skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It seems that government schools are not that eager to teach about how governments killed 150+ million of their own citizens in 20th century. Maybe it’s to promote the idea that the fear of the tyrannical government is somehow irrational mere 18 years later.
Thanks, I am now imagining interstellar smoke signals. I feel like that's pretty unlikely, though. :X
Payoff is somewhat proportional to self-education effort. For a big payoff you may need to spend years on learning. But for many people earning extra few hundreds bucks per month can drastically change their lifestyle. And that kind of change doesn't require years of self-education, but a little bit of curiosity, determination and perseverance.
Please let it be aliens
In what sense does a Google employee need their job to “survive”?
Yes, assuming this is an actual intelligent life sending us radio waves, we're seeing their signals sent 3 billion years ago. So it's entirely possible their species already went extinct or they left their home planet for galactic expedition. Practically, nothing is the same about this civilization since they sent this signal.

To put this into perspective: when this civilization sent this signal, there was merely unicellular life on the earth!
That link didn't say anything about why the homeless population went up, other than "rents went up".

It doesn't explain what stops people from looking for jobs in other, cheaper places, which is something I'm struggling to understand
I thought this, but it really only holds true if you work in a different neighborhood you live (likely tho it is)

I've spent some time in Marina del Ray and Long Beach, and they're walkable cities in their own right if you ignore the rest of LA (my preferred strategy)
> For the sake of collaboration, we agree on structure and semantics, and agree to disagree on syntax.

`FooError on line 111` suddenly becomes a lot less meaningful... I suppose that's what the canonical representation is for, but having to map between the two seems like it would be at least somewhat annoying.
You mean not every civilization chooses to make their unit of time multiples of 9,192,631,770 cesium-133 oscillations? /s
This video shows more of the DelFly Nimble's flight maneuvers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEhu-FePBC0
Also, liquid water is very convenient for complex chemistry.
But surely an advanced civilization would realize theres less advanced lifeforms and would thus send the simplest type of message possible. After contact is established, they could then send their ultra-compressed data.
How could it do that? The safety statistics quoted by Tesla is "fatalities per mile of Autopilot-enabled vehicle", compared to "fatalities per mile for the average car on the road". It's by no means an accurate comparison, in fact they're inflating their relative safety versus other cars by more than an order of magnitude.
Hasn't been since the middle 1970s.
GDP is a pretty terrible measure of the economy, even if you're trying to look at the big picture and ignore the day-to-day impact on individuals, because it only measures creation of value and not consumption/destruction of it.

If you destroy a city, GDP is not affected, but then if you rebuild it GDP gets a huge boost. In the end you're back where you started, but the numbers look great.
>when you can probably get good performance

This is a big problem with android. Performance sucks overall, and like windows, degrade over time. The quality of apps is not there.

And also, android is the worst if you care a bit about privacy and security.

When you must decide between a clear superior product (iPhone) vs a overall inferior (except if you take a lot of care in researching, have luck or expend almost the same money) and have a tight budget? Go for the best, because we don't have money to waste money.
---

BTW: My policy is buy the previous model when needed, so I still not expend that much neither waste money with android.
We could have missed those signals millions of years ago, but we could also start receive a civ's first ever radio broadcast tomorrow (that would be incredibly lucky).
You forgot to mention how much of your life is spent in a car commuting.
FatF taught us all you need is a 9-speed FWD DSM.
Sterling does believe cameras may someday be good enough, but I'm personally of the belief that Lidar will get cheap before vision gets good, and as such there's no good reason to not have the extra redundancy.
> can’t get water

California has plenty of water, it's just allocated poorly. Agriculture uses most of it. And don't give that silly "but we need food!!!" response, nobody's gonna starve if water prices go up a bit.

> is subject to deveststing earthquakes

Doesn't seem to have impacted Tokyo too badly. Really, modern buildings don't have much of a problem here. If anything, the wildfires seem to cause more trouble than the earthquakes.

> is overpopulated in terms of what can be sustained in a sane manner over time

Nah, California really isn't that densely populated. Besides, denser-type development would be mean less resource usage, person for person.

> Even if you reject that premise, what you call “unnaturally restricted growth” is being applied to a truly massive city. What would unrestricted growth look like exactly? After all was said and done, would it still be such a desirable place to live?

Vienna is mostly 5 or 6 story buildings and scores extremely high on livability ratings, much higher than LA. I live in Munich right now which is similar and it's quite nice, so I'd say: yes.

