skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> No, he really doesn't. His point is that the proper solution to externalities is to price them in domestically, and tariffs in lieu of environmental policy harmonization are "second best" with unconvincing arguments in favor.

How does that help? Isn’t the country that has lax environmental laws and can sell cheaply going to win over the country that has tough environmental laws? (Genuinely asking, my degree is in engineering not economics.)

And do these models account for changes in dynamic equillibrium? E.g. a foreign country engaging in dumping ends up killing the domestic industry? It seems odd that exercise of monopoly power can lead to deadweight losses in a closed domestic market, but a country engaging in anti-competitive measures overseas is best handled by doing nothing.

Do these theories account for the interactions between economics and government. (E.g. the ability of foreign governments to exercise power over companies in their jurisdiction?)

I’m not trying to argue with you by speculating, I’m trying to figure out the metes and bounds of your assertion.
John Oliver on Civil Forfeiture:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks
Smartphones: "I want to search for something on the Internet when I'm not at home." It's a very simple problem statement, it's well solved by a smartphone, and it's a far superior solution than the pre-existing one, which was to find an Internet cafe or free wifi hotspot. This is borne out by smart phone adoption worldwide.

Meanwhile, bitcoin was never better than the existing alternatives of barter and foreign currency for dealing with a failing central currency. It's not got substantial traction as an electronic currency.

Bitcoin does solve one problem: "how can I rake money in from suckers when I'm providing them with nothing in return". It does this well. Tremendous amounts of money are going from "investors" to miners and people at the top of the pyramid. This can only continue so long as there's a growing base of new money coming in - but nothing of value is coming out, just the promise of more coming in later.

My opinion is that Bitcoin was originally a political statement or thought experiment in crypto-anarchy, with a poorly thought out economic model that actively discourages its use as a coin, and history continues to reinforce that opinion.
What bothers me about the article is that they say that the basis of the claim is the 8th Amendment ("excessive fines"). I hope that is not the only argument the lawyers made.

The problem with relying on the 8th alone is that the word "excessive" is imprecise, and there's good reason for the Supreme Court to defer to local legislatures to define what it means, except in extreme cases. Deciding criminal penalties are normally within the powers of the state.

I think the more important amendment is the 5th: ("nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."). This "takings" clause is what civil forfeiture is all about.

The 5th Amendment has been fully incorporated, and is binding on the states: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/incorporation_doctrine

In cases where there is no rational connection to a crime (and there are many such cases), the taking can in no way be construed as a fine.

If you look at the 5th and the 8th together to try to divine the intent of the founders, it's clear that they were trying to limit government overreach of exactly this kind. This case should be a slam dunk.
This is impressive enough, but his other projects are also awesome and totally worth a look:

http://www.aholme.co.uk/Projects.htm
> The earliest mass adopters of pagers were physicians and surgeons (high income on call demographics) followed by drug dealers

That's why I specifically said consumer adoption. Doctors and drug dealers had good economic reasons for buying cell phones. But considering that the earliest cell phones were up to $10,000 inflation adjusted and weren't even remotely good, there were only a handful of non-business use cases for buying them for your family members.

Mizuku Ito's book Personal, Portable, Pedestrian has a good overview of cell phone adoption and usage patterns. And there have been papers about cell phones being used for partner stalking for decades, e.g.:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=technology+partner+stal...

Or for a more recent example, look at the uproar over Facebook instituting their Real Names policy because of how many people were using the site to stalk former intimate partners, among other issues.
After looking at your github it looks like you certainly have some technical chops. I don't think this is a competency issue but really just a lack of interview skills.

Obviously nobody wants surprises in the interview process, and I believe that showing future employers that you are cognizant of your short comings is a good thing and shows self awareness. That said, you need to be sure you aren't disqualifying yourself with the information you are sharing.

To be blunt, it seems to me like you need to take ownership of this situation. Rather than asking "Why won't companies offer me the junior role ?" you should be asking "How can I take the risk out of hiring me for the senior role"

If you're interested in chatting, maybe a quick convo would help? Not sure that I could directly connect you with a job but it never hurts to talk.
> Statically linking the test suite would consume on the order of terabytes (I am not sure the exact number; I have never tried) of disk space which just is not feasible for a workstation

I read complaints like this a lot. Have you ever tried using -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections and --gc-sections as in :https://elinux.org/images/2/2d/ELC2010-gc-sections_Denys_Vla...

I find static linking to take up far less disk space when done properly, but I keep seeing comments like this.
Thanks. That's a plausible hypothetical. Could you name an organization like that? One that you are eager to donate to? How many people would like to donate to it? What's the total payment volume per year?

