skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
2010's music is dominated by remix scenes. Across most of the popular new genres this pattern holds:

* Arrangements are consistently built on samples and reconstructions of older songs. Big productions regularly credit a dozen people as songwriters: a Top 40 production is a factory process.
* Awareness for new acts is built with fewer "big break" moments, and more of a grind with high-energy guerrilla marketing, endless tours, etc. Inclusion in a soundtrack is a common success milestone.
* Live performance takes the form of: DJ set with a few vocal/instrumental parts, idol dance routine, acoustic cover - aiming to perform with a live performer on every part is the exception for acts driven by their production, though of course you still see traditional styles represented as a full live group.
* 100's of amateur covers, "dance remix" and "nightcore" versions filter out over Youtube, Soundcloud and parts unknown. The sound gets curated by these fan groups leading to innumerable niches each with their own "canon text".

It really stopped being about the gear, and is only to a limited degree about mastery of traditional technique:"the sound" is always a commodity. But the brand is also more than the sound, and popular acts always get their branding on point now, which does include whatever aspects of the performance are necessary for "authentic" portrayal. Music is more than ever a tapestry with increasing extremes of "big heads" - constructed formulas - and "long tails" - folk vernaculars.
Well, it might indirectly do it depending on the tax structure. That's why the capital gains tax is lower than general income tax, for example.

But I'm thinking we would use the money to more directly encourage investment. Small business programs are good here, including classes, mentoring, and small-business loans.
So going far afield, I teach karate and use this all the time though I was unaware that there were typical time constants across the population. I may start using that to teach better.

In karate we teach some forms we call kata. When I teach these, I like to cover the details slowly at the beginning, break for other stuff, and then come back to it at the end to test their memory because it's long enough that short-term memory will start to degrade and they'll have to actually work at remembering it (and thus identify the parts they didn't really quite get).

It's very obvious to watch in realtime. It's a waste of time to just work on teaching the kata for 2 hours straight because they get exhausted and lose focus. It's just as effective to teach it for a half hour at the beginning as long as I have a 10 minute review at the end to solidify what they learned. I usually think of it as three separate practices -- warming up the form, practicing the form, and executing the form.

Warming up means going at half speed with the intent being to refresh the memory. Practicing means going at 70% of full speed to help get it into active memory more solidly. Executing means going at 80% of full speed and focusing on checking muscle memory (video works great) under conditions of some mental stress, and also actually developing the techniques and theory further.

To get back to your point, I see no reason why you couldn't make your card require all three types of reviewing something. But I am not sure if the time constants on forgetting practiced skills is different than memorized facts. In karate your deeply practiced skills are in muscle memory (or for you perhaps in your most accessible memory with the math details you don't even realize you're using which are not known to most people). Having stuff in muscle memory is the bare minimum required to actually move further.

You can't learn karate from reading a bunch of articles and watching karate videos. You have to actually practice it to reinforce the memory and build new connections between different concepts. Does that sound familiar to how you think about learning math?
The best note on this was from the Republican running for attorney general in the state in that he could not believe that the city was returning to the racist system whereby blacks would be having a reduced mobility option because of the known, yet not handled, yellow cabs not picking up blacks. A better system was identified that helped fix an issue and we have a city council so beholden to the taxi network that they are willing to screw over the populous.
> On-restaurant-table credit card swipe rather than taking the card away and entering tip later. Many places overseas do this almost universally.

If they took the card away, how would you enter the card's PIN? That's why places outside the USA do the swipe on the table.
"in visual view" being the url bar?
If you're interested, I just put https://followalong.co into alpha. It lets you follow people on HN and get email alerts when they post
> "with many analysts and experts expecting that the business will streamline itself"

Seems like wishful thinking
If your business model can't be made GDPR compliant, your business model is abusive and defunct.
> If something is worth starting then it is worth finishing.

Perhaps that's true, but I think it's often quite difficult to know whether a project will be worth finishing before you start working on it.
I thought their big solution was a bunch of shitty, slow buses with a vaguely reserved lane across a bridge: http://gothamist.com/2018/08/06/l_train_pre-apocalypse.php
I'm good at coding. What else do I need to start a successful business?
SURROGATE MOTHER AGENCY: PRICES AND PAYMENT IN USA
Given the problem, this seems like a reasonable action on the part of the NYC City Council. But I'm confused by section on congestion pricing:

> Many experts believe congestion pricing is the best way for New York City to fix congestion and secure the funds needed to fix the subway. Mr. Johnson supports the idea, but Mr. de Blasio has opposed it. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, who controls the subway, has said he will push for congestion pricing...

