skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Please explain your use of the term "unfathomable."

I interpret it to mean that there is no possible, conceivable reason other than the one given.

I believe this term is inappropriate, as it implies that "unfathomable" is somehow an appropriate guideline.

The guideline should be "reasonable". Otherwise, I pointed out a 'fathomable' but unreasonable scenario. I can easily create more 'fathomable' but unreasonable scenarios.

I believe the use of an extremist term like "unfathomable" serves to trivialize the topic made by making the goal posts too high.

What is a reasonable scenario where a potential donor to the Conservancy, when told several times they should be dealing with Sandler, still insists on a private meeting with Kuhn (and not Sandler) as condition of the donation?

I can fully understand why someone might want a private conversation with Kuhn, because of his background and experience.

The question at hand, however, is why a private conversation with Kuhn is a gating condition for the donation. I strongly doubt that the only way to have a private conversation with Kuhn is by contributing to the Conservancy.

So, what scenario do you propose which is more reasonable than institutional sexism?
>What level of evidence is enough?

Much more than what the author presented.

>Why can we not accept what the author writes?

Because when people make ugly accusations against others, they need to show evidence.

>I have read and listened to far more from Kuhn than I have of you or the other commenters here on HN.

Your perceived intimacy with the people in question does not work in your favor. On the contrary, it is more likely to make you biased.
Adblockers Have the Opposite Effect
> The US occupied Iraq for over a decade, and installed a new government. The US spent a little time in the Balkans and Somalia and then gave up. There's a difference.

A similar difference to the one that motivated its even longer occupation of the oil-less Afghanistan.
Gmail is by far the most popular email service in the world. I assure you that plenty of "non-tech users" have no trouble using it. But while I, too, am sad that skeuomorphic design has been abandoned, Apple has abandoned it too.
Unfortunately, you can only harvest black locust (aka Acacia) flowers for about two weeks out of the year, and they don't keep at all. Also, they're always hopelessly infested with bugs, so you have to think of bug juice when you eat them.

That said, the French have a great dessert recipe for battered/fried black locust flower beignets:

1) Snip the bunches of black locust flowers from the tree at their base stem. Maybe let them sit out in the sun for an hour on a cloth so some of the bugs can escape. Then rinse the bunches in cold water.

2) Prepare some pancake batter with maybe 30-50% extra milk, obtaining a thickness that forms ribbons as it drips from the whisk, or a bit thicker.

3) Heat up a frying pan and add a half inch of mild-flavored oil to it.

4) Hold a bunch of flowers by the stem, dip it evenly in the batter, and fry both sides until browned, then remove them to some paper towels on a plate to drip dry and cool off.

5) Sprinkle sugar evenly to taste while still warm and enjoy heaven, trying not to think of bug juice.
Thanks arasatasaygin - As of July 1, how will you decide which logos get awarded first? Is is by most popular of all the logos, or in order of the GitHub issue for each logo?
They are catching up, which is a net good for humanity. The highbred command/market economy and the focused bureaucracy of the Party have has been amazingly effective at industrializing and modernizing China. They have lifted many people out of poverty in a very short time.

Catching up and innovating are different though. There is so much structure and even culture in China that will make getting ahead in tech and science very difficult.

The protected industries and closed internet incentivizes making copy cat businesses. The lack of established academic institutions hurts research. Innovation depends on individuals, and the lack of individual freedoms does make staying in china less appealing to talented individuals.

I really, really hope china can become more open and democratic. That would be an amazing win for humanity. More opportunity and freedom for more people! For a while they seemed to be on the path to doing that but with Xi staying in power indefinitely I worry that what the powerful and rich want is at odds with what would be best for the population.
The more likely risk is not them turning it off, but increasing prices.

Of course, it's a competitive market, so the other two providers would eat their lunch.
The world’s animals are getting their very own Facebook
Notes from the ground here. My undergrad was in EE at an "elite" school - I can say definitively that ~50% of the MS/Ph.d. students in EE were from China (with the other 50% largely from India). They TA'd many of the graduate level courses and were the majority of the students taking high level semiconductor design courses that centered on fabrication and nanotechnology.

China's short term goal is clearly to reach parity so these students can enter a mature semiconductor industry. Give these students ~5-15 years to gain expertise from the American academic system and industrial research base and I think we'll start seeing China innovate.

American expertise will naturally decline because we don't have students studying EE. To many good full-stack jobs that pay ~40% more.
Thanks for the great reply. This is exactly the sort of information that I was looking for.

Do you have a page or document you can link to for more information, or is this just internal meeting stuff?
Thanks for correcting me! At the time I was growing some finicky orchids already, but I'm sure the extra context is extremely helpful.
Sigh. This is just another example of normalization of abuse at a workplace. I've worked at workplaces like this. They mental anguish and dread of going to work drained every bit of caring out of me.