> Are you so sure the solution for everyone who isn’t looking for a high-end techie salary (i.e. most people) isn’t for the industry to be less concentrated in one city?

Agglomeration of an industrial sector in a particular area is normal and fine. It happens, even though companies have to pay higher rents and higher salaries, because it's advantageous to productivity to concentrate a wide variety of specialists for a certain field in a particular area. If companies want to spread out more, of course that's fine, but forcing them to do so would almost certainly hurt their performance. If you want lots more high-paying jobs, maybe not the best idea.

> The thing is, between people who spent a lifetime in a city not wanting it to turn into blocks of high-rises

It's pretty amusing to see so many people who think a 5 story building qualifies as a "high rise". 5 stories is nowhere close to that, chief.

> there really is more than the dichotomy of “the virtuous” and “the NIMBY.”

Yeah, but California (and really the US as a whole) is chock full of NIMBYs whose policies definitely hurt others. Rent prices are a big problem right now, especially in any area that's booming, not just California, and the two big problems are incredibly restrictive zoning regulations, and no serious public housing efforts (and the latter is also impacted by the former anyway).

> I hold out some hope that it can get some thoughtful rebuttals too.

Perhaps you should first put forth some thoughtful arguments then? I don't see anything that can't be easily dismissed by anyone who's actually put forth a modicum of amateur research into this area.

I read most of Cadillac Desert back in high school for one of my classes, I don't recall anything that sounds like it'd be unsolvable now. If you remember anything that would actually be hard to deal with, by all means, bring it up. So far everything you've mentioned is fairly trivial.
Exactly, but that doesn't go well with the murrican narrative, so you're being down voted.
The problem is that our growth ( the good times ) is fueled by debt. If the debt stops, then growth stops. Then politicians get blamed and we can't have that. So back to debt we go.

And it's not a partisan issues. Both democrats and republicans love debt, just like they love defense spending. It's politically expedient.

Obama increased the debt tremendously. And now Trump is doing the same. Our debt went from around $10 trillion to $21 trillion in 10 years.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEBTN

Think interest rates are going to increase much anytime soon? Yeah me neither.
Most of the addicted once had stability, but lost it because they would not give up their addiction(s).
The first debt borrowed starts a countdown timer of X years--not to exceed the median age of mothers at the birth of their first child--until the jubilee date, when all outstanding debts are cancelled and forgotten.

If your state is debt-free, that's great; you have X years to borrow and spend your way out of trouble. If your state owes even $1, better pay it off quick to reset your Keynesian pump-priming capacity! And if your state can't pay off its debt, the younger generations aren't forced into austerity to pay for the excesses of the elders.
https was a practical issue at one time but it isn't anymore. This RCE would be far less severe if all communication was over TLS as the attacker couldn't just sit on the wire between the client and the server. It would still exist with TLS of course, but you can't say that TLS "can [only] provide privacy". The correct solution would be to do both TLS and GPG signatures.
The USA economy is flush with cash savings, and anything where it's plausible to invest to (i.e buying capital goods) either has been invested or is being invested. It's just that it's not the general population who are doing this; the savings are held by corporations (as a proxy for the few ultra-rich individuals) and accumulating because there's not much to invest in.
> "This is the country that starved millions of its own citizens "

This is also the country who managed to feed most of her billions citizens and lift tens of millions out of poverty. Most rural areas and cities at all level have been drastically changed in a good direction during the last 30 years. Given the scale of China and the fact it was teared into pieces during WWII, don't assume that's an easy feat.

I hate to defense for CCP (which honestly has been totally practicing utilitarianism after 1987, I feel hard to call it `communist` anymore), but some people just can't get their eye out of the few most ugly corner and that is disgusting.
It may be hard to fight exclusionary zoning state laws politically, there is a hack I thought of: abolish zoning on federal level, replace their functions with sanitary codes.

This way you get the a lot of benefit from market forces sinking their teeth into "land luddites." Land surely becomes more expensive where you can build a luxury highrise, and you know it IS better if a highrise developer will after all buy the bloody house from a "land luddite" for a gazillion than letting his house stand there for eternity, stalling any development.
Response to Elon Musk's Cannabis Use Shows Giant Double Standard to Overcome
That would be meaningless. Pi is 3.14159. But 3 minutes and 14 seconds is 3.23333 minutes. There's no special relationship between the numbers "3" and "14" in different arbitrary bases...
What Bezos spending $2B would feel like to the average American
I was talking about San Francisco, but it got lost
Strange to think that a model where people getting disproportionately rich, then give some of that richness away to poors, is going to work. The problem with US seems more that people lose the way because the state does not provide any fundamental help when you need it. So IMHO makes more sense to increase spending (and maybe taxes) in order to provide things like free health care, minimum pension, and so forth. This way the homeless can be, in part, prevented.
Google staying out of China absolutely hurts China.

