skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think a good resolution going forward would be for the standards author to divide their work into two sections. One section would explain in plain english the regulations and how to follow them -- that could comprise the bulk of the work. Then an appendix could be written in legalese that would be intended to be incorporated into the actual building codes. This part they could make available to legislative bodies for free publication, but the useful part (the explanations and how-to-follow guidelines) would still be the proprietary part.

Kind of like giving away the software, but charging for the users manual.
> It's less aggressive than China in terms of being used to control the lives of the entire population of the country, though.

I'm not sure that's true.

NSA and other US domestic surveillance capabilities feed the information it gathers passively (they call it "strategic listening") for DoD to understand how to influence entire countries, continents, world opinion.

For example, DARPA has a current program called SMISC: "Social Media in Strategic Communication" - where they are studying next generation technologies for determining how information and opinions spread by social media for US intelligence and military botnets and troll armies to influence opinions at scale. This is just a small evolution over the information domination US intelligence and security has applied domestically and globally for decades.
$60k is mind-blowingly low. I wouldn't expect much, if anything from this site.
I find it fascinating that your glib list of "cool new tech stuff" - cryptocurrency, robotics, self-driving cars, drones, and AI, seems to have a huge characteristic blind spot.

There's a major industry that for some reason people don't mention these days when they are imagining where the future is coming from, and I find it entirely inexplicable that it just doesn't register.

If I told you what it is, you probably would find it too obvious in retrospect, so I won't. I am over 30 BTW. And no, it's not green energy.
> We have moved towards a world of centralized services because that's what people want.

We have moved towards a world of centralised services because decentralised ones are—by definition—difficult to monetise for the platform/software-maintainer(s). What people want is irrelevant when all potential options have to be initially well-funded: the choice is too restrictively limited to perform an honest comparison.

> To many people it's the centralized services that "are" the Internet

That's because they dominate, because they're profitable for the central host.

> If you want to solve the problems with YouTube you have to do it with another YouTube. Build another centralized service that fixes the problems that YouTube has

The problems with YoutTube are caused by it being centralised, so this proposal is paradoxical.

> they all go from Active to Dead or Stalled

It's a difficult challenge. It's David v Goliath. Many fail.

> YouTube's audience doesn't care about anything at decentralized network has to offer. It's just entertainment for them. They just want to watch videos and shitpost in the comments.

YouTube's audience want to be able to find entertaining/useful/educational/whatever content according to what they've come to Youtube looking for, and promptly leave after having been entertained/educated/generally fulfilled. Youtube is not incentivised to give them this; in fact it's strongly incentivised to make what they're looking for as difficult to find as possible so that they'll spend hours and hours binging vacuous addictive content looking for something but never quite finding it and getting no satisfaction from the experience.

This is not something that's unique to YouTube, it's a property of any model whereby the profits of the host/platform maintainer are tightly linked to users spending as much time navigating the platform as possible (see also Facebook/Instagram/Pinterest infinite scroll psychology).
Youtube search is actually pretty good. Toss in the terms suggested.
Seeing the future? Picking the right macro strategy, programming language, database, etc ahead of time, sure, an experienced developer can usually do that. But correctly predicting the boundaries of systems, libraries, APIs—and guessing who will maintain which system and figuring out dependencies—that never goes according to plan. So in my experience YAGNI and reducing coupling are more important principles than sharing code.
Hey rbliss, article author here. I've been out of pocket all day. I was getting ready for bed when I saw my article on the front page of Hacker News!

Your comment is fair. It's late here, so I don't have the mental energy right now to write the 1000+ words I would like to on this matter.

It's totally worth writing another followup blog post explaining in more detail, which I'll aim for next week.

But, in brief:

-- Flattening yield curve

-- Ridiculously low unemployment ("full employment" is the term that's floating around)

-- Record high housing prices

-- Public corporations sinking profits into stock buybacks instead of acquisitions or capital investment (I find this a highly dangerous trend for the economy)

-- Consumer debt levels now higher than they were in 2008

-- Subprime auto loans being "tranched" and sold to investors much like subprime housing was in 2005-7 (and this is even worse, since cars are depreciating assets): https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-16/riskiest-...

And I saw this one yesterday: https://www.feld.com/archives/2018/07/early-stage-vcs-be-car... -- specific to the startup/tech field.

If anyone has any more questions, please feel free to ask me here, and as I said above, I'll aim to write a more detailed followup next week.
Well, if you put it this way, we humans was[0] also good at it.

