skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You're not wrong in that the land value often isn't in line with the shacks.

But a few things to consider:

One is that shacks tend not to be built by the owners on their own land. i.e., they're not paying for the land, therefore the value of the land plays does not prohibit them from building a shack there. Instead, they're occupying the space illegally. A shack only costs a little in bricks (these lowgrade ones are probably about 10 cents a piece) and some metal roofing.

Second is that shacks in some countries are built in high-demand locations as a political and economic instrument by poor people. In Morocco for example, those who live in slums often get bought about for about 25k per family by a public-private investment project aimed at building luxury apartments. They then take this money to build/buy-into a low-quality apartment building in the city's poor periphery. They're often staying illegally and refusing low-ball offers. If you kick them out by force, you have a moral and socio-political problems and the problem only relocates (waterbed effect). Further, local politicians will often cater to these people for their votes, when the majority of the country is below middle-class, that's who you pander to. In essence, these slums and the related buyout acts like a sort of earmarked social-housing tax on luxury housing projects.

Sometimes the slums are actually owned by those who live there (unlikely, usually it's based on forged documents). But even then, no developer will buy a small plot in the middle of a slum for luxury apartments. You need to be able to buy-out families consisting of hundreds of people before you have a large enough plot of land to develop in. That isn't easy and people know they can fetch a high-price. They also know they have to, finding another place to live isn't cheap.

And lastly, there actually are tons of shacks being sold every day, replaced by apartments due to the value dynamics you described. It just doesn't happen overnight to the entire stock.
The UK and Ireland are their own mini-Schengen called the "Common Travel Area". Irish and British people don't need to show ID to travel between the two countries, but they do need to show ID to prove they are Irish or British and hance entitled to travel without ID [0].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Travel_Area#Ireland
Ask HN: Build vs. Buy for AI solutions, any real-world experiences?
Ever been to Mumbai? ;)
In "Bullshit Jobs: A Theory" the author has a really interesting theory of how open source and employment in software interact.

His model was, that programmers are expected to donate their time to OSS creating core components, in order to get jobs integrating those core components into commercial systems.

When you think about the issue like that, it makes a lot of sense, but its a terrible deal for the programmer.
I think the main reason people do OSS is because they can work on a project they chose and that it's an interesting technical challenge for them. Giving the work for free and being recognized for it is what they're also after, but I don't think anyone would refuse to get paid doing the same thing.
You must have grown up on the coast or the island, because I grew up in the interior and they never had trees like that outside of the temperate zones. The majority of the province has logging but it is not giant, old-growth ancients and never was.
Is this use of "Edge Computing" a term that anybody else uses when they are not talking about an always online distributed network in datacenters?

"I have some Raspberry Pi's in my basement and at my vacation home"

VS

"I'm keeping bare metal close to the action with our uniquely scalable Edge Computing implementation"
After you work really hard for a very long time, physiologically, your brain expects some kind of reward.

Then you remember that there was never any reward and you wonder why you did this to yourself. Lol.
The most recent Dell Latitude 7490 looks nice too.
Or you know, just import sys and print sys.version instead of reverse-engineering it from the syntactic features introduced over time.
If you haven't seen it yet, I highly recommend Henry Zhu's (Babel core team) talk from React Rally[1]. He talks candidly about the struggles of maintaining an extremely popular library and the demands and stress it puts on his life; especially now that he quit his job to work on Babel full time.

If your company uses Babel (which it probably does), please donate to Henry[2] or at the least, send him a thank you for his work.

1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0sfFX7WH1c

2 - https://www.patreon.com/henryzhu
Hot standby is Cloud-Fil-B
> compute loads

What are you computing? This is what everyone is wondering.
Our tolerance requirements for synchronicity are broad enough that we can tolerate blips like this... at the end of the day we are automating away some simple human interactions (ie; fry the fries or track the food), we aren’t performing surgery with these systems.

So far we’ve been satisfied with Linux (Ubuntu 18.04 to be exact) and it’s overall capabilities.

Also, don’t forget that cost at scale is a big factor... doing things perfectly but expensively is not profitable at 2k locations.
More about pea protein, which you might find interesting:

"Scientific Studies

According to Medical News Today, research from Canada found that pea protein powder may help help reduce hypertension and chronic kidney disease. Researchers extracted pea protein hydrolysate from the yellow pea and fed a small dose each day to lab rats bred to have polycystic kidney disease. After eight weeks, these rats showed a 20 percent drop in blood pressure. Dr. Rotimi Aluko, the study's head researcher, said that eating the yellow peas in their natural state would not produce the same benefits as the extracted pea protein, which can only be activated with special enzymes."

from https://livewell.jillianmichaels.com/pea-protein-5427.html
China has changed their thinking, literally. Their constitution no longer has term limits for their leader and the constitution was altered with their leader's personal philosophy.

