pinot
As someone who learned young to love Charlie Parker, & co., I suspect your friend loved what he grew up listening to at home. Classical music _was_ the contemporary context for your friend, just like your context included the Who.

If you didn't ever go back further than the Who, btw, I'm not sure you 'learned history' in the usual sense of the phrase, and I'm not sure you can teach a history class based on random encounters.
Depends what you consider expensive of course. You're not going to find a 5-star hotel in London at £99 a night, no.

Then again, it's a 5-star hotel, so service will generally be good (and that is worth something in my view).
Diet and Exercise for Weight Loss
I'm a simple man: if I the music isn't on Spotify or Bandcamp I'm gonna torrent it. If the movie/show isn't on Netflix, I'm gonna torrent it. I'm not buying any dodgy channel subscriptions full of crap.
The problem is searching through all the blogspam to find that nugget of good content.
You may have changed more than you realize. I like to think I'm as open to social connections as I always was, but the reality is that I'm older and wiser and quicker to recognize that a lot of people who want to talk to me are not really innocently trying to befriend me in some mutually beneficial squeeing over common interests kind of way. They usually have an agenda and it's often not a nice agenda. They are usually looking to take advantage of me in some way or to force a particular narrative onto me driven by some internal psychology of theirs, and don't confuse them with the facts.

I have learned to have my own agenda of looking out for my own needs and husbanding my time to invest it in things that matter to me. This turns out to not be conducive to the kinds of conversations I used to have.

I'm lonelier than I used to be by quite a lot. But my life overall works better.

I don't know how to get both things. I wish I did.
> Or someone you know online

Following someone, and knowing them are different things.

> like their work

Which often is "selfies in different places"

> and recommend only a few places?

That they convinced to let them stay, visit, or eat for free...
According to this article, "Even with the best treatment, some 14 per cent of pneumonic plague victims still die."
What's the difference between 'active verbs' and 'action verbs'?

Edit: Sorry I should have read further down - page 31
Search for "IBM Z DevOps" they're trying to revitalise the platform with modern development practices.

Also banks are large users of Cobol so that ecosystem wpuld be good to keep an eye on.
One answer to “What happened to the old internet?”

We did. I’m 35; a little older than you, and (maybe pertinent?) close in age to Mark Zuckerberg (though I’m neither wealthy nor successful). I have a lot of the same fond memories of the 90s internet that you do. The online walled-gardens that are now displacing the web, were in many cases founded by _our_ generation. The firestorms currently ravaging culture and politics? In many cases _we_ started them.

I feel I’m just verbalising the zeitgeist here, but we could’ve done better. We should’ve done better. There’s a solid argument that we weren’t to know, that nothing like the connection enabled by the internet has ever happened before, but as arguably the first “digital natives”, this happened on our watch.

If the egalitarian ethos of the early web was indeed born of the values of the 60s and 70s, then what values from the 90s created the web of today?
What we have today is far from a la carte. Yesterday: if you want shows 1, 2, and 3, you have to purchase cable bundles A, B, and C, even if you don’t watch 99% of the content in those bundles, since the shows were spread across those bundles. Today: if you want shows 1, 2, and 3, you have to subscribe to streaming service A, B, and C. There is almost no difference, except now you’re paying three separate companies instead of one for 99% of content you don’t watch.
This link always gets posted here when this subject comes up. If you haven't read it it's well worth a look. It's a very effective way of conceptualising the vastness of big numbers.
I think the joke is that you're choosing to upvote a post, and by proxy the person who wrote it, in relation to the horrifying "upvote" centered plot of the television episode quoted. It's upvotes all the way down.
Long pressing on android chrome does nothing. Maybe just my samsung...
Right. They are instead tied to slightly less expensive streaming bundles with a bunch of other content you don’t want. Completely different.
This re-written headline could really use some punctuation for clarity, moderators.
If you are getting traction and enjoy what you are doing focus on that and keep working at it. You might not be interested in selling in 6 to 12 months or you might sell for 10x what you would sell for now.