I'll gladly take a cut in pay to be treated respectfully. Never again will I put myself in a position like that...
13-Year-Old Charged with Felony for Recording Conversation with School Principal
China Escalates Hacks Against US as Trade Tensions Rise
Read about the Carnton Plantation, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnton

It was a temporary field hospital for the Battle of Franklin in Tennessee. It doesn't talk about it in the wiki page but if you search for "Carnton house blood stains" or go on a tour yourself you can see how horrific it was. Quite literally you can see the blood stained floorboards today from the civil war. You can still walk on them.

There is a place on the second floor where one of the surgeons had a bucket on the floor to hold his tools and the entire floor around it is stained with blood except for a small ring from the bucket which is unstained.

Highly recommend a tour of the house, grounds, and small museum especially if you like history. Plus let me know if you are in town. ;)
I'm OP, not your parent commenter, but I do understand the perspective.

This is something that is actually occurring, there really is a psychological war going between how much information black box entities have about entities they provide a 'service' for, in how it impacts the experience of living life, the fact that most people have no choice but be connected to the internet (the subject of the linked article).

It's a psychological war in that it's an inverted microcosm of the history of discrimination. Instead of just judging people based on some generalized set of superficial details like appearance or a quantitative metric of intelligence, a GPA, resume, etc - a lot of organizations are refining it down to the most seemingly insignificant and 'supposed' trivial details.

Which is missing the forest for the trees, even though it may be profitable in the short term. The US has a president that fancies himself a dictator and looks up to / highly respects people like Kim Jong-un and Uncle Xi. It's the cultural and political climate so it's clear there are real reality reasons to show cause for concern. All this stuff influences what people think is acceptable and where to draw the line. It's all background noise information that propagates into models of interpersonal boundaries - what people are willing to tolerate and what they will cry out against. Learned social behavior, etc.

It supports fear culture and that is another tool people can use to manipulate and control others. Regardless of whether it actually works, this stuff is the mentality of some people in power. So when I read comments like the parent that replied to my original comment (I'm OP), the point is - guide them out of the conspiracy but understand where it's coming from by describing why it is true while not necessarily being true.

Fear culture controls. People who want to control others for any purpose aside from improving the well-being and respecting the autonomy of others are aware of this. There are plenty of existing technologies (look back to the development of advertisements) that exist purely to manipulate emotional state in order to direct behavior, and I have no doubt there are some folks out there looking to refine it down to a precision science.

The real front lines come down to, how far will they push it before people 'snap' (and you can see that happening with the US president, because honestly, every intent a 'self' attempts to have on others comes back to affect the individual 'self'). I think that explains his ludicrous behavior in a way that has empathy, because you can tell, all that garbage he has done to others continuously affects his perception on how he sees those around him. The man can't trust anyone except for dictators lately.

I don't think there's going to be any kind of corporate takeover aside from corporate rebellion, possibly. Creating a tight association between the government, the media, and corporate interests is too last century. There are some interests that seem to be going in that direction, but it's clearly not all of them.
Why should the average US resident benefit from what you describe? (I mean - what did they contribute?)
Warning: auto-playing audio.
Because screw those poor farmers?
If I'm pretty sure I had money in Mt Gox but I'm not sure how much, how could I ever file a "proof of claim"? It's not like Mt Gox was sending depositors balance statements every month or something.
With Git, creating a branch and merging into master takes mere seconds.

It's not about distrust - it's about making systems reliable. People make mistakes. Having things branched out from master means that those mistakes aren't as damaging.

Using other branches does not require you to institute onerous restrictions. I don't understand what this author is arguing against - it reminds me of a comment on another recent submission:

> In his book, The Checklist Manifesto, Gawande reports that at the end of a big checklist pilot project for the World Health Organization (IIRC), participating surgeons were surveyed.

> • One of the survey questions was, in essence: Would the use of checklists improve your surgical practice? Most of the surgeons responded no. This was consistent with the resistance that Gawande encountered: I don't need no stinking checklist; I'm a good surgeon!

