skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The Fed has been raising rates and is expected to raise rates in each of the next two quarters. They hope they can raise rates high enough, fast enough to give them leverage for when there is a crash. Of course they don’t want to raise rates too fast else the rate raising will be the cause of the next crash.
I suspect it will regress to the mean as people realize that those "tech" majors were not long term winners. You have to skate to where the puck will be, not where it is.

By the way the snobbery can run both ways: when I decided to go to MIT several of my high school classmates sneered that I'd chosen a "trade school" instead of a "real school". And indeed I got a degree in...humanities, like most of my HS classmates.
I've never heard of this phenomenon and find it interesting as someone who does advocate for such policies from time to time. I'd love to read some reasearch on the topic if you have any? (Genuinely interested not trolling).
OT, but not much, the spaghetti racquet which was the actual technological advance but that was soon prohibited:

http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~cross/SPAGHETTI%20STRUNG%20R...
Quicktype: generate types and converters from JSON, Schema, and GraphQL
This morning on HN:

Polluting less is actually grandstanding and curtails individual freedom. Doing something good actually pisses people off and makes them hate initiatives that constructively help a problematic situation.

But it's definitely not a societal problem, American's toxic bratty attitude should be catered to so they don't get personally offended. We should definitely blame the people eliciting change.

"You're making me act this way and my opinions definitely need to be respected because I have them" - The post
It depends on timing. Suppose the market were to crash 8% on Monday, then another 9% on Tuesday, then another 5% through the end of the week for a total peak to trough drop of 20%.

That’s a big correction in historical terms, but it only sets the market back to summer of 2017. We could easily have been having this conversation in the summer of 2017.

That said, if you have decent conviction you probably want cash and close case substitutes (e.g. short term high quality debt) so you can take advantage of any big drop as a buying opportunity.
7. Killer app
The author claims winners and losers but doesn't talk about the criteria for winning and losing. Decentralized networks aren't after the same things as centralized ones. They're not after engagement metrics, ARPU, or stock valuation.

If the criteria is number of engaged human users, then for sure the decentralized networks are far behind. But these things can change quickly after changing slowly.

If decentralized networks cause big centralized ones to change their behavior in meaningful ways, for fear of losing users to the decentralized ones, then I would argue that's a win for decentralized networks. Small win, but still a win.
Well ... there are different kinds of deploys with different kinds of risks.

I usually don’t like a blanket don’t deploy on Friday rule.

We can usually rollback with one command easily, have good monitoring and health checks so even though something makes it into prod, it’s super easy to go back.

Unless you have changes like you mentioned, weird side effects, db scheme changes, config changes that affect machine configuration. Those are unknown unknown changes. Good practice to hold them back.

As to web and assets changes to a css file or a self contained js change, that should only re-deploy the files that changed and generally low risk.
It reminds me of some of the extreme positions the NRA has taken. Like talking about arming all teachers in response to school shootings. Nobody thinks that's a good idea, whatever you think about gun rights.

I'm realizing that positions like that, or this straw thing... the ideas are successful with groups because they're impractical and dumb. It's about exhibiting group fealty. I'm so devoted, I'll say things that any non-member thinks are ridiculous. It's like burning the boats behind you when you land on shore.
The dynamics of mine development show interesting parallels with tech, actually.

Lots of mines start from little companies searching for a possible ore body (the idea or market fit), then raising money to perform a closer survey (seed funding). If the closer geological work is promising they often obtain a lease (patents or other IP).

At this point it goes one of two ways. Either they raise enough money to start and operate the mine themselves (series A, B etc, leading to an IPO) or they sell the prospect to a major company.

Then the newly-minted millionaires, who know a lot about mining, invest in the next crop of junior miners.

So as with tech there are conceptual, exploratory, growth and liquidity phases, followed by a process of reinvestment.

I remember realising this when living in Perth and being frustrated that, with quite literally billions of dollars sloshing around the city looking to invest, you'd be hard-pressed to pitch anything smarter than a brochureware website to the local investment class.