If you haven't check out @DHH's start up school talk. (Link is to a section for you, but go back and listen to it all)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CDXJ6bMkMY&feature=youtu.be...
Presumably the irony arises from your confusion as to if you should add or remove social reputation from a comment discussing an episode primarily about the near future of adding and removing social reputation.
One reason to teach history backwards is that people are already interested in what is happening today, and so it is easy to get them interested in what lead up to it. And one reason this is so is that learning what caused present problems helps you in figuring out what to do about them.
There used to be more barriers to entry. The signal:noise ratio has steadily deteriorated as those barriers fell and more of the general population got online.

Now that the internet and the devices for accessing it are fully mature it's the new television.

Maybe VR is the next niche where mostly geeks will converge until fully matured with a headset in every household. Enjoy it while it lasts.
> These days parents want to keep their existing work

I would say for most it's more like "these parents have to keep their existing work", given how housing costs have increased far faster than lower-class and lower-middle-class wages. Being a stay-at-home parent isn't really a viable choice if you need two incomes to afford a place to live.

> I see kids at sports games watching Netflix, or I hear my sister talking about her kids watching YouTube with headphones in the car on a roadtrip

Would you react the same if it was a book instead?
I was hoping this might be based on or mention Geoffrey West's new book, Scale, though it's neither. Despite this, it covers similar ground.

Aa realisation I'd had a few years back was that networks -- and here I'm talking about any organisation of components with flows, not just data networks, but people, organisations, cities, companies, markets, transport, conversations or discussion boards, etc., -- have several characteristics which govern behaviour. These define a large class of hence related dynamics.

There's topology: (peer, star, chain, ring, mesh, tree, , web, complex...). There's scale: null, unary, pair, triple (largest size where links equal nodes), 4 (first where links exceed nodes), etc. And the scale effects discussed here resemble those I've noted.

At large scale, scale tends to domininate topology in large part as there's only one viable topology, the dendritic tree (this is West's bugbear).

There's also network depth -- the number of nodes between pairs, particularly on average. Even relatively shaallow depths can have huge significance, think Six Degrees of Separation (or Kevin Bacon): this gives you everyone within a substantial industry (cinema) or even the world (Facebook, national security agency threat matrices).

Related is the characteristic of specific individuals -- superstars and regression toward the mean. A Gresham's Law type effect means that the effective functional level of a group is set by its least capable rather than most capable members (absent some means of effective management or moderation), another tendency which favours smaller groups initially.

It's also worth noting that certain transition points, such as HR being required as headcount climbs above 50, are determined by regulatory requiremment -- beware outside influences in anacdotal observation.

A particularly pervasive similarity comes to mind between agriculture and media, and how scale, topology, node characteristics, and complexity result in conceptually similar activity models. This is, of course, broadcasting. Named for the farmer casting seed on fields, the analogy continues when the harvest is considered: the mass-gathering of commodity high-utility carbohydrates through a uniform and undifferentiated processing. In media, this is advertising. And the results are similar: focus is on nondifferentiation, uniform processing, and maximising harvest yield, not the field's (or audience's) quality experience.

It's also interexting to note that even before the term was adopted there was a trend to more targeted cultivation in ag, including Jethro Tull's seed drills (and those of China long preceeding him), pressaging moves to media segmentation and targeting.

It's also possible that there are other ag analogies which might prove useful or insightful: herd-tending (prevalent in religious contexts), orchards, forestry, foraging, hunting, fishing, vegetable vs. staple crops, reserving methods such as fermentation, etc. Food for thought, as it were....

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/26/business/dealbook/geoffre...
"Soccer" is an abbreviation of British origin, and was widely used throughout the British isles until at least the late 1970s.

source: http://ns.umich.edu/Releases/2014/June14/Its-football-not-so...
> It's far to easy too game larger social media networks and make it seem like the consensus.

That's how it was growing up though, right? Avoid the popular stuff, find the group you feel accepted in, that's what the internet was to me growing up, found my place on it for some time being, hopped around here from there.

Sometimes I just pretend that astroturfers are the bullies of the internet, and I try to figure out new ways to be both lazy and smart in how to not succumb to that sort of influence. It's somewhat demeaning to basically be considered an information carrier to spread the message of some new shiny thing to buy. Ads. Ads make and break the internet.

When people push money around that way, I dunno. Seems short sighted. People purchase quality products and services, quality products and services are hard to make. Word travels naturally for things that are of intrinsically high value, overvalued things eventually have their bubble popped.