> • But the more-telling survey question was this: Would you want another surgeon to use a checklist if operating on you or one of your family members? Something like 93% of the surgeons surveyed responded ... yes.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17358827
Great Read! Very comprehensive and well written!
This is pedantic. "Smyte" means "the people who formerly made up Smyte, especially the founders".
If you don't start a business because of having to pay a SaaS provider to setup tax payment, then you weren't really serious at all. Note this is only required at over 100k in revenue...
Reminder, links to JWZ.org from HN will have NSFW results.
Opportunities and challenges of the platform economy in South Africa
How Can Neural Network Similarity Help Us Understand Training and Generalization
5 Major AI Trends of 2018
There was also a hollywood movie, iirc starting Mila Kunis, called "Awake". Not something I would ever watch but I remember the commercials.
Why would you lend money to someone who accepts a term of 190%? Wouldn’t their acceptance imply a lack of financial aptitude or extreme desperation?
An algorithm for machine learning on near-term quantum computers
It depends on the kind of business you're in. I work for a sales driven MSP and we have a ton of actually vendors in the normal sense of the word. We probably have more vendors than we have employees but I haven't counted. We spend less time maintaining out relationships with them than we do our customers but that's more because half of them are big impersonal companies like MS which don't require a lot of effort, just a little bureaucracy.

I think that Youtube is in a different situation in that their creators are mostly individuals who use Youtube because it affords them advantages that they can't get elsewhere. If that were to change, either with Youtube becoming less popular or another platform becoming good enough, Youtube would lose a lot of its video makers and that would lose them a lot of business. I don't think Youtube's problem is that they see creators as products so much as that in order to maintain their market position, they have to be all things to all people and they desperately want to automate their business. That means there's not going to be any policy that works for everyone that uses Youtube and no matter what they do, somebody is going to get screwed.
What’s more likely to happen first - Amazon will stop offering an AWS service that you depend on at a price you are willing to pay or that the system you are building will become obsolete and when the time comes to replace it, you can choose different infrastructure?

I think you're committing something of a "fallacy of the excluded middle" here. Those aren't the only two things that can happen. AWS could, for example, continue offering the service but not to you. We've already heard stories of AWS accounts being closed for various reasons, and it's hardly a stretch to imagine a CloudFront / Daily Stormer kind of scenario where Amazon decides to punt you for taking an unpopular political position, etc.

I would even say that your company going out of business is a bigger risk than depending on AWS.

I would say that I disagree, in at least some cases.
Consider the converse of what you said: Because law enforcement typically only makes strong requests, judges take seriously their duty to reject insufficient warrant requests.

I hope that illustrates the folly of both statements.

The government has nothing to lose by testing the boundaries of the law, because there are so many undefined and underdefined boundaries. An unfavorable precedent every now and then is a very small price to pay, particularly when playing fast and loose with the rules lets them bring so many more cases. It's like saying one daily speeding ticket resulting in a warning will stop people from speeding on a busy urban interstate.
Wow, that is insane. I wonder if there is some kind of opportunity here for automation and vertical farming to create economies of scale for the mass production of vanilla?
Yes, but that's a poor example since the reverse would get downvoted as well.

If you want to be the top comment, your dismissal needs to be more middlebrow and noncommittal.
Can you be pro peace and work on open source code that anyone may use, including all governments?
How about running these benchmarks through a time profiler so you can see where the time is actually going?
Sure, before getting it upstream, I had to:

- Gather a list of desiderata, ensuring we take into account a complete list of use-cases targeted by everyone active in the rseq discussions. This is crucially important to ensure discussions don't spin in circles going back and forth between different requirements,

- Redesign the uapi/linux/rseq.h ABI, making sure a single TLS store is needed to enter a rseq critical section, without requiring any extra registers as ABI. I have introduced the "rseq_cs" structure as critical section descriptor to do this,

- Optimize arm32 and x86 rseq critical sections for speed, by creating my own benchmark programs,

- Rewrite the kernel rseq implementation a few times so it follows the kernel coding style and ensure it pleases everyone caring about it,

- Present 2 talks about rseq at Linux Plumbers Conference,

- Go through various rounds of in person, email, and IRC discussions with Paul Turner, Peter Zijlstra, Andy Lutomirski, Boqun Feng, Paul E. McKenney, Thomas Gleixner, Ben Maurer, Linus Torvalds, and many others. Those were very constructive discussions bringing up everyone's concerns with respect to this new system call,

- Extend the rseq selftests, adding new testing strategies such as delay loops between "steps" of the critical section, thus increasing the likelihood of generating preemption races,

- Figure out nasty races only happening on NUMA systems after about a full day of stress-testing,

- Provide solutions for debugger single-stepping "lack of progress" problem if rseq is used when retrying on abort. It's basically the cpu_opv system call I plan to propose for 4.19. Meanwhile, without cpu_opv, rseq can still be used in ways to guarantee forward progress, but the abort code needs to use a partitioning strategy rather than a simple retry (e.g. going to a different memory pool in case of abort for a memory allocator),

- Harden the rseq mechanism for security, by adding a "signature" word before the abort label,

- Implement prototypes of lttng-ust and liburcu which use rseq, gathering benchmarks to validate the approach,

- Write rseq and cpu_opv man pages.