There were other structural problems. Stock options are not A Thing for various legal reasons. Failure in starting a high-risk business is a bit of a black mark. There are VCs but so much of their money came from governments trying to jump-start a market that they were about as risk-taking as a loans officer at a bank (what government wants "10 MILLION WASTED ON PHONE APPS" as a headline?).

Meanwhile the super funds are collectively sitting on trillions of dollars[0] and investing an absurdly dumb fraction of it in the ASX. Putting just 0.5% of their holdings into VC would unlock tens of billions of dollars of potential investments.

For which, hey, VCs who lurk here and want to raise a fund: go talk to the Australian superannuation industry. It is a massive pool of underperforming cash languishing in the same dozen public companies and, because Australian law forces all Australians to set aside at least 9.5% of income for retirement, the industry will never stop having incoming funds. There will always be new money to raise[1] and it will probably the 2nd largest pool of pension investments sometime in the next 10-15 years.

I will accept finder's fees and/or massively remunerative job offers as reward for this insight.

[0] https://www.superannuation.asn.au/ArticleDocuments/269/Super...

[1] https://www.willistowerswatson.com/-/media/WTW/Images/Press/...
'Privileged' is very much a matter of what you're comparing against. In the 90's, about 25% of the world's population didn't have electricity [0], let alone game consoles.

[0] https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/eg.elc.accs.zs
This paper is important. It doesn't point out anything that you shouldn't already know if you're an experienced systems programmer, but may be a good reminder that WebAssembly's sandbox isn't the last word on security. You still need to be on alert for things that can trigger XSS, which can be easier when you have a memory unsafe language like C or C++ in your stack.

There's a good point in there about how node.js is exposed to all these vulnerabilities too.
Human intelligence is a process that runs on a 2-dimensional substrate of cortex plus the magic of older portions of the brain.

Volume isn't the key to intelligence: big brains are a red herring. Brain size is poorly correlated with measures of intelligence but the idea sells lots of books and wastes lots of readers' time. People think it's like Gary Larson's famous cartoon:

"Freeze! ...Okay now...Who's the brains of this outfit?"':

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BCA1_FLFCxU/UMpbOPEH2xI/AAAAAAAAiO...

There are cases of human hydrocephaly where the cortex has been reduced to a thin sheet. These people can live normal lives and some have above-average IQ.

"Is your brain really necessary? by R Lewin":

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/210/4475/1232

"No Brainer: IQ of 126 and first-class honors degree in mathematics":

http://www.rifters.com/crawl/?p=6116

"Man with a small brain shows that size isn't everything!":

https://www.news-medical.net/news/2007/07/22/27900.aspx

A Good slide show on hydrocephalus and its effects:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwI95WRbQAHbMGFjYzQ1YjYtOTN...

And don't think the cerebellum is critical either: here’s a woman without a cerebellum with mostly normal motor function (mild impairments; can still walk and talk):

http://www.wired.com/2014/09/24-woman-discovers-born-without...
They must have been made out of natural fibers originally, but I would imagine a big problem with that would be that they would absorb water and become very heavy.
Have you heard of "coal rolling"? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNiF1UEjrE0
Predicting Instagram Pictures Likes and Comments with .NET Core and ML.NET
That's an argument that 3/4 is the same as 6/4, not an argument that 3/4 is the same as 6/8.

If your phrases really go ONE two three FOUR five six then notate your piece as 3/8. 6/8 is for ONE two three Four five six SEVEN eight nine Ten eleven twelve, where beat four is significant, but not as significant as beat one.