Xi Jinping, and thus China, no longer tolerates dissent. Go ahead, refer to Taiwan the wrong way even outside of China. You'll find a small army calling you out, much like any public criticism of Trump on twitter brings out a strange and chaotic assortment of random accounts that spout a variety of common talking points. If you're a company with a good bit of money in China, dissent is dangerous because China is getting quite skilled at using finance as a means for exerting global control. Not that this is shocking, the US did so for decades and still does so to a mighty degree, but it doesn't try to financially destroy you for criticizing the US.
And? People are welcome not to write OSS if it’s a burden.
> I'd still be disappointed having to stay up preparing a deck until 4am that ultimately led nowhere

Disappointed but not devastated.

> I'm still a little confused why we're bending over backwards to try to relate this back to crypto somehow?

I think it's one commenter. Unfortunately, it reflects a prevalent (and wrong) hypothesis from the cryptocurrency community that the investment risks inherent to cryptocurrency are normal. They're not.
Poetry Is Everywhere
>right to free speech from governmental interference

I don't like where this argument goes. Do you think it should be legal for Google to remove every search result of a cannabis business? Should it have been legal for Google to censer anyone advocating for LGBT rights before they were a protected class? If you answer no to those questions its hard to justify saying that 1A only applies to the government.
GPLv3/AGPLv3 would still force Amazon and the like to share all the updates they make to the software itself, which is good for the software - forcing companies to be part of the software ecosystem - but not necessarily helping the (main or otherwise) developer.

The elephant in the room here is that the usual OSS-as-an-offering model works from the fact that intimate knowledge of the software and visibility creates a strong market position for selling services (SaaS or consulting) that others cannot match. Whereas if "others" includes Amazon, GCP etc., their economies of scale and market visibility tilt the playing field in the other direction, making it harder for the OSS-as-offering model.
Intel NUCs come in a wide price range (for example on Newegg the Celeron-based NUC is $130)
Just ask to change that clause to cover only work done for the company (even if that work is done from home) or using company resources. Most will. If they won’t, walk away if you’re in a financial position to; or work there for a few months for the paycheck (holding off on your side projects in the meantime) and start looking for something else.
This is my problem as well. Freelancers and consultants would be unable to teach, install, configure, or manage anything licensed under Common Clause. It's a terrible license.
If I could be the devil's advocate I would say that you aren't scaling properly and that is leading to your stress but I am no new pot millionaire. Employ those around you that you trust and that will do well for you. "if you want to do it fast go alone, if you want to go far go with others"
What to say, the headline is rather flamebaitish.

If your opensource project can't live without "life support," it's a failed project. It means nobody wants to keep it alive.

No such prerequisite is for 9 out of 10 software packages you see in any serious software repo.

I now run a graphical Linux desktop with fully functioning graphical UI, all done without a dime of sponsorship money, or corporate life support of any sort.

No "well funded corporation" in the world can pull out making an OS with graphical UI from scratch these days. That's simply beyond even heavyweights like google and apple with their countless battalions of coders.

Now say, who has more power there?

Why it is such a problem for guys making software for web ecosystem if open source desktop community can pull out doing things many many many times more hard and complex?

I myself draw a mental line in between a genuine open source projects, and those which are masquerading as such. In reality, those are failing commercial enterprises trying to earn "coolness cred"
I've also seen that many people FOSS users mainly because it's typically free of charge. It really should become more normalized to 'pay' for Free Software and give money regularly to projects the user supports and finds useful.
This article seems to assume that the main problem with this "Commons" rider is a complaint about the "open core" business model. I think that assumption is false. Lots of organizations have "open core" business models, and do not get the rise that this announcement has received.

The problem is that this "Commons" rider is confusing and misleading. The term "Commons" makes it sound like this is a Creative Commons license - which it is not. The term "commons" is often used to refer to open source software licenses - which this is not. The coupling with Apache makes it sound like this licensing system is from or endorsed by the Apache Foundation - which it is not. (The article uses the term "Apache Common Clause license" - the fact that author thinks that's a reasonable name, even though Apache didn't create or endorse this license, shows how confusing the situation is.) The Commons FAQ admits that the rider isn't OSS, but then suggests that the OSI definition is some minor technicality - yet the OSI definition is what practically everyone uses, and the "technicality" is at the heart of the point (that everyone can use it for any purpose).