And this is just the items that were "forward progress" in the rseq adventure. I'm leaving out everything that were attempts at making things more generic that had to be thrown away.
Not just normalization but the actual approval of abuse as building character. The CEO is honorable for screaming, the recipient gains by taking it (and doubtlessly asking for more).
I think an argument is that at some point the government becomes an entity of its own e.g. thousands of faceless bureaucrats so they are not fighting for the commons but for their own existence.
I relate with the latter part of your story.

A company I helped found had an uneven equity split. I was focused on building our platform out and didn't really care about the equity after we set the initial split; Because I was so naive and had a co-founder like your Mr.X, only my equity share was diluted each time we hired someone. Eventually I noticed but it was far too late for me to do anything about it; Years later I carry this lesson with me to constantly pay attention.

[edit]: Forgot to mention my Mr.X drove the company into the ground after I left.
Probably: rice, wheat, cassava, potato, banana?

You obviously need to eat some other stuff occasionally, but those plants are the staple diet for a large chunk of the world population.
I think the situation is basically identical. Retail availability wasn't really my point.
"I felt like I had failed him, or could have done more." -- This sounds like the actor died as a result of a wrong choice, not from a freak car accident.
Try opening this link in a private window:

https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Fa...
The thing that strikes me is how deep the pathos about Cleveland runs as the newscasters hype the event ("Cleveland is no longer the mistake by the lake!" as the balloons fly). And that everyone seemed so entirely sure that dumping a million balloons into the sky would somehow make everyone stop laughing at the city. And then of course they all landed in the lake anyway.
To expand a bit: I think we need to embrace the fact that often times we have posts that don't have a "right" response --- i.e., where you can get a good view of exactly the right way to feel about something given the first few comments. Lots of these issues have many angles you can come from, and I hope people are

(a) willing to keep themselves to a high-enough standard to think for themselves and see that it's a grey area (that they might have a bias for one side or another). You can't just assume the top post is definitely the right thing, even with a good number of upvotes.

(b) willing to read more posts further down, giving them plenty of respect, and contribute to the conversation.

Maybe a better way to rank comments is something more probabilistic rather than just ranking by (num_upvotes - num_downvotes). (Actually, how is it done now?)
Crooks exploit CVE-2018-7602 Drupal flaw, aka Drupalgeddon3 to deliver miner
Nobody is denying the importance of maintenance, but just keeping plants out and the roof from seeping will get you a long way. The most important effect of the use as a church was that it limited (but far from completely prevented) spoilification, and that (cheaper) replacements were installed when the original gilded bronze roof was taken. Much of what we intuitively assume to be natural decay is the result of mining disused buildings for materials how the damage inflicted by that then accelerates natural decay.
> I _really_ need the help

No. What you need is to start looking for another job.
I would imagine the relationship similar to programming languages and standards; If there's no official standard, then usually for anyone trying to re-implement the language, they're "doing whatever the mainline version does". ie anyone trying to reimplement python does whatever cpython does, bugs and all, to claim "compatability".

But if a standard exists, that is, we've split the API from the primary implementation of the API, then we as a re-implementer no longer need to replicate bugs and all; we just need to do as the standard says, and anyone relying on cpython bugs is, well, at their own fault. Compatibility claims are no longer dependent on implementation-specific details.

And of course, it doesn't matter until a second implementation begins to appear; there's no reason for cpython to follow (or have) the standard unless it actually wishes to be compatible with jpython. At the same time, it makes a lot less sense for a second implementation to appear as well, as they have to put a lot of extra time and effort into matching cpython's implementation details (as far as they matter; a difficult determination itself), and this also makes it more difficult to produce an alternatively-optimized implementation (focusing on say, memory-usage instead of speed or whatever). So it's also a chicken and an egg problem.

So ideally everything would be an official standard, and we'd put little to no effort into simply matching whatever the popular implementation is at the moment, and we could criticize the mainline implementation for failing to adhere to the standard.

In this particular scenario, to replace smyte everywhere, transparently, you'd both have to adhere to the API and whatever details incidentally exposed by the API, because you have no protocol to actually reference (the protocol is whatever smyte was doing). But thats also particularly difficult here, since you can't even test it against an implementation of smyte anymore..
> What if they choose to use it for their own purposes or disclose it to some third party?

I appreciate the sentiment, but Slack has a privacy policy and a known system for how they make money (they charge customers). Companies don’t just, on a whim, decide to start giving away data, especially when they know that it’s valuable and they have a business model of trust. Slack has this. So does basically every other corporate geared SaaS.

Being worried about data security is a real problem. That’s understandable. But companies don’t just “decide” how to use data on a whim — it’s a business after all. When you pay for a product, that direct monetary exchange is the one that firmly identifies who the product is — and it’s not you.