skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's not just the sales team. Eventbrite has a fantastic user interface and features that really work for people with complex ticketing requirements, better than any other ticketing platform I've ever used.
> and market the experience.

While locking their devices and users to that experience, or forcing those users to make large-scale security compromises just to avoid it.

> My take is that until we decide that a given platform is a monopoly

They seem like they are. Is there another app store that iPhone users can use? Android users? Does the operating system on these phones let you easily change your "app store" preference?

> we let the platforms fight for a larger market share by attracting high quality apps using this "tax" as leverage

How does that benefit consumers? Is it impossible to achieve these same benefits in any other way than the somewhat draconian system we have now?

> Microsoft tried (and failed) to improve their platform by offering developers a larger share of the take away and hoping they'd improve the ecosystem.

Microsoft had more problems with their platform than just the price. There's already a workable distribution channel for third-party software on their systems. Their "app store" really didn't add any benefit to people already familiar with their software. Plus, they never really sold a volume of phones that puts them close to Apple or Google so their Monopoly position in this regard was severely hampered.

> My hope is the market gets more competitive so that app makers get a larger share of the profit.

How is that going to happen when you only have one app distribution mechanism to choose from per platform?
Extravagant handouts to the people who own the company, you mean?
Oh yeah... Whoops!

You're right.
I'm not sure it would be that easy since I believe e.g. I/O can go through the System process (or other processes even), which has full affinity. We'd likely have to set thread affinities for all processes/threads. But then it would clash with manually-set affinities, and I'm also not sure if it would have worse performance than actually disabling hyper-threading or not.

Right now I'm looking at what making a UEFI application to disable HT before boot might involve... not sure if that's too late in the boot process or not.
It looks like a duck, smells like a duck, and quacks like a duck being held off at a distance by an intermediate party whose sole purpose is to let Microsoft have all the benefits of full time employees without the protections that we award to full time employees.
"I think it's fair to say that Silicon Valley is dead." (1993)

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.folklore.comp...
I wish more big stocks (looking at you, tech giants) paid regular dividends instead of buybacks. It gives me a real, irrevocable return on my investment and benefits all shareholders equally (on a per share basis).

The stock market seems to have lost hold of its very basic premise:

1) Companies need money, so they sell equity in public markets
2) The people who buy the equity, if they are rational, value each share as some fraction of the net present value of all future cash flows
3) As the company moves forward and realizes those cash flows, they pay back cash not needed for reinvestment to the investors as dividends.

So many stocks have such little dividend (or buyback) activity that it's a rounding error. That means the investors are more likely to be interested in pure speculation, hoping to buy before the peak and sell at highs. When you're only engaging in speculation, there's no reason the stock price has to stay tethered to reality. You end up with companies like TSLA that have insane multiples or TWTR that lose money for a decade without paying a penny back to shareholders and are still somehow "worth" billions.

A rational market would be a better market, and more dividends would, in my opinion, increase rationality.
That kind of obstancance isn't a sign of being an adult.
How have you found working with Go?
For every tax dollars that this structuring saves long-term investers, that's one extra dollar that average Joe, who owns 0-10k in stock, has to pay.
Yes, English version was on 15 (or 13 specially formatted) 3½ discettes. Localized into my language was on 28 3½ discettes.
Yeah, to those shrewd investors... the lessors, you could call them!

What say we split the profits, 50/50? Doesn't sound fair, huh... well, what number would you consider fair?
Colon cancer linked to viruses in beef, Nobel-winning scientist contends
The Impossible Job: Inside Facebook’s Struggle to Moderate Two Billion People
Granted I only gave it a cursory look it seems like another attempt at a NextDoor style social awareness network in Nigeria (although not limited to Nigeria). I'd also like to warn anyone else who wants to check it out, it contains some graphic content. Currently there is a report of a man who was shot on the front page with an image to accompany it.
>what a respectful and user-controlled smart household appliance looks like and how it's built

Connected straight to your smartphone without a server in the middle or not connected to the internet at all. E.g. make your bathtub automatically fill up with water at your preferred temperature on a specified time every day and then maintain that for x amount of time. Flush it automatically after that time if you haven't pressed a button manually. I could see coming home after work and jumping straight to the bath being convenient and this setup doesn't even need connectivity.