Of course you do have patterns of bar phrases, not all first-beats-of-the-bar are equal in a larger piece, and where you draw the line between a bar and a phrase is ultimately a matter of taste and judgement. But a player will absolutely understand 6/8 and 3/4 differently; a run of quavers in 6/8 is ONE two three Four five six, a run of quavers in 3/4 is ONE two Three four Five six.
The main reason why type theory is used for mechanized theorem proving is that developments in that area are mainly driven by computer scientists, not mathematicians. And computer scientists like their formal objects to look like programs.
The last few invasions have not exactly helped with the deficit, have they?
Bond returns have a low correlation with stocks. Short term and international bonds are sometimes negatively correlated.
Commodities have a low but positive correlation with stocks.
Some observers suggest that commodities boom before recessions.

The Goldman Sachs Commodity ETF (symbol GSC) is an easy way to invest in a diverse set commodities. Many other funds are targeted (eg, oil or gold).

iShares Core U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (symbol AGG) is the largest bond ETF. There are many others.

You can always stuff cash in your mattress.

As others suggest, you can also short the market. Shorting housing for a small investor is not super easy.

Diversified long term buy and hold investing in stocks regardless of current conditions has historically been a great bet.
The weather in Atlanta, Houston, Austin, and Phoenix is brutally hot and/or humid and shows no sign of getting a cooler average.

It's difficult to do stuff outside when it's that hot, especially as you get older.
Do you trust the statistics that show how effective vaccines are and that the downsides are small?

Great! Me too! I wasn't involved directly in that work, but I trust that it hasn't been manipulated.

This is what I mean, I still trust these institutions (in part because I'm part of the technical/scientific community, and understand how it works). Many people appear to have lost trust in these institutions.
You could probably read through the speeches of some historical dictators to find a good way to express the idea of "the real politics is what things fall apart in to when order breaks down." Sure, the national debt exists on one level higher than the stuff the defense spending is buying, but so is our trade with other countries and most of our livelihoods. If the civility of our relationship with, say, China breaks down to the point that it's obvious we won't pay our debts, a lot of other things will break down along with it - perhaps enough to qualify as a gigantic disaster.

The US will be able to keep foreign soldiers off its territory but you and I could be out on the streets with a whole lot less.
The rest of the comment explains what the license means by "preferred form for making modifications" and why the full commit history isn't it.
Well crap. Thanks for pointing that out.
It's a very old phenomenon indeed. Plato's Republic can be read as a meditation on the centralisation of power, the pros and cons of centralisation vs decentralisation, and how and why the balance shifts over time.
This has been in Chrome 69 beta for a while, The Verge could have included a a screenshot...
The article is extremely light on substance. This issue can be more readily addressed with a simple list:

Centralization pros:

* security
* ease of management
* lower overhead in task delegation
* maintenance simplicity
* versioning
* no distribution

Centralization cons:

* fixed resources
* fixed configuration
* fixed environment

Looking at these lists centralization at first appears immediately superior. These lists is an illusion in that it accounts for concerns in the present, but it does not account for growth or future concerns. Decentralized systems can scale in ways centralized systems cannot.

The fixed nature of a centralized system is also a huge limitation. Projects like SETI@Home and Folding@Home illustrate that thousands of lower powered distributed nodes are better for computation than a single centrally managed super computer. While the computation power of super computers grows rapidly over time so too does the computation power of your average home computer.

There is also an economic qualifier for distribution too. Computational resources cost money in both hardware and electricity. When computational tasks are distributed so too are the expenses of computation.

There is also a security/availability benefit to distributed systems. Centralized systems are a single point of failure. Distributed systems, at least in the public space, are diverse in their hardware and software which allows the system immunization from many forms of attacks. A centralized system can be isolated from the world by a DDOS attack, but it is substantially hard to attack a distributed system in this way.
Probably not a popular opinion. With the world reaching ~10 billion in population, wouldn’t some in the govt see not offering child care, a good thing for the planet since it side effect encourages people to have less kids?
Brain volume does have a (small) correlation with iq in humans.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2770698/
I'd hazard to venture that modern microprocessor improvements "seem" less for two reasons.

1) A lot of the "a ha" magic really has been figured out in microprocessor arch (e.g. pipelining, superscalar, multi-level caching).