This got me thinking, maybe about 64000 years later we will see the first group of elephant programmers :D

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_painting
Once I got a card with 2% cash back and no fee, I felt like I had gotten as good a deal as was possible. I expect that some day such deals will go away though.
Cash might have been better thanks to the wonderful world of CCTV that protects us all like a helpful Big Brother
Raft cut loose: HF tower for HFT refused in the UK
Meet the Author: Jennie Alexander
It is an honest question. I’m familiar with the debate and I honestly don’t understand why it’s such a hot topic.

From a sheer systems design standpoint, it’s one of those things that seems like a reasonable thing and the opposition has never made a lot of sense to me.

From an audit trail standpoint, if we are taking measures to better ensure integrity of elections it seems like you would want to do both. Do it with whatever measures are necessary to ensure that people who would have difficulty obtaining an ID have some means to do it.

It just seems like if we have a goal of removing questions about election integrity, we should go the whole way.
> Why not make pro football players wear standardized shoes during a game?

I don't know whether this image is accurate, but: https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/es-footb...

Really though, standardised boots would probably not kill this market. In cricket, for example, it's common for players to use a bat that is dressed up to look like the product of their sponsor, while actually being manufactured by someone else entirely. This is a bit of an open secret, so I guess that footwear companies would also be willing to pay good money to have 'their' boots worn by the big stars, even if the public knew that they weren't allowed to be meaningfully different from the boots everyone else was wearing.

A genuinely good reason not to force standardised boots is just how different everyone's needs are. Feet don't just differ in size, but in shape (in three dimensions), not to mention all the other things that can affect a person's natural gait, weight distribution and so on. I think it would be hard to write regulations tight enough to preclude an unfair advantage for richer teams, without also forcing some players into boots that would be not only sub-optimal but even dangerous (in the sense of increasing the risk of injury).
Maybe crediblity isn’t quite the right word, would you go for losing all good will?
I personally think, during a transition to an SDV majority, human drivers will get worse.

Mainly because good driving is often synonymous with defensive driving. And you don't need to drive defensively if there's a large number of cars on the road which won't unexpectedly change lanes, turn right from the left lane or wildly change speed for no reason. If anything, human drivers might start doing unsafe maneuvers more as they see SDVs around them react quicker and safer to their bad driving. Why bother getting in the correct lane when you can pick the less congested one and rely on SDVs to move out of your way when you barge past?

There's also the issue of people switching from SDV to manually operated vehicles. What if someone uses an autonomous car for commuting on weekdays and gets used to the car acting for them, then uses a normal car on the weekends? They might expect the car to emergency brake for them when a pedestrian steps out into the road, and in the split second it takes them to realise the car will not do that for them they've already traveled too far to stop in time.
It's almost all writing blogs. Either famous authors or blogs / websites about writing. As an aspiring author I want to learn all I can from the professionals.

I also have web comics
No one other than a small group of elite athletes is ever expected to win a marathon, it's mainly a race against yourself.
The top glass piece already leaked. Doesn’t seem to be the case. Though the bezel is thicker - seems they’ve figured something out
IF you gain Dutch citizenship by descent, you don't have to renounce your first citizenship.
60+ seconds to 0.1-0.5 is a pretty nice speedup! :)
Reading through the meat of the 40 pages, the appeals court did two things:

1) reversed the lower courts summary judgement

So public.resource.org ("PRO") "won" in the sense that the lower courts summary judgement was reversed, so PRO no longer has their hands tied by that summary judgement, for the moment.

2) remanded the case back to the lower court, because they found that there existed genuine issues of material fact such that the case was not suitable to be decided by summary judgement. And they remanded the case back to the lower court to analyze those genuine issues of material fact more carefully.

What this means is that the case is not over, in fact, it has only just begun, because the appeals court has directed the lower court to analyze PRO's copying of the various standards under the copyright fair use doctrine to determine if each instance was, or was not, fair use.

So this is not a "win" outright as in: one can copy the standards because they are referenced by the law. In fact, in more than a few locations in the decision the appeals court went out of their way to state that such a simple decision outcome was not possible for cases such as this.

So the case continues, and PRO has more work to do to show, almost to a standard by standard basis, whether their copying was fair use based upon the standard, the law that incorporates it, and the directions given by the appeals court.

However, the appeals court did indicate that there were quite a number of instances where, were the case facts developed sufficiently for them to render a decision on the merits, that many of PRO's copies might very well be seen as fair use copies. Other copies, maybe not so much. So it is a step in the right direction, but the situation is far from settled.

edit: fix typo
> What's wrong with a pipeline operator?

