skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The Cinemark membership is $8.99, the general admission (2D, non-matinee—what you get the ticket for with the membership) for my local Cinemark theaters is around $12.50.

That's more than a $1 discount. It also includes add-on tickets at the same price (structured so it's basically unlimited viewing for one person plus optional guest at the $8.99/ticket price), concession discounts, and waiving of online ticketing fees.

It's not really anything like MoviePass, but it definitely makes sense.
Supporting that 5% who really need it would effectively be a means tested pension system. The point of a pension (retirement savings) is to prevent masses of destitute elders. The goal is to have a society in which masses of elderly are not left without means to live at a reasonable standard. That’s the purpose of a pension system. If the goal can be effectively accomplished in another way then I support it. I’m not personally tied to the notion of a pension system.
The Cinemark one for us is about $4 cheaper than a regular ticket (SF bay area) and also gives 20% off concessions and you don't have to pay the extra fee charged for standard online purchases.
Most projects do not make a language choice based on the needs of the model, but based on the needs of the developers. It's the same reason you've chosen English to write your comment in, rather than some other language that might express it better.
That's not a problem, or at least it's not a problem outsiders can solve, it's a problem only the Theatre chains can solve.

If MoviePass had negotiated great discounts and co-marketing agreements with the chains up front to re-sell their unused seating inventory, it might have made sense. As they did it was one of the dumbest business ideas ever, and gives credence to the rumor that early backers were trying to launder money from a previous fraud.
And often surrounded by land I would wager the government owns, which could be used to build the transfer stations upon. Maybe even a susbsidised incentive to get companies on board, so they don't have to spend their own time and capital acquiring land.
The key being that the code you're writing needs to be performant. If you write O(n!) code, it's going to be slow whether it's C or JavaScript.
We looked at it for our project, but it didn't work for us. Too little configuration & it made sections of code completely unreadable.

I miss clang-format...
Why did not they add the features to OpenWrt trying to make it better?
Almost all the forks of OpenWrt die in months. Some lasted only few years. I am afraid that it is a wasted effort.
It does on the supply side. It keeps drivers on the Uber network, which is good for both the rides business and the Eats business due to more consistent supply, and good for drivers due to higher total volume of work.

The eventual result is that Uber can operate more efficiently than competitors that only do rides or food, allowing them to compete better in both markets.

(I used to work at Uber)
They're addressed by established process and routine - 2 things machines do better than us. Can a machine monitor braking or perform the current brake check - absolutely. Could we shift the responsibility of check the load tie-down to the freight facility and monitor ongoing status with sensors. I'd hope so.

You should be asking "can a robot drive for 12+ hrs without fatigue?" or "can we eliminate the restrictive, expensive and often gamed system of keeping drivers within their hours?" This is were long-haul transport could be "disrupted"
I don't know car/cdr/cadr/caar etc might not be close to the current machine architecture... But to me at least it feels quite low level. Perhaps similar to some of the unfortunate parts of the jvm/byte code spec that held back/convoluted dynamic languages on the jvm for a long while.
I'd say neither are very good, and they lack the sophistication of brand design history and why things are designed the way they are. I can tell these were sketched and created by someone who has not studied iconography or identity branding.

But why is this the case? What indicators signify this? Here's a basic test: damage them.

Strip away the colors. Make them entirely flat. Can you still identify them? Do they stand out after you've "damaged" the icon in any regard? It's just not colorblindness: what about to a viewer who sees them as slightly blurred, can you still recognize the brand? If you warp the logo, as if from a wrinkled shirt, can you point out whose brand it is?

What about on the worn surface of a sticker on someone's MacBook? Someone getting acetone on some branding materials?

Think about the branding of companies from the S&P500, when the light hits cutouts of their icons, can you identify them from the shadows?
Dropbox upgrading paid storage tiers at no extra cost, 3TB plan now offered
I would insanely choose ruby rather than javascript for the major advantages that has to offer. Performance in most of cases is not a real needed over consistency. Also Ruby 2.6 has jit, would be great to see some bench tests. :P
Welcome to 1995 and the wonderful world of Java. Except in Java you can use threads to use multiprocessing, so you can have efficient shared data structures but also hard to debug bugs.
> when they do have accidents they will seem bizarre and inhuman mistakes that even the most incompetent human driver would never make.