Yes, making money is hard. That problem is not limited to OSS either - most new restaurants fail within the first 2 years. I love to see new/better ways to fund OSS. Having a proprietary rider for some modules or having an open core model aren't new ideas, but if they want to do those things (and have the legal right to do), then let's see what happens!

But if you're going to create a rider, it's important to actively work to not be confusing. It's hard getting consensus on anything; I think the anger here is choosing names that appear designed to be deceptive. If these names and such aren't changed, I wouldn't be surprised if the Creative Commons Corporation or Apache Foundation start considering a trademark suit to prevent confusion in the marketplace. If they weren't intended to be deceptive - and I hope they weren't - then some renaming and clarification would go a long way.
Credit card transactions, mobile orders, timer synchronization, order receiving (tablets etc), iot devices (cameras, cooking devices) and other things planned for the future.
> People underestimate how difficult it is to create a popular open source project. It's very competitive.

In the web space maybe. The desktop and CLI sector are much more relaxed.
Patreon currently exists, and a lot of game emulators make use of it. There are a variety of one-off tip mechanisms too (kofi is a popular one). And feature bounties also exist (elementary, for example, uses Bountysource for a lot of their development).

I think all of these things work for certain projects. They work less for mission-critical but un-flashy components (i.e. the "how do we adequately fund OpenSSL?" problem, which was solved by having big money corporates endow funding for it). They work more for user-facing stuff. So they're a good option.

But I don't think they're materially superior to the other models for sustainable OSS (maintainers working on OSS projects as 20% type tasks at their day jobs; companies selling service agreements and hosted versions of OSS components; very large companies simply being public good providers). They're just another part of the puzzle. I do agree it might be slightly more convenient to offer them as part of the public-facing code repo stack.

In this case, it's not clear to me Patreon style development funding would have worked near as well as Redis Labs being a corporate sponsor.
Dell Latitude 7490 (i5-8350U, FHD) Laptop Review
Open Commit – Code Review as a Service for Developers
I this article did a good job of summarizing the collapse (from the formation of OPEC in the early 60's to the present) https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/07/16/how-venezuela-struck-it...

Essentially they believed the oil price surge of the 70s would continue and failed the diversify the economy. This allowed Chavez to come along and take over in the late 90's on a socialist platform with promises to restore the economy. Chavez ignorant to production of oil and fighting to stay in power, gutted the state run PDVSA and severely inhibited production by diverting profits to fund his social programs. Eventually production and profits dipped, with the government deciding to print more money to keep social programs running.
It's good to have the experience of interacting with someone far more intelligent than yourself who nevertheless believes things you think, with good reason, to be nonsense. It teaches one humility, to question the nature of "knowledge" and how it is attained, and the limits of "intelligence" alone to divine reality and arrive at consensus.
That's guaranteed to result in a Cease and Desist. Concatenating those words makes it look like an endorsement.
Los Angeles has serious grade inflation across the board wrt social ratings.

Their yelp reviews are completely unreliable, everything is 4 or 5 stars. I'm used to Chicago where even a great restaurant can have 3 stars because everyone is so picky, and the 4 or 5 stars are reserved for the truly extraordinary.
Right. One way to look at it might be "the less judgment you need to run a service, the more viable it will be as a non-profit". Hence the success of credit unions and the office coffee pool.

Restaurants and stores need a lot of judgment by comparison.
This has largely been debunked -- the questions asked were not about their access to sufficient funds. For example, the median American household has $1000 per month in disposable income ("beer money") after all typical living expenses. This fact alone should immediately raise questions about the assertion that the majority of households can't afford $500 in one-time cost, emergency or not.

The major source for this assertion is that most American's don't have $500 in savings accounts. Which is true. What is also true is that a large percentage of Americans with plenty of emergency cash don't even have a savings account -- it is an anachronism from a bygone era. Most Americans no longer own savings bonds either.

My emergency cash is in a checking account, like many Americans, so by the measure used in this article, I am completely broke.
Tesla’s deliveries earn massive amount of ZEV credits
Right all this talk of "what it takes to be a success in OSS" ... programma please!

"Success" in the OSS world is putting code out that others can use. Either they find it useful, or they don't. If they don't that's not failure. That's ... someone else put out something better, or that your user community is small or just not out there.