Honestly, for the use case, the same thing that's wrong with a (mandatory) visible function application operator in Haskell.

> Chaining calls in JS means that a function returns the original object, piping is actually passing over the result as an argument, so it's semantically different.

The syntax Flux uses for creating the result is the same as JS would use for mutating an inbound object, so it actually would be consistent if pushing the result used the same syntax as passing the (mutated) original object would in JS.

Though I’d prefer whitespace for piping just like Haskell does for application. If your are going to specialize a language for a domain, don't be timid about it.
The text of lolc's comment says "the conspiracy theory that the Russian state falsified votes"

Can you say more specifically where your link covers that, I didn't see it.
The goal I think is a complete ban on human driving on public roads. With that in place, maybe we can make significant improvements in traffic. I agree that the last mile will always be a problem though.

While self-driving cars are cool, I’d imagine self-driving subways would be easier. In New York, the f train in Queens hits a standstill because of problems in the d line. The air train at JFK has no driver. Why can’t we do this for MTA?

While we are at it, transit in the city should be entirely tax funded. N

We also need self-driving buses. The buses in Queens sometimes don’t show up for over half an hour and three show up at the same time. Why?
Carbon Copy Cloner
> as long as identifying vulnerabilities and exploiting them without detection is more expensive than the value of the assets the system protects, defenders are winning.

I'm not sure what "winning" means or why it's valuable.

I don't have an interest in the payoffs of the attacker being small. I have an interest in the costs to myself being small.
How to Build a Decentralized Application (DApps) – DevTeamSpace
Three Major Physics Discoveries and Counting
How the Recession Reshaped the Economy, in 255 Charts (2014)
I'm a lot less concerned about retail stores tracking me via cell signal, as it requires much more specialized hardware/software - meanwhile, it's likely feasible to modify extant in-store WiFi infrastructure to track that.
> I wonder why it's mixed with the conspiracy theory that the Russian state falsified votes.

How is that a conspiracy theory?

> You'd think there are enough interested parties to make the Russian state an unlikely culprit even if evidence of tampering should be discovered.

How many of those interested parties were actually identified as culprits in widespread hacking of election related systems in the 2016 election?
"Seeing my initial retirement fund returns go extremely negative (> -40% for 2008) right at the beginning made me question the "conventional" investment advice to just contribute/DCA into index funds and not look at it."

Psychology differs. I got my first job with a 401k in 2007, and I had no problem whatsoever investing as much as possible as the market declined. Hey, stocks are on sale, right? But temperamentally, I get an intense desire to cash out as the market goes up. When I was a kid, someone told me you haven't made money until you've sold at a profit. Luckily, the fact that it was a 401k meant I couldn't cash out without switching jobs.

I think a large part of dealing with risk and money management is accepting the fact of your own psychology and biases.
I haven't written a GBA emulator, but GBA got me into ARM. Tonc's old guide to ARM[1] I'll still send to people who want to learn ARM.

[1] https://www.coranac.com/tonc/text/asm.htm
All of these goals are positive. I also assume that's all of the goals that you focus on.

But it's an abuse of power to only look at one side of the equation.

Companies are run by people, and at the end of the day, no person would want to dump their money into a technology that couldn't yield any financial gains. Where do all the large companies get most of their revenue from? From figuring out how to trigger dopamine to be released into our brains, and we're starting to see the negative effects it's having on people.

Also, you aren't giving people voices. You're opening up a door to a world where they have no control over. In their outrage, and futility, they focus more and more time trying to fix something that doesn't exist.
A bunch of people will say age doesn't matter, but it does.

There are plenty of exceptions. People sometimes quote exceptions as the rule "I know this one guys who works at Apple that still programs and he's 59".

There are plenty of older PM who do a great job, but that's not the same thing as saying "assuming all things equal" != you have an equal percentage chance at getting the job.

(Just some dudes opinion )- I believe someone younger has an advantage if you're truly equal. You need to be better than equal :)
Having worked in TV for 15 years, I can say without a doubt the top comment is correct in many, many ways.

Content creation and hosting is a small problem compared with distribution and marketing. That's much of the reason why it's taking so long for software to eat entertainment. Distribution to interested parties is a process that took Hollywood half a century (and YouTube and Netflix) decades. Keep in mind, Netflix started by focusing just on distribution.