Why does de Blasio oppose it? It seems like another reasonable approach to tackling congestion -- heck, it's the public version of building private toll roads -- with the added bonus of providing funds to improve public transportation.
Having this enforced by the browser as a mode would be brilliant. The HTML stack has grown enormous, with it the potential for a abuse and misuse. If you are just looking for a digital version of paper, so to speak, 95% of that is simply completely unnecessary.

Right now the AMP CDN enforces the restrictions of AMP (you can't simply pretend it conforms to AMP to Google and then feed the client something else) which is something that is fundamentally misunderstood when this is discussed on HN. AMP is a protection and guarantee of behavior for the user, it is not for the publisher, it is not for the developer. Google has a profound vested interest in trying to maintain people's interest in the web, especially in the face of various alternative walled gardens like Facebook feeds, Apple News, etc.
On iOS, hold your finger over the image to make it appear.
I think that build out has been going on since at least 2004, at least around the University. Plenty of luxury student apartments around there with even more inflated prices for the value.

Even in the suburbs, sketchy one bedrooms were 900-1000 last I had looked, though I was limited in options because I had a small dog. I ended up going way out to savage to get one for 700 / month back in 2010
That's an interesting concept. Can you name a couple of examples, or a link to further reading?
How much of that is influenced by economic necessity?

My wife would love nothing more than to raise the kids but making ends meet is proving a tough tradeoff
Stealing your btc is also really easy, as xkcd showed a long long time ago: https://xkcd.com/538/
CTF weekly guide
Have the green cabs helped in that regard?
Except that foreign competition will reduce prices overall. Tariffs blunt that, meaning foreign consumers will buy local goods at higher prices than they would without tariffs.
Looks like it's a simulation of a NN based on the response of a chosen memristor type to pulsing.
4 Consumer Demands That Impact Today’s Global Foodservice Supply Chain
This benefits the drivers at the expense of consumers. Maybe that's worth doing, maybe not. I don't think there is a right answer to that since it depends on your perspective. In either case, it seems like the problem they're trying to address is congestion, which could be better addressed by taxing drivers more highly. Then only the more productive rideshare and taxi drivers would be on the streets, plus you'd get rid of a lot of the other drivers who don't value their ability to drive that highly. I used to drive into NYC fairly regularly, since I liked being able to park near where I was going, but if it cost more I would have just taken the train and the subway.
Early in my career, I worked at a shop that serviced credit cards for bottom of the barrel subprime customers.

They got slapped by OCC (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency) for offering a card with a $300 limit, that upon issuance, already had $300 in fees billed to it (offering a credit product with no usable credit, or something like that), and settled with them by lowering the fees to $250, and paying a million dollar "fine" — which, IIRC, they were able to both write off, and "earn back" with "good behavior".

I don't think that's exhaustive of "predatory lending", but it's damned well exemplary. And the "punishment" was, too.
It seems that he believes that it would put an undue burden on poorer people commuting into Manhattan:

> The de Blasio administration has steadfastly maintained that it can’t get behind a congestion pricing plan because it unfairly burdens low-income New Yorkers traveling into Manhattan from the outer boroughs. On Friday, the Mayor seemed to soften on his prior opposition.

https://ny.curbed.com/2018/1/19/16910546/nyc-congestion-pric...

But I can't actually find a quote of him saying that; everything I can find just says he thinks it's not fair, but doesn't specify why: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/21/nyregion/de-blasio-conges...
In the spec (http://yaml.org/spec/1.2/spec.html#id2759572) it says:

> YAML can therefore be viewed as a natural superset of JSON, offering improved human readability and a more complete information model. This is also the case in practice; every JSON file is also a valid YAML file. This makes it easy to migrate from JSON to YAML if/when the additional features are required.

I think that's why I absolutely love YAML: I was able to start using it by writing JSON, then replacing parts of my documents with their "native" equivalents as I got comfortable with it.
Thanks for your input. One takeaway from talking to my friends is that the "play for free for exposure" also happens at some very high profile venues that I wouldn't have guessed did that kind of thing.
Interesting point. It is probably the most charitable way of looking at how tariffs could possibly have been instituted by a party that claims to value economic freedom.

We're told that finally a master negotiator is at the helm and that he will renegotiate trade deals that leave the US at a disadvantage.

One data point that offers evidence counter to that view is the president's vocal opposition to NAFTA, a deal that resulted in a large (mostly) free trade zone and lower tariffs on US goods than on those from the other participants.

I think the most likely explanation is that the tariffs are viewed as a way for the executive branch to unilaterally redistribute wealth to key swing states that have been hit hard by globalization.

If your speculation is true, then the administration must believe not just that escalating tariffs will move trade negotiations to the brink and will allow the US to negotiate freer trade... but it must also believe that the negotiated freer trade will be economically significant nationally AND to the swing state areas hit hard by globalization.

It is my understanding that if the above is true about the administration's beliefs, that the numbers quite obviously do not add up.