Maybe some stuff could connect with each other only via LAN. E.g. night/day sensors that will turn the outside lights on when there isn't enough sunlight. Or a monitoring panel( basically a tablet) that will tell you if your fridge is struggling to keep the temperature down( maybe the underside needs cleaning). That could also be used to create various profiles for your smart lightbulbs so you can get the exact type of light that you want. Slowly increasing in luminosity to wake you up or getting a red led-like light profile for when you want to watch a movie. Maybe a more blue oriented light to help suppress melatonin when you have to stay late. A coffee maker( using regular grounded coffee, not capsules) will notify you when the internal coffee storage is low. I hate it when I run out of coffee without realizing it and I have to leave the house early in the morning without any caffeine.

The possibilities are there but those that make these devices need to look and listen to how people actually live instead of just trying to impress with useless and dangerous gimmicks or try to get extra money by extracting data.
There is precedent.

Look at Altered Carbon which got 10 hours for the first book, or The Man in the High Castle which was adapted into 2+ seasons for a book that's only 240 pages.
> What happens when whole generations view computers as black boxes of consumption rather than tools of creation / something to tinker with?

But that's how every generation since computers existed has mostly viewed them; tinkerers have been a small minority, even if young tinkerers-of-computers were an iconic image associated with the first generation in which that was a possible thing. That wasn't because they were common, but because it amazed (mostly older) people that they existed at all.
Or Japanese.
Mastodon has no burn rate. It can improve incrementally and snipe valued users.
How vulnerable are these to differential power analysis? From my understanding, many FIDO keys are designed with resistance to these sort of side-channels in mind.
Ask HN: West vs. Midwest?
This is my final year of undergrad.

I have a new-grad software engineering offer with one of the FAANG companies. I can choose between the Bay Area and Seattle. Base comp is a bit over 100k plus RSU's (a reasonably standard offer I think). I might try for more offers out in the Bay Area, but I liked my experience at this company so far.

I have another offer with a startup in Chicago. While I don't have exact details yet, I expect a base comp that's a little under 100k plus equity vesting after some cliff (pretty good for the area, I think). The company is well-funded and has a very interesting and difficult problem to solve with under 50 engineers so far. In general they do work that I don't think anyone else is really doing and everyone there seems to really believe they'll be successful in a few years. I think so too.

My concern is that taking a new-grad offer with a midwestern startup might label me as a midwestern startup engineer (after this startup exits). In other words, companies might not be as willing to hire me unless I'm looking in the midwest. I think tech in Chicago is growing, but if it doesn't and I want to go work a FAANG company elsewhere in my later 20s/30s, I don't want to be caught out of luck.

Are my concerns valid, or am I being unreasonable? Does anyone have any thoughts on how I should approach this?
"works as ... open source" and "is ... not open source" are compatible statements. For instance, the handle of a screwdriver works as a hammer but is not a hammer.
The Beautiful New Orleans House Seen in Drakes “In My Feelings” Music Video
Less consumption -> Less CO2 emissions, so that’s awesome I guess ?
Whales and tuna look equivalently as cute to me - i.e., not at all. Whales look almost exactly like fish.

The reason people object to whale hunting is whales are incredibly intelligent mammals, with a psychology we identify with - social and language-oriented, with lifelong family ties and a love of play.
I had to look up what a zero-hour contract is [1]. Seriously sounds like a setup ripe for worker abuse - I mean, yes, according to the standard zero hour contract, both employer and employee can decline work offered/accepted, but who do you think has power in this relationship?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-hour_contract
My company does actually give a subsidy to health care, so it's not a totally alien concept in Australia. But it's pretty rare.
My point was in response to WilliamEdward above so really only dealing with showing that travel time is not a constraint. That said, your points are good, but knowing humans I think "Unrestrained colonization just because we can" is probable if not certain, for anywhere that a self sustaining society can exist. It certainly holds for Earth. The moon is not a great example because it isn't habitable. Same as Antarctica. We have sent a few expeditions and have a few bases but have not colonized it. If the moon was earthlike then I would bet that colonization would have started shortly after the Apollo program. Right now there are no habitable planets we can get to. If we ever develop interstellar travel, finding habitable planets we can reach is a near certainty. More likely we first develop technology that allows terraforming and a self sustaining colony on Mars. And at that time I would bet that it happens.
You could only buy stock that produces dividends? (Edited because words)
Banks Are Becoming Obsolete in China–Could the U.S. Be Next?
This may be bad for the economy, but to me this sounds like a good thing? People are lowering their spending and carbon footprint. Now if this is because they legitimately can't afford it, that's different; but cutting consumption is generally good.
Or skipping children altogether: https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/children-carbon-fo...
Is average Joe in US free from taxes from dividends if he reinvests? If not, then it's bad for him too.
That claim could be made at literally any point in history. Even in 1983, any employee at ARPA could have been a grandparent. Old people have been involved in technology since the very beginning. I'm not seeing your point.
Sounds like the Chinese can finally enjoy all the wonderful side effects of a mature economy
I wish it were that simple but I find your analysis highly flawed. The early employees, founders and investors risked a big chunk of their resources and hence played a huge part in the creation of the company and are all the beneficiaries of those buybacks assuming they stick around for that long.
> I wish more big stocks (looking at you, tech giants) paid regular dividends instead of buybacks.