Healthy competition and free exploration of markets leads to better tools which creates both economic and cultural value.

China is sacrificing that in order to maintain cultural control. It’s precisely the cost of Google’s absence which could twist their arm.

(Although I suspect they won’t change until they are forced to by censorship-resistant creatures which will spawn Jurrasic Park-style in the next decade from the morass of cheap electronic components and waste ideas)
Google chiefs were distraught after Trump won in 2016
Plus, if they don't use Tau by convention, they aren't even worth discovering in the first place.
> but I’d challenge anyone who thinks homelessness in Seattle isn’t primarily an addiction and mental illness problem

It's not easy to detox from opioids if you don't have a home, or to get treatment for mental illness if you live on the streets.

We have a pretty good idea that housing first works, and is probably cheaper than other approaches.

https://www.homeless.org.uk/facts/our-research/housing-first...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/12/homele...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_First
Journey to a $15M Run Rate at Teachable (SaaS)
The replicability of the biomedical sciences is just as bad if not worse than in psychology.

[1]
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/future_tens...

[2] https://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on...
I'm assuming parent meant they're communicating across their own world using those forms, and we should be looking for timed puffs of smoke :)
I once drove the highway through the white sands missile range, 2 days in a row (tourist). I went through a DHS checkpoint twice where they checked my ID and asked detailed questions about where I was going and why. The second day they wanted to know why I had gone two days in a row.
There are (where back then anyway) big barriers they would lower to close a portion of the highway during 'missile' tests.

A fascinating place to visit.
I hate most of the driver assist technologies I've used or witnessed so far. Backing out in my coworker's new Subaru, it beeps like crazy when there is a pedestrian 50' off to the side. Already there's a slew of problems: what do the various beeps mean, and how to interpret them in context? Lane assist I find even less useful. My current rental car just started beeping seemingly at random then I finally realize it's because I drifted across the end of the dashed line at a merge point without signaling. I was the only car around! A huge distraction trying to figure out what the problem was.

Even anti-lock brakes and traction control systems are imperfect, I've had traction control come on after going over a big bump and causing me to lose traction completely for about half a second.

ACC seems useless, I don't use cruise control at all because there's no place to comfortably rest my foot where I can still quickly reach the brake except for the throttle.

Backup cameras are great. Give me more useful information like this that doesn't make me think, please!
Docker containers multiply faster than rabbits in a forkbomb. It behooves Docker to do vulnerability and malware scans of containers, because letting random people have semi-sandboxed write and execute permissions on random other people's systems is a dangerous combination. That will cover some cases, but end-to-end personal accountability of container publishers is a necessary evil as there is unlikely a reasonable technical way to ensure there aren't malicious scripts in a given docker container. Signature-based malware scanning operates only in a limited fraction of the past since it requires submittal and review of what has been seen by a particular user AND submitted to a malware scanner publisher for analysis.

Scenario: Anonymous docker publisher installs a kiddie porn i2p or tor downloader service hidden in a container for Apache Kafka. Random corporate trainer accidentially picks said container, blogs a howto with it and suggests its use in in-person and web-based courseware. IANAL but Who's liable? The end-users using it? The trainer? Docker?

Disclaimer: I love Docker, but it needs some chain-of-custody assurance and greater visibility of container contents.
> because everyone running Windows reboots it regularly because of its notorious instability issues

I reboot monthly because getting owned by 0 days sucks, and at this point in life, every platform (except for OpenBSD) is having new exploits found against it at a rather fair rate. Same reason my phone gets rebooted once a month.

Aside from that, I have had uptime on Windows boxes in excess of 6 months.

Laptops on the other hand, those are more problematic, but it isn't Windows' fault if a WiFi card hard locks itself, has a dysfunctional watchdog timer on board, and needs to be power cycled to get it working again.

OSes that can hot swap or live patch kernels can brag about uptimes. The rest of us should stay humble. (And AFAIK no modern consumer based OSes distributions do that)
> You can maybe identify "traffic light", "car", "pedestrian", and "deer" with machine learning.

What you wrote makes a lot of sense to me. However, I would also hope that in a matured self-driving environment, traffic lights would be mapped ahead of time. It's always possible that a traffic light shows up in an unexpected place, but in my mental image of the future, this raises a flag for system management to modify the map of permanent objects.