Even when things seem like the consensus though, I try to put on my 6th grader hat and remember what it's like to have an interest in the information people are offering, but also be skeptical and discerning and true to myself about my own feelings, before trying said service or product, and after.

Ads sort of treat people like once you get them hooked, you have them for good. And that's clearly not the case. Or it doesn't matter, because there's always another new set of people available to fool.

Internet has become the place to make money and find status. That's the opposite of what it was growing up and I think that is why it sucks. We all need to make a living, but all that stuff isn't life. Having the internet shift from being the place to escape to, to the place I want to run away from, eh. That's why I come here though. Reminds me of usenet and slashdot. I'm still on reddit, just, the only subreddit I'm subscribed to is programmerhumor.
>I have bad news for them: you're going to lose. People don't want to go back to paying $100/month for a dozen streaming "channels" with one or two good shows and a the same crap the rest of the other "channels" have.

No. That's not the correct way to think about this. You are dreaming if you think media and production companies are going to leave $90/mo on the table. You will see prices rise. You will see multiple streaming services. You will see bills in the same ballpark as those of cable/satellite ... because that's about the sweet spot for people willing to spend monthly for media content.

>We want an on-demand nexus. A single hub.

You won't get it. Nobody is going to let anyone control all media distribution.

>So I have to pay an addition $7/month to watch a single show?

Yeah. Or you can just pass on that single show.

>Off to a torrent site or asking around to see if someone has rips or a box set. I have better things to do with $7 like buy dinner.

Age of piracy is going to end as well. And by the way, you are free to go and buy dinner and read a book. Nobody needs to watch the latest season of GoT - its not a human right. Talk about entitled!
I think he is simply addressing the argument that today’s environment (multiple streaming services each with exclusive content) is any different than yesterday when it was multiple cable bundles each with exclusive channels.
Careful what you wish for, because that hub will be censored and the useful idiots will scream that it's not censorship if it's not the government.

I'd much rather a very very fragmented space with lots of diverse productions and perspectives.
This strikes me as closely related to a current article on "Startup Physics".

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17333081
I believe a number of brands use software to monitor social channels for tags/locations related to their brand. This happens, of course, in near realtime and then it becomes fairly simple to identify them and start manufacturing instagrammable circumstances - comp'd bottle of wine, pretty amenities sent up to the room, etc.
If you don't mind the handle being rather large, make the sequence number 64 bits, and store it alongside the index. 2^64 nanoseconds in years = 585... computers just aren't fast enough to wrap it around in any reasonable time frame.

Depending on how many index bits you want, you might be good with only 64 bits in total. 2^56 ns in years = 2.3; 2^52 ns in days = 52; 2^48 ns in days = 3.3; and so on.

All of these figures are worst case scenarios, anyway. Your program probably simply can't actually be made to allocate objects at that rate.
> but there are thousands of them

There are thousands of restaurants in New York. That doesn’t mean I don’t eat out.

The people who I know who subscribe to news subscribe to multiple publications. The set of people who (a) want limited access to lots of publications and (b) would pay for them is limited.
I’ve always wished Netflix had this built in. If it didn’t support syncing between the same account it would even voluntarily cut down on account sharing.
i'm a few years younger, but i get the same feeling from modern social media sites. i don't really like the "broadcast" mentality, but i get caught up in to too.

fediverse[1] is a great escape from the modern internet. it has its problems, but it feels a lot like my early experiences with the internet.

[1]: https://fediverse.network/
Spot on. Dungeon finder and cross server BGs / dungeons killed the sense of community. Instant travel to instances killed the feeling of the size of the world. All the streamlining of combat and the removal of the threat management game made dungeons boring while adding loot tokens made the dungeon grind mandatory.
That "same thing" this month is Finding Nemo, next month is Cars, next month is something else.

Also, you can buy it and they watch it half a time and never think about it again.

$10-$15 is cheaper.
I think they’re saying they miss not having to worry about being used by randos. if you were around in the early days of the web, there were definitely a lot of people trying a lot of things (I tried on more than a few different personas when I was a young teen in the mid nineties), but almost none of it was for profit, it was just people trying things.
Check out the other tweets in the thread though.