Apple does both. Not sure where that puts it....
Since I don't care about these supplementary things I never made any use of my insurance at all in the years I had it, I just paid the fees because it kept my mother quiet and continued as a normal NHS patient. I know friends who've had stuff done privately, but I didn't see any meaningful benefit. I'm sure mileage may vary.

I had cancer when I was younger, the NHS fixed that. Again what would private providers do differently? Better wallpaper or whatever versus the worry of imminent death? Who cares? I used to buy myself a BK Double Whopper as a treat before chemotherapy do you think a private insurer would throw in a free burger?
You have to step back a few links in the chain to see the error here.

For example, let's say a private owner starts a company, hired employees, pays them the agreed wage, and makes a profit. The owner should get the profit, right? They didn't do all the work, but they directed things, and took the risk that their capital would be lost.

Now, suppose you had the same situation, except the owner sold to a private shareholder. This private shareholder wouldn't seem to be in a different position. They risked their capital that the enterprise might succeed.

What about a public IPO? Well, the investors are putting their capital at risk to sustain the enterprise. Still seems fair.

The objection is that subsequent shareholders have done nothing. They haven't worked on the business, and they haven't injected capital. Instead the stock merely changed hands from the original owners.

So, the idea is we don't pay these people, or we don't pay them very much. What are the options:

1. We pay out less to shareholders. But then, this would affect ALL shareholders, including the original owner who put capital in.

2. We reduce payments to shareholders who didn't put capital in. All very good, except this means that those who did put capital in can never sell at the real price. The share is worth more to a capital injector than to subsequent purchaser. So, these people would be more reluctant to invest capital in the first place, knowing the shares could not be adequately resold.

3. Cut payouts for everyone except employees. In this scenario, the business simply doesn't get created. There is no reward for the capital at risk.

There's no way I can see to get the outcome you want without wrecking the whole system that creates the wealth in the first place.
That would make sense if dividends were not double taxed. Dividends are paid from after tax dollars and then the investor has to pay taxes on dividends again.
Interesting question:

What if all the local companies got together and agreed to only pay tech workers minimum wage?

Rather than use a hypothetical, lets use a couple of actual things that have happened; "all the local tech companies got together and:"

* agreed not to offer jobs to the other's workers
* agreed to get H1B visas rather than pay hire wages
* converted previous employee jobs into contracting

These are all things that have happened which could not be counter acted by disorganized labor pools. So when you say "I'm extremely happy to be employed in a field where I have natural bargaining power that doesn't need to be augmented by legislation." I expect you will find at some point in your career that your "natural bargaining power" will erode and you will be in a position where the lack of any bargaining power will benefit the corporation disproportionately.

I think it is great that this hasn't happened to you yet but it would be unwise to assume it will never happen.
Hmm, trust funds aren't like basic income at all. I also suspect people would do better things upon being freed from work than people generally assume, but "well trust fund kids volunteer a lot!" is a very uncompelling argument for that supposition.
> If you want to compare unions to corporations, consider this: What if all the local companies got together and agreed to only pay tech workers minimum wage? By pooling their bargaining power, they can achieve a far better result!

And this would be totally fine if we valued corporate rights over individual rights.

But as a society, we value individual rights over corporate rights, which is why we allow for unions but not corporate collusion. Any individual cannot stand up to a corporation, but a union of individuals certainly can, supporting the subjective values of our society.
> Some might object to such extravagant handouts to people who (by a vast, vast majority) played no part in the creation of that wealth

Then join or start a partnership. In a partnership, all the capital works for the firm. When you make partner, you buy in. (If you can't afford it, you get a loan or don't make partner.) When you retire or die, the stock is bought back. Coöperatives are another example.

Corporations aren't the only ownership structure. For private organizations that scale, however, they tend to win against partnerships and co-operatives.
Curious, what did come from your communication with the Apache Foundation after they voiced their concerns about your usage of the label "Apache License"?

https://github.com/dgraph-io/dgraph/issues/2416#issuecomment...