I agree -- but it's even worse. Even if robots do make human-like mistakes, that doesn't mean humans will be forgiving of the same mistakes. For one thing, I might forgive a human being unable to react due to a 1/2-second reaction time, but I sure as heck wouldn't be that forgiving for a robot. I would expect and demand an order of magnitude better. For another thing, people have more tolerance for mistakes made by "closer kin", if you will. (e.g. if my own child steals from me, even 10x as much as a random thief does, that doesn't mean the thief can expect more lenience than I had for my kid.) Self-driving cars pretty much have to be strictly _and_ significantly better than more than the majority of humans for people to trust having them around. Merely being better than average, even if it's in all respects, isn't necessarily enough to cut it.
Why do they need 2.5T USD for import-export? Could you elaborate on this?
How is Express even remotely close to Rails? Express is a glorified router.
"Speech can be violence, no?"

No, I don't believe speech can be violence. Screaming "N____" at black people is a shitty thing to do, but not violence. Murdering people is violence. Stating that you will demonize, illegalize, and murder people if they get power is a good argument to make sure they don't get power, but it is not violence.

There is a fairly clear dividing line between "violence" and "not violence": "Did you directly cause physical harm to another person?" Punch someone? That's violence. Shoot someone? That's violence. Throw someone to the ground? That's violence. Run over someone with a truck? That's violence.

Call someone nasty names? That's a shitty thing to do, but it's not violence even if it hurts emotionally; you are completely in control of your emotions, and you can also choose to disregard anything anyone else says. Say that you will inflict violence on someone in the future? That is also not violence, though it is perhaps a reason to be extra vigilant and take measures to prevent that violence from occurring. Incite other people to violence? They are guilty of violence, but you are not (incitement to violence is its own crime, and one that is intentionally very narrowly defined).
Free speech isn’t only for approved speech.

Let the weeds be visible. If you can’t see them they will only get worse.
In my group at Oracle we're experimenting with running C using the same just-in-time compilation techniques that JavaScript uses, and sometimes we see it running faster than ahead-of-time native compilation, due to the effects of things like inline caching and profiling.
Lets not be too optimistic.

The biggest problem for mars is not pressure, but nitrogen.

You can make oxygen from CO2, obviously. But where do you get nitrogen?
Try reloading without cache! That CDN should be working.
The business case is that by using the same fleet for ride hailing and delivery they can provide the service for a lower cost than competitors that only do delivery.
I've been having scores of conversations with fellow progressives (the ones that still can hold conversations) over the last two years who are extremely uncomfortable with the fact that they find themselves agreeing more and more politically with their up-until-now opponents.

From my observation, it has been because the right well-understood their losses in the last political cycle and learned how to empathize with and embrace their disagreements. The "battle lines" of the traditional right/religious right/(multifaceted-)alt-right (as in there's 10x as much political diversity there) don't line up at all and in some cases seem to be mutually opposed (religious Zionists & Neo Nazis), but they all hear each other and give each other a platform. They also constantly debate their politics. They all manage to find some thing or another in common and work to that goal.

In contrast, us (and I strongly consider myself one) progressives show absolutely zero empathy for people that do not agree with our politics to a tee. We're all about "correct thought", focus sharply on how we are divided and shut down conversation with outsiders. Honestly at this point I'm completely disgusted with the movement and the direction it is going.
This attitude is nothing new. But I don't think people are seeing the big picture. Self-driving cars may cause a temporary spike in unemployment, but the economy and human workers benefits in the long term from the elimination of tedious work.

See how the length of the average working week has been decreasing in the USA:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8A9_5tIWVQY/U5XkaRfB8bI/AAAAAAAAM8...

(Source: Univ of Gröningen and Univ of California, Davis)

This is due to technologal innovations.
Not much, I think. It's already about tied with NYC for highest state+local taxes in the nation.

Also, no reason to believe just 5% will fix the issue.
Ok. Isn't that like saying the only problem with perpetual motion is entropy?

My point is that there is so much imperfect information in geopolitics that trying to draw large scale conclusions about it from minor events is silly.

Basically, this is an argument from final consequences in which the final consequences are virtually impossible for this one person to discern with any real certainty.
The median truck driver salary, including owner operators, is 42k.

There are people making six figures but it is not the norm.

https://www.bls.gov/ooh/transportation-and-material-moving/m...
>This is not starting off well. The first rule is to interpret him in the most favorable way possible

Actually, as a principle of reading in general, this is not a bad one. It does not mean that we have to decide that the most favourable interpretation is the one correct interpretation, but it does mean that it is reasonable to search for such an interpretation in the beginning. This is called the principle of charity. The reason the author recommends it is that often people will impute a particular view to a philosopher that implies the philosopher made elementary errors in reasoning or obvious falsehoods.

This may, of course, be the case. It is trivially true that philosophers make invalid or weak inferences, and false claims.