Previously, we were reaping the benefits of process shrinks AND microarch epiphanies. Now, only a slower former and less powerful versions of the latter (e.g. branch predictor tweaks).

2) We're discounting the "performance" that has instead been allocated to power. Up until the P4, we had the benefit of just saying "more power!" in pursuit of performance.

Now, not only do we have a power budget to stay within, but we're actively trying to decrease power draw for the same workload in mobile parts.

So instead of getting something twice as fast, we get something that has battery twice is long (or however the math works out).
I wonder if we will ever really break out of being generationally bound for situations like this. I see this in social issues especially. Seems like the speed of change is rate limited by older generations dying and newer ones being born.
The people you describe are going to intentionally destroy the environment anyway. They aren't reachable by reason and we shouldn't factor them into any initiatives unless necessary and then we should simply assume they're part of the problem to be worked around or blocked.
> but when I saw people wanting to ban straws, I just had to roll my eyes.

You rolled your eyes at people stopping a senseless practice that pollutes the environment? That's some next level misanthropy.

>when obviously inconsequential stuff

It's not inconsequential, so I'm not even sure how you can paint it as obvious.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1iJ1PuR7IwqFuhkvuk7ZW...

Straws are one of the top 10 items involved in beach cleanups.
Analysis: Why Elon Musk abandoned his plan to take Tesla private
Nextcloud user since v11 or so (small installation, <10 users). Updates have been painless, the web interface for updating has worked fine each time with nothing to clean up by hand. Its given me remarkably little problems after running it for ~18 months.
Using the force of law under penalty of your money [fines] or time [courtroom, prison] is a terrible way to 'raise awareness'.
so if you had HIV youd opt out of anti viral drugs?
“Everything helps at this point.”

This is not true and is dangerous because some things (many things actually) hurt. The article calls out some (drawing attention away from fishing industry), but I think more people need to be aware of opportunity cost [0] because time is not infinite.

The idea of doing something is better than nothing is not an absolute rule and should not be followed when it results in campaigns like this one that have caused harm.

Many examples of stuff like Starbucks [1] replacing straws with more plastic.

Skipping a straw is a good activity with really minimal impact. Having a law to ban straws amplifies the effort for minimal impact and leads to other behaviors with worse impacts like increased wood use, etc. It also removes the ability for activities like restaurants simply using more recycling to offset their plastic use.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost

[1] https://reason.com/blog/2018/07/12/starbucks-straw-ban-will-...
PHP can be secure
Yes, let's ignore evidence based medicine because there might be some emotions involved. Nobody is arguiung that fertility is not complicated - there are multiple factors, but if you want to look at the effect of one particular factor (age) while controlling for others, I have no idea how to do it without data.
I couldn’t disagree more. While there weren’t female executives then, a nurse != executive.

One yields a lot more decision making power, responsibilities and possibly much higher salaries.
...As the following chart from Statista shows, the current bull market is now ‘older’ than the previous record holder, the 1990’s bull market and Dot-com Bubble.

The boom is just capitalism's way of setting up the next bust. Too few people seem to understand this.

The current bull market and tight labor market were amplified by the largest outpouring of easy money by the world's central banks in history.

All eyes on the yield curve.
Slatestarcodex wrote a fantastic blog on exactly this subject: "The Toxoplasma of Rage" http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxoplasma-of-rage/
Pay off your debts instead
>locking down ip

that's the golden ticket right there. a meshnet is entirely possible RIGHT NOW but it would entirely destroy the idea of copyright and IP
I want the platform to be like cable television. 10000s of channels. If someone doesn't like a particular channel because they don't believe in the content. Simply block it and move on.

If someone comes across a user in the comments, whose views they don't agree with. Simply block them too and them move on.

What I would like to do, is put the agency back into the hands of the user. I don't want them to be coddled. I believe everyone is better by listening to viewpoints from those even if we don't agree with it. There's always something to be learned.