This stuff really sours me on the otherwise fairly reasonable license and its users.
Providing capital doesn't play a major part of wealth creation? Like it carries no risk and deserves no reward, and isn't the fundamental thing that allowed the wealth to be generated in the first place?

Are you sure?
I’m probably just tired but re-reading my comment I think it’s reasonable. To clarify, the workload for all the testers could be proven to be the same while the number of things to test could have reduced by 7/8th as the article suggests.
Cheddar Scratch Kitchen Exposes Card Data of Over 500,000
Another related example: We don't have the abundance of resources to do so. Whether or not the universe is infinite, while it does mean there can be infinite resources, our direct radius of galaxies is finite and it gets harder to travel as the distance gets further so the infinite planets are not all the same distance from earth.
Could you generalize to other identities ?

Or, on the contrary, give an example of such equation with some actual empirical value ?
All the developments we've had since 1969 feel more like improvements of what was already invented.
Within living memory of an (old) person alive then would have been the birth of nuclear power, powered flight, the telephone, car phones, electronic computers, radiography radio, tv, the internal combustion engine, satellites and the first men on the moon.
I wonder, if true, how this trend will affect China's insane property market.
They will pay more, the following quarter or year, if profit sharing is unchanged and your shares constitute a bigger proportion after the prior buyback.
That's because they have so much cash that they have no idea what to do with it otherwise.

They are also doing buybacks.
The physics of stone skipping (2002)
Didn't they play the most key role of all? They paid everyone who works at the company to do what they do.
I wish the law allowed investors to reinvest the dividends and postpone the tax event. This would have improved the current skewed state.
Why isn't the ability to short sell enough to balance this incentive out? If twitter is severely overvalued there's a ton of money to be made informing the market of that fact.
Show HN: XJoy – Use Nintendo Switch Joy-Cons as an Xbox Controller in PC Games
Your blog post turned up in slack today (congrats). My particular flavour is Concourse but I nodded all the way through.
No real problem has a single solution.
And there are 2 HN front page postings on this now, each from someone with only 1 post (Vicilook) and no comments to their record. There were 2 yesterday with the same pattern.
This is true for some boards. For realtime OS-less microcontroller boards like Arduino, the execution model is what I've described: http://johnny-five.io/platform-support/#arduino-uno

For beefier linux boards, like Tessel and Beagle Board, it's what you've described: http://johnny-five.io/platform-support/#beaglebone-black
http://johnny-five.io/platform-support/#tessel-2
Cutting unnecessary consumption is good, but generally in market-oriented / capitalist economies you need consumption in some form to drive the economy. Cutting consumption can result in pretty big ripple effects as not only retailers and physical good extractors/manufacturers get hurt, but all the businesses servicing them get hurt too. Lowering consumption in the US, for example, would hurt Google and Microsoft a lot.

In addition to the imports, it sounds like a lot of the problem is due to rising rents and housing prices. I’m basically a broken clock on this, but a “strong” housing market is not necessarily good for the economy. Increasing home prices and rents can wipe out real growth the same way inflation can
> Some might object to such extravagant handouts to people who (by a vast, vast majority) played no part in the creation of that wealth.

you realize this won't garner much sympathy on the Silicon Valley town crier since employees also have a significant $ value of shareholdings

yes this is an outlier in every other industry that employs people for wages
You'd have to be able to predict when the market will have an adjustment to do that.
That's just an individual. If consumption for an individual is down due to price, that's consistent with risin carbon demand.

(Global carbon use is up)
This was eye opening. I was always under the impression that early detection would mean a different stage of cancer.
> There's no way I can see to get the outcome you want without wrecking the whole system that creates the wealth in the first place.

This really sums up the economic conversation in America these days (and FWIW I agree!).
Thank you x 100 for posting this fascinating article.
Maybe you should read with Warren Buffett says about it
In Energy the number is missing the huge amount of temp workers that the industry tends to have
Deep Learning for NLP: An Overview of Recent Trends
This reminds me a bit of ActiveX.
it does? you don't pay capital gains on reinvested dividends
I've had my share of beefs with Sir_Cmpwn but this post is nonsense. You can't "largely" practice an open source model. Either you do or you don't.

Dgraph was interesting to me until they said they wanted to take a vig for me sharing knowledge and practical advice about the software (because that's what consulting, an activity expressly precluded in the dishonestly-named Commons Clause, is). That? That can go straight to hell.

Being a taker of open source (because you certainly "interact with open source") is your right but has absolutely nothing to do with those of us actually expecting those draping themselves in the banner of open source to practice open source principles and to run an open source project as an open source project. That exists between your ears and your ears alone.