But there are two good reasons to adhere to the principle of charity that the author does not make explicit. First, if we do not, then we often end up short-circuiting our understanding of what the philosopher may be trying to say. That is, we may prematurely dismiss the claim as absurd instead of trying to sort out what might be the actual claim. Second, while part of philosophy depends on what philosophers are actually saying, a good part of doing philosophy is figuring out what our response to a particular claim is, how we ourselves would support that claim (if the inference is invalid), and what claim we would put in its place (if the claim is false). If we do little more than dismiss a claim as absurd, then we are not really doing philosophy.

So I guess what I am saying here is that making the assumption "Plato is a smart guy" is actually not a bad start for one taking a serious study of what he has to say.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity
> and a customer can tell whether the review was paid for or not.

Isn't this what the companies are paying for?
What Rails features do you miss from which framework?
Because the government existed before you and will exist after you’re gone. It exists (in part) to enable continuity of society, and that is the compact you agree to by remaining a resident/citizen.
I don't think it comes up much in practice because bugs due to non-terminating code don't actually happen much to begin with (compared to all bugs that cause hangs or timeouts), and when they do they are often found via testing. We know that a function terminates for any inputs it was tested with.

But I have little experience with these languages (I've mostly read about them) so I'd be interesting to hear about your experiences.
You don't need to prove it, you just need to guess it successfully. If you're wrong you can deoptimise and fix-up to the same base-line performance.
"but I can never get them to say what any particular idea(s) he has that's useful or true/important but not already well known"

Philosophy does not rack up facts in some sort of storehouse of knowledge.

Much of the value of reading Plato is that he gets you to question your own assumptions and those of others, and does so in an accessible and easy to understand way.

What is justice? What is good? What is the best way to govern? What is true? Where does knowledge come from? Why should any of this matter?

Most people without any philosophical training go around acting like they have the answers to all of these questions, or that they're self-evident, or that they don't matter.

Plato helps us to see that we and various self-styled experts might not know as much about these as we thought.

Later philosophy tends to get more and more technical and jargon-filled, and (at least in Western philosophy) tends to assume a familiarity with Plato.

In many important ways, you would be either lost or missing an important piece of the puzzle were you to try to dive in to later philosophy without a knowledge of Plato, as philosophy to a large extent is a dialogue with earlier philosophers, of whom Plato is a seminal figure.

Plato is also a good sparring partner for when you're just dipping your feet in to the waters of philosophy. A boxer shouldn't expect to knock out the reigning heavyweight champion the first time he puts his boxing gloves on. Similarly, you should really have a go at Plato before you have a go at later philosophers, who themselves have engaged with Plato and tried to answer Plato or have another go at issues first raised by him.

A familiarity with philosophers from every historical period is just part of a well-rounded philosophical education. Skipping to contemporaries would just leave huge gaps in your education, especially if you skip some of the greatest and most influential philosophers of all time, like Plato.
I have no idea, this system was created years before I started working there.
> So you admit the syntax is not as brief or as clean when you lose Clojure's data structure literals, and you have to write additional code for each type to get there?

I didn't admit anything like that. I showed you that vectors are well integrated in Common Lisp.

> Personally I wouldn't call Common Lisp a low level language.

I wouldn't either.

But then I didn't call Common Lisp a low level language. I said: 'Here (and in many other places) Common Lisp is a low-level language' - which means that Common Lisp is PARTLY a low-level language - for example no detection of modification of literal data is required/provided - the programmer has to make sure data can be modified when necessary. A higher-level data-structure would probably require detecting this or would provide only immutable data types. Common Lisp has many relatively low-level features, from cons cells to directives telling the compiler to avoid runtime type checks. Having singly-linked lists is much lower-level than persistent sequences of Clojure.

Generally it's not surprising that Common Lisp has lots of low-level features, since it has been used to write much of itself and large parts of its runtime - where Clojure is a hosted language: large parts of the runtime, the compiler and parts of the library are not written in Clojure: https://github.com/clojure/clojure/tree/master/src/jvm/cloju...
Theres so much abuse of flagging and downvoting on this forum that I honestly think it does more damage to the community than the benefits it's supposed to bring. And that's even with all the heuristics you use to catch abuse.

So often you see unpopular yet perfectly valid (sometimes even technically correct) comments voted into oblivion and then whole arguements arise because if it. Sometimes technically incorrect comments based on popular myths deserve "air time" if they're followed by an intelligent rebuttal, but those comments get lost in the ether meaning nobody learns anything.

It just feels there is so much lost content and bad will generated by the current state of peer moderation.

I say this as someone who has a very healthy "karma" so please dont take this as a whinge post. More just my opinion and observations.
I don't think people are claiming computers can load or unload a truck.