When it comes to advertisers, well they are advertising on the channel. They are not necessarily supporting the platform. My wish would be, that once launched, going forward users understand that when Toyota sponsors a channel, they are sponsoring that user and adverting to that audience. They aren't sponsoring another user elsewhere which is banging on the table for Trump to build that wall 10ft higher.

That said. In the beginning, I will be forgoing mainstream advertisers. It is my belief that they will eventually see the light. That the user has full agency and they can craft the platform to cater to their needs and what they want to watch.

Finally, terrorism, child porn, revenge porn, nudity and all that nonsense will not be welcome on the platform.

Look, the central tenant is for everyone to be welcome. Craft an audience on whatever they feel to be passionate and to be able to make a living. With no fear of being de-platformed because there is a minority that wishes to subdue another minority. I believe such censorship is a slippery slope. That's all.
I didn't downvote it, but there are a number of things that made me sigh, so this may partly clarify other people's sentiments if they happen to be similar:

-The tone of the comment is very matter-of-fact and peremptory, as if that explanation was obviously the only one and not just one among the dozens that have been put forward by the community so far, all having more solid support.

-The lack of proper sourcing. A plos one and an evopsych pop sci book do not count as proper sourcing.

-The expression "brains are wired". At least they didn't say "hardcoded", but still. It's as lousy as people calling DNA source code.

-The quasi-Freudian mindset some people demonstrate by seeking to placate sexual selection onto everything that arises through evolution.

-The very loose attempt to apply this argument to present-day cultural phenomena. I find it too easy.

-Basically anything involving evopsychy explanations for anything is very likely to be sigh-worthy.

Before some of you come out of the woodwork (yes, you) and jump at the argument with more plos one citations and retorts from whoever is the flavorful evopsych specialist of the month: yes, I am aware sexual selection is a thing, I partly work on it. Yes, I know evopsych shouldn't be dismissed off-hand. No, I am still not willing to have the discussion you're about to engage me with. To be honest I don't know many scientists who are, it just feels fruitless for us.
I disagree vehemently.

Like it or not we need excellent educators in ALL the humanities. That requires people with deep and diverse ways of being able to teach HOW to do it in as many different ways as possible. That means we need more exposure to more people. Discourse is hard and demanding.

Hell, being able to communicate and know without a doubt your message has been received is hard and demanding, but most people can't be bothered to admit it.
"That wasn't always the case. In the early days of the internet the internet was protocol driven, decentralized, and often distributed—FTP (1971), Telnet (<1973), FINGER (1971/1977), TCP/IP (1974), UUCP (late 1970s) NNTP (1986), DNS (1983), SMTP (1982), IRC(1988), HTTP(1990), Tor (mid-1990s), Napster(1999), and XMPP(1999)."

Yeah, no one uses TCP/IP, DNS or SMTP nowadays. Good thing that we have gotted rid of those antiquated protocols and instead can use facebook and whatsapp! </sarcasm>
Surprise surprise, corporations (in this case commercial fishing) are doing major damage to the environment, and even after realizing that straws make up only 0.03% of the oceans plastic waste, the attention is still (even in this comment thread) pointed at the consumer.

The free market will not save the environment, regulatory action will.
Redis and Open Source – The PR Perspective
WireGuard Takes Another Step Towards the Mainline Linux Kernel
I'm sure there's a way to map this to id, ego and super-ego somehow.
I want to solve a similar problem with my Maven pgp-signature-check-plugin (checks artifact signatures). A federated list like that described was over idea I had, another was registering keys in a blockchain.
Ask HN: Urgent Need an email provider that would never black-hole incoming email
Hi guys! All email providers I know of throw some of the emails I receive in the black-hole (doesn't bounce so the sender doesn't know I didn't receive them). I need an email provider that would never never never do such thing. Throwing 0.01% of my emails in the black-hole is too much for me: what I need is 0%. I don't care if it's Viagra spam, let me sort that myself.

Please let me know if you have any suggestions (free is great, but paid is also OK)!