The only organization I can think of that might be in that category is Wikileaks. But they take both credit cards and Paypal, so they don't qualify. Maybe Hamas or Al Qaeda? Except that those are illegal to donate to, so the market is not going to be large.
We study a billionth of a billionth if a percent of ants. Most ants we totally ignore.
The 1970s was when solar PV started to be used for RAPS (remote area power supplies), so there's a reasonable number of installations out there of that era. I wonder if any surveys of those have been done.
This would explain their brigading of topics on reddit.
GCC is licensed under the GPL, RISC-V chose a license that allows for proprietary modifications. Inevitable might be taking things too far, but it's certainly within the realm of possibilities and thanks to the license always will be.
My trick is to set a timer on my phone when I start a load. Even if the machine doesn't tell you how long it's going to take on a display, these things tend to be pretty consistent. Low tech but it works.
Technically, it's not a polynomial as you can have nonlinear activation functions, such as the ReLU function. There's no polynomial that's equal to a network with ReLU activations (although, of course, a sufficiently large polynomial could come arbitrarily close).

I would state that a neural network is a large, complicated, differentiable function, and the beauty of deep learning is that it turns out that by doing optimization that's derived from basic calculus, you can optimize this complicated function to do surprisingly useful things.
If you pre-retired in 2008, you enjoyed decades of previous gains, even if you sold at the trough.
> If its owners want to sell it, why does it matter if they sell it to an American, or a Chinese investor?

Because there are second order benefits to Americans of America being the world power. (E.g., Americans really don’t want to live in a world where you have to learn Chinese to succeed in the business world, as opposed to everyone else having to learn English.)
You're asking him to prove a negative. The onus should be on you.
Yeah, everything you’re saying just invokes my fundamental distaste for the JS ecosystem. Hugo is fantastic for its utter lack of any sort of environment requirements. Requiring webpack, npm, React, and any dependencies else at all is a complete turnoff. Hugo’s Go-based templating isn’t difficult to pick up (I use it and extend it and I’ve never actually read any of the docs outside of one place I wanted to check on loop-based variables). Of course, I’ve been using various templating languages for over a decade, so I can pretty much see some examples and relatively immediately intuit how it works with little effort. For me, having to invoke npm is a non-starter for SSG work. I reach for an SSG because I don’t want any JS at all—or a very minor, controlled amount of it. To be fair, I feel the same toward just about any other SSG—if a person must setup an environment to use the tool, the SSG is doing it wrong.
It will be interesting how they determine if the fines were excessive in all the cases where there were never any charges filed and the government simply seized property under the presumption of guilt.

To my untrained eye a $27,000 fine for failing to properly signal a lane change is a little bit on the excessive side.
https://medium.com/@ankane/introducing-dexter-the-automatic-...

Closest thing I know of at the moment.
You’re conflating two different things - 1) justification and 2) explanation, and with that misinterpreting the gist of my post.

Just because it has a valid explanation doesn’t mean it is just, nor that it should continue. I was trying to give one possible background for why things are they way they are - not the way they should be.

The situation is starting to change, but it simply cannot happen overnight, the best case scenario for sustainable change is a couple of generations of sustained effort from all sides. Look at how the Italian and Irish immigrants went from pariahs to normal. The Chinese have gone from manual labor to solid middle class in 2-3 generations.

And I’d be happy to submit whatever kind of explanation I think might fit the facts of any situation, regardless of group.
Oh sorry about, I copied that from a previous project I did, just published a fix for that. Thanks!
Those are other things you can prove — I actually watched an idris talk where they included the complexity cost in the function and it refuses to run commands over a certain complexity.
Do they though?
> It's distributed trust. That's the problem it solves

I don't know that to be true exactly. I don't think that distributed trust is a problem really. I also don't think that blockchain itself actually solves for it. From what I can tell, and I may be naive here, with bitcoin for example two people enter into an agreement and a transaction is made and I guess the blockchain agrees to it and commits it to the chain through magic (hashing). But the trust is put in the wrong place I think, should the network have trusted the transaction was correct? I suppose bitcoin has keys that attempt to ensure ownership of the coins, but I don't think that is a blockchain thing precisely. I'm just rambling... I'd like to hear more about why you think blockchains solve for distributed trust.. also why is distributed trust a problem to begin with.
Supreme Court Rules for American Express in Swipe-Fee Antitrust Case
Try the sea docks from ancient Rome around the Mediterranean. The concrete got stronger in sea water whereas we have major problems with modern concrete in sea water. Roadways being another example.

Plus all the other construction efforts around the world, including ancient cities that have survived even being overtaken by jungles, etc.

Let us also consider the various modern nanotechnology research areas being undertaken today to find out how "primitive" people did tasks that we cannot duplicate today.

If people actually understood even the history of the last 200 years, they would understand how much knowledge we have lost during that time and how incapable of repeating many of those things we are today.