So while the US would certainly be better off with freer trade, the economic cost of tariffs is not enough to move the needle economically in a significant way (per an analysis done by Reason magazine). This directly contradicts the claims made by the administration.

So unless there is a deep factual discrepancy between the analysis conducted by Reason magazine and the analysis the administration is doing, the tariffs seem intended mainly as a tactic to rally key groups of voters, and there appears to actually be no broader strategic significance or possible negotiated outcome that would achieve the goals the administration claims will be possible via the tariff escalation.

That said, the tariffs are probably a smart way to try to win a few elections. They allow the public to view other nations as adversaries and to rally behind the US "winning" over other nations. They also prop up the fiction that trading partners are in fact adversaries rather than cooperators. Such adversarial rhetoric is obviously a useful political tool.

So since this kind of us vs them, zero-sum rhetoric has been such a key element of the administration's message, I find it unlikely that it would ever seem desirable to remove the tariffs and to reframe the US relationship with other nations as constructive rather than as adversarial. Why give up such a useful enmity if it's working politically?

My concern is that the tariffs will cause unexpected and sudden economic harm, which could quite suddenly cause a lot of the players to lose their perspective and actually begin to act adversarially.

FWIW tariffs also reduce trade cooperation between nations and reduce the disincentive for armed conflict.
I use DuckDuckGo, so I haven't actually seen an amp page in my own personal browsing. However, I have seen an uptick in people sending me https://google.com/amp/<content>.

I avoid GOOG when possible, so I have to copy out <content> manually, which is (minorly) annoying. Thus, AMP leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Then, of course, there's a variety of ideological arguments against it, but those have all been discussed ad nauseam, so I'll leave them out of this post.
Before those two rules, I would put:

* look at (and fill) the edges of the frame. Too often, we look at the part of the picture we are interested in (often the center), and ignore the empty/ugly space around it. Look at the edges, and the center will take care of itself.
PSD2 and “open” banking is bullshit. I wish this myth would die - it is anything but “open”.

If you want to gain access to APIs, you need to become an “AISP” (as they are called in the UK), this requires a certification and a load of other nonsense akin to PCI-DSS. This is for read-only access - for “write” access including the ability to edit payees or make payments you need to become a “PISP” which I assume requires even more paperwork.

I also said APIs because the regulation does not mandate any kind of API format, so every bank has their own with different capabilities as far as what data is returned and in which format. Some of them are truly awful.

And finally, “open” banking still does not allow you to get a personal access token for your own account.
Anyone figure out how to get an instance of spark up with sparser working?
True. That would probably knock all of the Bay Area cities down quite a bit.
It's because this field doesn't value experience, and instead values youth and rewriting things in Javascript.

It's maddening how preventable a lot of this stuff is, but you can't convince anyone to listen to you because rules and processes aren't fun.
This article from January 2017 has some statistics:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/15/nyregion/yellow-cab-long-...

https://ny.curbed.com/2017/1/17/14296892/yellow-taxi-nyc-ube...

"...there are 13,587 yellow cabs on New York City streets. The total number of black cars: 60,000, more than 46,000 of which are connected with Uber, though they may be hooked up to other services as well."

"To the credit of taxis, that’s still more than the number of daily trips taken by app-hailed cars—but not by much. Combined, those cars took a total of 311,305 trips in October 2016. Yellow cabs are on a downward trajectory; app-hailed cars are on an upswing.

The Times breaks down the brand-specific numbers: in a twist surprising to no one, Uber, which started operating in NYC in 2011, is still king of the ride-hailing apps, providing on average of 226,046 rides per day in October 2016. Lyft came in a distant second, with 35,908 rides, according to city data, while Via had 21,698 rides; Juno had 20,426 rides; and Gett, which launched in the city in 2014, came in last with 7,227 rides."

Some of the statistics are dated in a fast-changing industry.
The golden section is complete woo and in scientific studies, people tend not to prefer compositions made with the golden section. As for the rule of thirds, think of it as a way of thinking about your photo rather than an actual rule. There's no reason why you can't think of the composition in your photo in quarters, or any other arbitrary subdivision. 3x3 is just a small enough number that you can approximately think about a picture that way.
Does anyone have experience with buying an air quality sensor for personal use? I know of Plume and AirBeam but have not seen them in use.
The rents look a bit off, $3,700 is not the average 2BR apartment in NYC. Same for Miami, $2,400 is way too low. Maybe they're including too many apartments in the outer areas of these cities, but if you want to keep your commute <30 minutes in the cities, NYC would be closer to 4.5k and Miami would be hitting 3k.
Well the company is not A/B and it's not a large percentage of my portfolio. All I said is that it's the remainder of the money from cashing out of crypto, you're making a bunch of assumptions beyond that.