OSS is not a business model. It's a SHARING model.

God it's just like the music scene these days. Did you get into it for the Art? Cool you're gonna be ok. Did you get into it wanting to be a rock star? Might as well buy a lottery ticket. Your chances are better.

OSS success is providing something of use to a community that contributes back to it.

Yeah, maybe you can find a way to make a nickel off that, but that's not what it's FOR. It's not a marketplace, it's a public library.

This celebrity/glamor seeking is so apparent on github. Every single project's readme.md reads like marketing copy these days.

Just like the music scene again. Reminds me of the 90's when the record labels still had money and steamrolled the alternative scene looking for a cash grab.
It looks like VIA[1] are actually planning on bringing out an AMD64[2] compatible CPU- though I honestly wonder if it'll get any traction at all (it could be interesting in the low power space assuming it can even vaguely compete on price).

[1] https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3023729/via-techno...

[2] Yeah, I know we're supposed to call it x86-64 these days, but lets take a moment and remember some of the brilliance AMD can be capable of. And thank the gods we're not stuck with Itanium.
You mean TS 1989? Taylor Swift’s most recent album right? Suffice it to say, those T-shirts did not go down well in China.

People know it happened, the government says the west overblew the casualty figure, but they otherwise don’t want it talked about publicly at all. For them, bringing in PLA to kill Chinese (again) was pretty traumatic, especially since many of the soldiers actually said no. So they think it was “wrong”, but maybe not for the same reasons as the west (China has invested a lot more in riot police since then).
China's Xi says internet must be 'clean and righteous'
Yeah, not at all uncommon. More annoying than that, in terms of likelihood of missing a connection and getting stuck overnight at an airport hotel or whatever, is when US airports unload your luggage and make you check it in again. Argh.
Henry is a wonderful person, and this talk was excellent. I second the recommendation.

I posted my own thoughts about over-committing and potential burnout a few months back: https://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2018/06/redux-writing-resp... . Since then, I've stepped back from trying to keep up with recurring treadmill tasks like cataloging articles and links, and am focusing my maintainer time on some specific Redux/React-Redux issues. Feeling a lot better as a result.
'Xbox All Access': A Subscription Service with Xbox Live, Game Pass, and Console
This is the best write up I have seen in a long time on this subject. Open source doesn’t exist in a vacuum without commercial influence. The best you can do is pick the influence.

FAANG sponsor open source either for strategic reasons (the Kubernetes example in the blog) or as a goodwill exercise. To the kinds of engineers Facebook would love to hire to help serve ads more devilishly, React goes a long way to making the company look developer friendly. These projects get a ton of marketing support (time to promote the project, brand name, etc) that an all-volunteer nights and weekends grassroots open source project can never complete with.

Then there’s open core, which seems to struggle from the difficulty that open source has a kind of altruistic halo around it, and any attempt to commercialise or restrict parts of it (especially for things that were once open) is seen as bait and switch. Yet to see an Open Core company that isn’t continuiously torn between what it takes to keep the business viable and what it takes to keep the community on their side.

Consulting and support has its own downsides too. It only scales linearly as you can hire people, and the margins are much lower so it takes a lot more people - much less fun of a company to run. And it influences the project roadmap too: “yes the setup process is broken and could do with a wizard, but the complex install process drives a lot of our consulting leads”.

It seems like the huge companies that were threatened by open source have been replaced by huge companies that know how to weaponise open source. Open source still wears a certain halo thanks the nights and weekends code hacker that does it for the love, but open source at any scale is as corrupt - maybe more corrupt - than any proprietary company.

(Disclaimer: my company sells proprietary software but gives customers source access/right to modify and open sources many of the building blocks. As someone who wrote code for the love of it, I often feel like there’s something evil in not making everything open source. But I’m yet to see a less evil open source model)
See how many bills it took to buy a chicken in Venezuela
Not knowing the details of the intended operation I tend to agree with this view as this statement stands. Many names on the list know little of investment in tech and seem to merely "tick the necessary boxes" for the creation of an African American-focused fund, as seen by an SV investment group. Then again, maybe I'm just being cynical.
Maybe just "How the U.S. Can Prepare for the 2020 Elections"
Ever compare a 1940s middle-class house to a middle-class house of today? They're tiny. They probably have one bathroom. The bedrooms will be small. The garage, if there is one, is probably not attached to the house. The household probably had one car. Maybe had a phone, maybe not. Such a lifestyle could still be afforded buy a single income earner if they would really live the way a 1940s family lived.