Sure, we have some advanced technologies today. However, the facts are that we have lost large areas of technology and chemistry over the last lot centuries. In some cases, what we call modern facilities are a rediscovery of what was available to the ancient peoples.
I mean Buddhist do not believe in truth as some narrative.
How many words do you need to speak a language?
Curve fitting – A Primer on Bézier Curves
I was going to spend the weekend writing, but instead ended up doing about 48 hours worth of backend maintenance and new content writing for my Primer on Bézier Curves, so: have a link! There's a new section on how to implement exact Bezier fitting (with one degree of freedom), a "what's new" section in case you've seen this thing before and just want to know what's new since the last time you looked, and of course it still has all the delicious Bézier curve content that was up already.

Questions, comments, hit me up here on HN, the disqus comment thread on the page, or file a github issue (if you find any bugs: seriously, file an issue, bugs don't benefit anyone O_O)
While that is true, you will find that employers can, and do, fire employees for comments made, at work, or otherwise, that reflect poorly on the employer.

And in these cases, when challenged, they have been found to have the right to do so.

Free speech rights regard the ability of the government to restrict your speech, not your employer.

Free speech rights also do not come with "freedom from consequences of such speech".
Ask HN: How to profit a large hack if there is no bug bounty?
Let's suppose someone hacks a big and notorious company, and this hack might expose private customer details and bring down the company. How can this be profit, without breaking the law, if there is no bug bounty program?
You're placing a heck of a lot of trust in a digital system if you're putting a significant (as in "I would hate to lose this") sum of money into it in the expectation it'll still be there in the future.

Even if we put aside the problem of unstable valuation, forks, and potential total collapse of cryptocurrencies, you're going to face the challenge of keeping a private key secure for however many years you plan to escrow the money.

Compared to creating a trust account, this is insanely risky - you'd have to be convinced that the legal and banking systems were facing imminent catastrophic collapse to think that's better than what we've got.
But that's the point blockchain is missing. You don't need to tamper with the data in the ledger because there is no way to put a carrot in it, how would you prove that the carrot in the juice is the same carrot picked? Technology isn't going to solve for that without some magical way to identity specific carrots (or beef, or whatever) that have been transformed into something else... or even just from another carrot in the next box. Blockchain is interesting but trust is still required in the system, and in many cases it is in fact blind trust.
> 2-3 hand-managed servers

I think too many people in this sub-thread are harping on this excerpt, especially with regard to the "hand-managed" and failing to take the most charitable reading, as exhorted by the guidelines.

What commenters are, perhaps, failing to grasp, is that if there are only 3 (or even 6) servers in the environment, and each one has a unique configuration, then they're all, by some definition, hand-managed.

No amount of "automation" will reduce that fundamental administrative/cognitive burden.

Sure, there are some sensible best practices, even for that scenario, like, at minimum, storing config in version control. However, going all-in on a CM system (or, perhaps, Kubernetes) for 100 servers when all you have is 3 is, at best, premature optimization. There's a well-known aphorism in tech about that.
What I am trying to say is why do they keep expanding in areas which are already expensive ( Cupertino/Mountain View) and not move to cheaper areas (East San Jose etc). A majority of new home buyers can't afford the areas where they're located and making long commutes.
"Obama eventually did plug the hole..." citation?
Does that make much difference? In my experience, the cost of cheese is by far the biggest determining factor in overall cost.
I am pretty disillusioned with them too, and they do push an agenda in many areas (pro-military, anti-tech, etc). I loathe their opinion pages, they're a weird mix of bland and constantly pseudo-outraged. But I still like lots of stuff they create and a subscription isn't super expensive, so paying seems like the right thing to me personally. I'm just reading a newspaper, not looking for someone to marry. (I wouldn't want to marry someone who always agrees with me either, come to think of it.)
Incorrect application of civil forfeiture laws is one very good reason to have a digital currency. I'm not justifying its use for any illicit purposes but its pretty hard for a cryptocurrency to be seized during a traffic stop.
“The existing line isn’t functional, it can’t build cars as planned and there isn’t room to get people into work stations to replace the non-functioning robots,” Warburton said in an email. “So here we have it—build cars manually in the parking lot.”

This theory makes sense to me. Changing a over-automated line to one that is safe to use by humans must be way more expensive and time consuming then just rebuilding the whole thing in the parking lot. I imagine this line will have a pretty hefty defect rate though.
The earth would easily handle the impact of any colony ship we could currently manage. Sure things are you approach the speed of light, but we can't.
The Tesla story has effectively become a manufacturing story.

Can they meet production targets?

Can they maintain product quality while they scale?

Will they run out of money before they solve the CapEx intensive, low margin problem of automobile manufacturing!!!?