Also I agree with everything you said.
That's true. Don't neglect the cash base salary either, and don't overvalue the upside potential, because probabilistically speaking even under the best of circumstances it is likely worth much less than you think. Certain amount of faith is required, you should just moderate the amount of faith in anything startup-related unless it's late stage and things are going well, or unless you're a founder (and therefore you're mostly in control and are likely to benefit disproportionally in case of an exit). Even single-digit number first employees should be running these calculations in their head, with a healthy dose of pessimism.

There are other benefits to working at a startup though. For one thing you might end up on a great team. For another there's far less bureaucracy and process that gets in the way of doing things. For yet another, most of the truly "cool" things are done by startups, and your chance of getting a job doing something intellectually rewarding is far greater there (in my estimation at least). Simple fact is, FANGs of the world have some pretty cool teams, but those teams as a rule have no open positions, so pro tip: don't go to Google thinking you'll work on Brain or autonomous cars at any point in your future, unless you're joining those teams directly. Startups do have open positions every imaginable type of work, tech stack, or field.

But yeah, do consider whether money to fun balance is there, and if it's worth it for you.
Not sure, but green cabs do address the bias against the non-Manhattan crowd. It is very common for yellow cabs in NYC to refuse rides to Brooklyn/etc. Destination discrimination "isnt allowed" but there isn't really a way to enforce the rule.
If it didn't have a name it's probably because, much like the Italian Beef, nobody outside Chicagoland was aware of it or cared to be aware of it.

Also, though so-called Chicagoese has its own distinctive features, it's part of a larger regional dialect. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inland_Northern_American_Engli...). But that dialect is disappearing and Chicago, being the largest representative city, may become the location by which people remember it (e.g. in parody) in the future.

That's the heart of it: the dialects are now quickly disappearing (after a brief period where researchers were sure some of them were growing!) making them increasingly prominent as part of a larger social discourse.
might be the function of the default follow feature and when they were created
> The price of a taxi medallion, which is required to operate a taxi in New York, has plunged from more than $1 million to less than $200,000.

Clearly, a cap on ride hailing licenses can only mean that the already licensed drivers stand to gain a similar amount by pimping their license to various competing services until they get the best deal. It's simple economics, assuming taxis and Ubers are comparable to the average consumer.
> The existence of affirmative action for specific groups necessarily disadvantages other groups based on their race.

Why?
Because S3 is a K/V Store, not a file system.
Plus, ask any American who took French in high school how much French they still retain.

From two years of H.S. French I still remember:

Je ne parle pas français

and

Je m'appelle Phillip

and

je joue au tennis
China's economy would suffer along with everyone else's.

China economy would suffer more.

https://voxeu.org/article/china-s-wto-entry-benefits-us-cons...

https://www.thebalancesmb.com/top-countries-exporting-to-the...

China's #1 customer is the US, by a large margin. Around half of their exports come here. China has far more to lose in a commercial war.

It'd hurt them, but it'd hurt America a lot more.

Nope. The only way they can hurt the US is by economic suicide (dumping all debt). And I mean total annihilation: they'd be shooting themselves. And the USD would suffer, true. But it would recover, US economy has far more autarky.
Because it's regressive. It takes money away from people who drive, who are often people who are blue collar, spread out in the outer boroughs, or who need to bring tools to do their jobs, those who are forced to cross the city to get anywhere west of town, etc.

Sure, that's not the only effect it will have, it will also cost money for bankers that drive in from Westchester and park underneath their midtown offices. But, as you can imagine, it won't change their behavior much -- by definition the only people that it will affect are people who can't easily afford it.

If you look at it in a different way, congestion pricing takes a public good that everyone paid to create, the roads and streets of the central business district, and reserves them so they can only be used by drivers with lots of money. There are problems with that approach.

Of course there's another side to the argument, obviously. But I feel like many people don't realize this issue cuts in two directions, rather than just being an obvious "good idea".
> I think Scott just expected a different kind of interaction from a civil society.

Did he?

Seems to me that he outright admits that both the actual encounter and his mental picture of it are shaped by strongly by his strong internal expectation of persecution based on his “nerdy outsider” status, and saw everyone—starting with the smoothie worker trying to inform him that the money he had just picked up was from the tip jar—as being aligned against him because of this status.

It seems like he got what he expected, largely because he expected it so much that it blinded him to what was actually happening.
TechnoVolume
You’re right. I really just meant to say they are popular because of their ubiquity in gaming keyboards. That’s the biggest market for premium keyboards.

You can buy all kind of pretty keycaps for them, which is what “gamers” care about.
The next question that follows is "who at Mozilla instigated this and why?". The mindset at Mozilla seems to have changed somewhat.
They're both available as early access previews. You can request access via the sign up forms.
I lucked out hiring a great lawyer remotely through LawTrades (no affiliation). I'm not sure where I'd find such a person locally.