Good news is always good, but there's a difference between gaining access to tens of thousands of euros and getting to a first video distribution with 20 million views, for example. That's when people who work in content/entertainment will turn their heads and take notice.
Ha, sorry, I misspoke. I mean I report the card lost, which closes that account number, but the account at the bank remains and my credit report remains unchanged.

You can only request a chargeback, and chargebacks only work sometimes. I've done maybe 10 in my life, and I think 1 out of those 10 didn't go through -- the bank sided with the merchant. And I think if you do too many, the banks get pissed off. So depending on chargebacks is not a panacea.

And I'm not talking about reneging on my responsibilities or contracts that I've entered into. I always resolve those.
I know several people that are dual citizens of China and US. China doesn't recognise the second citizenship, but that doesn't prevent you having it. If China finds out, though, they'll apparently strip you of your Chinese citizenship.
Sure but MS also got in trouble for disallowing browser competition. Apple does this as well via their monopoly.
This seems like an obvious right. You should have to right to know about the laws. There's shouldn't be secret laws - like say how they decide on right to fly. Also we should disallow non-competes (they only help big companies, they hurt individuals).
Why can't the machines be open sourced in the sense that all the code, privacy encryptions, physical design, bill of materials, supply chain and manufacturing is done by the public via a voting system and any citizen has the freedom to inspect any part.
I actually misspoke in my post. I report the card lost and get a new account number. I have dozens of open credit cards at any given time. It's easy enough to move on to the next one, and it works for me.
Radical? There’s creative destruction and uncreative/destructive destruction. It comes across that 3D Touch is being sacrificed for optimizing supply-chain cheapness (Tim Cook’s wheelhouse), which would go against Apple’s core philosophy similarly to automaker’s hand-wringing depts. make terrible “mandatory” designs suck in order to appease bureaucrats.
Yes, but unfortunately credit card transactions get sold to third parties by the CC companies regardless, so it's quite possible Amazon gets to track me with that either way.
Yes, this is a "cobbler's kids have no shoes" moment. (Author here.) I have been busy building other sites. I promise I will make the time investment on my blog soon. :)
One might also think it unlikely that they’d invent a way to secretly open tamper-proof vials of urine so they could dope Olympic athletes, too, but here we are.
If it were just "the shoes make you faster" there would be nothing to discuss. The debate centers around a qualitative difference: "The shoes have a 'spring' in them that make you faster."

It's similar to a mini version of prosthetics such as Pistorius's that were banned from Olympic competition, as they are basically big metal springs on the end of your legs. The Vaporfly was explicitly designed to use this spring principle, i.e. store mechanical energy in a carbon fiber plate and release it back on toe-off.

So some, like me, feel that shoes for competition should not be allowed to mechanically assist the runner. It's not about percentages, it's a simple binary criterion.
This is a very silly way of looking at the world. The reason people prefer centralized services is because:

- they have greater capacity to add features

- they have more ability to have search and other discovery

Neither of these are inherent to a centralized service. All you need is a centralized website on top of a decentralized video host. Different websites can compete on features like search, while providing access to the same database of videos.

The fact that no one has succeeded yet is not proof that this is impossible. Moreover, this would be to ignore protocols like email and the web, which are decentralized, and which are very popular. Centralization has been preferred because we are in a period of very rapid change, where centralized services can pivot ten times before a decentralized service even gets started. People are beginning to realize the downsides of centralized services, change is starting to slow down, and decentralized services are now able to make headway.
I guess what I have run into is a lot of code that is agressively, needlessly abstracted for a future that will likely never come. Abstractions that perhaps would be worth it to save hundreds of copies or permutations, while I'm looking at one.

I'm all for not repeating myself, but there is a different between "usually avoid" and "never"

Copying and pasting in many situations would seem a breeze compared to the nest of abstractions required to avoid it.
Not until theres a critical security vulnerability where you must upgrade.
Interesting indeed but the part that stuck with me the most is:

>> Existing code exerts a powerful influence. Its very presence argues that it is both correct and necessary.

I read the article in 2016 and that phrase stuck with me ever since, I had never thought about it but it's such a simple and self evident fact but so easy to miss. It's a powerful concept to know. Both when writing and when refactoring code.
No evidence was presented, but lots of attention was gotten. I guess we are waiting in breathless anticipation for the "results". I doubt anyone doing this seriously would post a tweet thread like this before actually doing the work.

Does anyone know this guy? Is he competent or something?
Could you please add options for 3 passports? I actually have US/Canada/Finland and it would be interesting to see, although US v Canada is probably almost identical.