Despite the scrapiness of the "build a gigantic tent" story it's a bizarre risk.

Musk's desire for full vertical integration obviously mirror's that of Steve Jobs - who ALWAYS claimed a core apple advantage was total vertical integration.

But at Apple with the iPhone Job's knew he was outgunned by manufacturers and OEMs by a long shot.

And calculated that building fabs, plants, etc required a different set of skill sets and capitalization than he had at the time.

Where Jobs was a genius was that he maintained control over core manufacturing innovations (machining) and IP, while actually taking on very little manufacturing risk.

There's a really fascinating overview of this, published in 2011 and key quote

"China made Steve Jobs' revenge possible. Chinese OEMs could produce plenty of iPods, iPhones and iPads to meet demand, leaving Apple free not only to design as it wished, but to control what it designed."(1)

I wish for Tesla's sake that they'd taken a similar path, and I think a likely outcome on the downside of the Tesla story is a restructuring around a model like the above.

In the meantime I'm still rooting for them!

(1) https://www.thestreet.com/story/11737628/1/apple-and-the-ver...
You can easily make a bootable CD-ROM for MS-DOS by using the boot emulation...

> mkisofs -b dos622_1.img . > \temp\dos6.iso

something like this, will get you a bootable CD that'll emulate a floppy and get you onto that first disk... It's probably easier to do a dump/restore set of whatever it is you need to install, or just make a boot floppy to load up MSCDEX & friends so you can xcopy as another solution.....

Parallel ports aren't too hard to find, there is PCI cards you can find with parallel ports.. Now ISA slots on the other hand....
These guys have been around for a while:

http://icubecorp.com/products/
I don’t get it. Can someone explain?
It doesn't seem strange at all. It's not the Supreme Court's fault that the defendant or plaintiff in any particular case are scummy or sympathetic, nobodies or famous, weak or powerful. They are aware that their decisions will affect many more people.

They need to create law which caters for the for the wrongly accused as much as it does the rightly accused.
How is Fennec on the battery life? I tried firefox on android several years ago and uninstalled immediately due to battery consumption. Has that story changed?
The difference is we had threadding back then, and we also had a more robust set of databases & support libraries.

Now everyone is reinventing wheels. poorly.
I don't doubt that you were entirely / too stressed at the time. But take it from others perspectives.

Do you think it possible that any of them may not have told you that they felt threatened, imminently or otherwise, even if they had?

Do you think it reasonable for management to take issue with such a thing?

In the opposite situation, what do you would think might happen to management, or the employer, _had_ you later assaulted that person?

Asking (telling) you to leave until the situation changes is the "safest" (even if it turns out to be un-necessary) approach.

I say this not to wish you ill. You seem like a sincere, passionate person. If anything, it seems that your biggest challenge might be processing other people's perceptions of situations. It's an important, though not always easy, skill to develop. I myself have had challenges with processing social cues, or determining what is appropriate or not.
That seems pretty unfair to the people that care about you. They might not even be family or close friends, but might be acquaintances, distant co-workers, or people you see on the street. They get happiness out of interacting with you and having you with them. It doesn't seem right to take that away from them.

It sounds like you might be in a bad place mentally. I'm sure that it wouldn't hurt to talk to a professional. Worst case, you spend an hour or two and maybe a co-pay and still feel the same way you do now. Best case they may make every day a little bit more bearable.
Nor any Asian country whose natives are perceived in the West as being meek/humble or whatever else.

It is just that most immigrants (in the last 3-4 decades) to the US happen to be a self selected group meeting certain stringent criteria of acheivement in one area, which left, in most cases, little room for a “broader” personality, i.e. high acheiving STEM grads.
I can’t imagine they’re going to have any kind of profit margins left over after all of this and once returns start coming in.
Is it still advisable to "take a similar path" to that of Apple, given recent trade relations with countries like China and potential risks of a more insular world?
If you can definitely a problem rigorously, you've essentially defined a function. So "function approximation" is basically "general problem solving approximation".
But, again, solutions to that already exist. Cheats to that system will be cheats to a blockchain system.
Abuse survivors/advocates have been warning about this for years. I'm glad it's going mainstream so the people who make them will hear and think about how to make them less dangerous.
I was asked to join a startup from scratch that wasn't offering me an equal share (I may be proving your point here), the other founders were taking a much larger risk than I. So they wanted a larger stake. I ended up not going and the whole thing fell apart. I felt like you at the time. But now I've come to realize that what I thought I was bringing to the company was actually worth a lot less that what they were bringing. I believe now I would be in a much better place had I accepted the offer. My point is just that I believe it is complex and you may not think it is, but maybe you are not giving it the thought it deserves. I didn't fully understand the sales side of the business how how critical that is.