Computers can check if a brake is working or if the cargo is well balanced better than a human. One could do those today with cheap (on the 100's of dollars) electronics and few lines of code. Nobody does this because it's 100's of dollars more than letting the driver do the same.
I can't say much about its technical merits but I find it misleading that an application be described as "serverless" when in actuality it very much uses servers. The "serverless" moniker comes from the Serverless Framework, produced by Serverless, Inc. "Serverless" is the name of a product and should be capitalized accordingly.
The enzymes react with moisture in your skin to create hydrogen peroxide - read that somewhere. It also cuts off air flow to any bacteria. I think the sugar also acts against the critters.
We recently instituted a code review process at my company. We're small, 4 engineers on the core system, plus our CTO. All 5 of us review every commit now. Personally, I take issue with any bug that makes it into production, especially if its mine. We inheritted a code base that was written by cheap off shore contractors and it shows. We're working on cleaning it up and improving it, but it's slow going with a small team and tons of new requirements. I personally just committed changes to +600 files...we're still reviewing after a week.
Isn't there equal responsibility for politicians & gov'ts who agreed to the negotiated contracts? Were they not agreeing in good faith?
The idea that there is any synergy with Eats is a classic "bad business decision" based on hoped for benefits with a core business instead of a business that can stand on it's own legs. Driver and customer acquisition costs are high enough in their core business, why hemorrhage money in Eats spending to acquire drivers for it? In hopes that keeps some percentage as Uber drivers?
The Problem with the Stagnant Wage Narrative
Sounds rather conspiratorial. You should provide some evidence for such a claim.
It's not bad on my computer, but then again, I run with a good adblocker enabled by default.
When both the business of ride hailing and delivery lose money, it means you can lose money twice as fast as your competitors that only do delivering.
Pension holes mostly formed because interest rates dropped. Higher interest rates mean less money can be paid in to fund a pension today, since it will grow faster.

The critical error that pension providers made was to buy equities and 'alternative' investments instead of bonds. Had they bought bonds, their assets would have matched their liabilities. Instead, they assumed riskier investments would grow faster, effectively making pension promises cheaper.

Following the financial crisis, rates were cut aggressively, making bond prices and the present value of pension liabilities soar. IMO this is an under-appreciated facet of the financial crisis that's still waiting to bite us.
The Rothbardians seem like the libertarian equivalent of Marxists; a bunch of people who suddenly discovered, "hey, our political ideology sounds a lot less like a political ideology if we tell everyone it's just Economics! Also, the entire field of economics is lying to you because it's a conspiracy."
The fundamental problem though is that companies want to discretely inject these overly positive reviews. If users can identify these “paid-for” reviews, they will most likely treat them with distrust.

I really can’t see a way around this.
Why is this “common knowledge” while almost nobody believes astroturfing exists on Reddit or Hacker News? Serious question. I don’t see a fundamental difference.
Oh that's awesome. And yea - not sure how the legal end would work either. Will ask around and let you know what we hear!
I think the system 1 icon is too similar to gitlab which is a shame since I like that one the best. I would like it as the default browser icon instead of a round icon.
Given the opportunity to pay for sponsored reviews or risk getting perma banned from Amazon, I'm guessing a lot of companies would choose the former. Regardless, it's not an idea I have seen tested yet anywhere, so it's hard to know.
You are again failing to read your own cites.

"Radio propaganda helped Nazi to enroll new party members and encouraged denunciations of Jews leading to their deportation to concentration camps and caused open expressions of anti-Semitism."

The weaponisation of radio by the Nazis, which naturally had to occur after they took power, is what drove the rise of fascism in Germany. You're really going to struggle to make the case that propaganda in no way supported the Nazi state here.

And I guess the Germans must also be in that group that "never learns", what with their strict controls on Nazi speech. Still, they seem to be doing better at avoiding fascist leadership than the soi disant land of the free.
> First, because people survive whether you want them to or not, and driving old people into poverty will end up burdening you in some other way, probably worse. We pay a lot for not having a decent safety net.

You're falsely trying to paint the choice as only between driving retirees into poverty and paying the full pension.

I certainly won't be receiving 60-100% of my maximum salary forever after I retire, and I won't need nearly that much in order to not be in poverty. And IMO it borders on unjust to underfund a pension with tax dollars while those workers are working, then force younger workers that weren't even old enough to vote when those benefits were created to now shoulder the burden.

Why can't we cut pensions, without eliminating them? Why can't the state switch from defined benefit to defined contribution plans, like practically ever other non-government employee gets?

> If you drive a political wedge between the young and old, I can't say what will happen, but it won't involve the young ending up on top.

This is true only up to a point. The old aren't exactly going to be the ones who will win if the economy collapses or the country descends into chaos, are they?
Writing a front-end WebAssembly framework in Rust: lessons learned