There is a chance that a powered non-permanent traffic light is found somewhere, a dude walking along the side of the street with a stoplight on his back, and connected batteries. In that case, the police need calling. In machine learning, there are just so many corner cases where best to not try to fully interpret, just call out "dude, look at this thing!"
I think Stratechery did mention it in passing:

> presuming Apple follows its trickle-down strategy for serving more price-sensitive markets, that means in two years its lowest-end offering will not be a small phone that the vast majority of the market rejected years ago, particularly customers for whom their phone is their only computing device, but one that is far more attractive and useful for far more people.

...though I'm not sure where he gets the idea that the market rejected the SE?
>> No, this is about increasing performance by taking elements out of the slow DOM update cycle

The question was not about the intent of the feature, but a possible use case that may not have been intended. A more specific reason for the "No" could be more informative.
I would call a city walkable if you can get around the city or at least the "major" parts of it without driving, not if there are isolated pockets you can walk around in.
Interesting that "wages" does not appear once in the article. I guess "wages" are not a relevant metric is assessing economic "Good Times".
Regardless, an all-electric car is going to be pushing 90% thermal efficiency - transforming energy into acceleration. A combustion car isn't going to break 40%. Exotic tech like variable timing and taking cylinders out of service isn't going to get huge gains - they're actually a lot of work for tiny gains, because all the huge gains have already been had. Moreover, electric cars will get that efficiency with no compromise in performance, unlike combustion cars with tiny, weak, "fuel efficient" motors. A Tesla Model S is the fastest car in its class, as well as the most efficient.

The only big win for combustion-based cars is the range potential, because the energy storage of liquid fuels is so much denser. I don't expect to see electric commercial aircraft in my lifetime. But biomass-based liquid fuel? Sure. It just won't be cost-competitive with solar/wind into a battery. It'll be limited to specialized applications where power/weight matters.
Your turn: Yes or no, is "communicating with the outside makers of the AI Elon Musk thinks created the universe" something we have zero evidence for? Is that not reasonably categorized as a "flight of fancy"?

If yes, why do you expect to be able to say anything sensible about it? And why are we apparently obligated to discuss it despite explicitly setting up a premise of "let's discuss things using the physics we know?"

This is failing on the most basic level of philosophical discussion here. We are allowed to discuss "If X, then Y" without being obligated to also discuss "if ~X", nor is it a reasonable philosophical objection to "If X, then Y" to say "Well, what if not X?" It is a reasonable objection to disprove X and prove the whole "If X, then Y" conversation is thereby vacuous, but if you can disprove science as it stands today, this is hardly the place to do it.

(I'd also point out I did discuss "what if ~X" even so. It's just that if we're going to assume anything we like, we can get any answer we like. There's a profound sense in which there isn't much to say at that point.)
That one might be tough to defend as falling under the interstate commerce clause.
Happy to answer any questions people might have here - I've been around since the ~12k annual run rate days and have had a front row seat to all the scaling challenges referenced
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZF_Friedrichshafen
What happens if there is too much debt (as assets) on the Fed's balance sheet? Can they just write them off?
> Driverless cars are coming along just fine.

I am curious why you believe this to be the case? Driverless cars have yet to even come close to being workable in adverse conditions, to my knowledge, please correct me if I am wrong.

> This is mostly about sensors and geometry.

And mostly about the limitations of sensors, and the limitation of available algorithms to overcome geometry. A algorithm a driverless car uses to overcome some geographical feature might expect something to be spherical, but in reality, it ends up being elliptical, only it is too late for the car to adjust, for example, or vice versa. There is literally hundreds of thousands of potential corner cases out there. The earth in itself is a good example: although many people try to do distance calculations with lat/long and some standard radius are usually off by n precision points because the earth isn't perfectly spherical, only approximately. Driverless cars have to be precise. A couple points off might spell the difference between safely driving in the lanes, and veering into a ditch, off a cliff, or into a median or obstacle.

Sensors will suffer some of the same problems (or different problems) as our biological sensors do. How will road signs, lines, and likewise be detected in adverse conditions? Snow? How will radar overcome natural geographical corner reflectors?

Driverless cars seem to becoming along just fine in perfect conditions.

Not trying to be defeatist, but I believe if we want true driverless technology, the infrastructure will have to support the vehicles for these edge cases that we cannot overcome. Or we can continue to be idealists. I for one wish we never gave up on trains -- they are the perfect "driverless" technology candidate.
I'm not even sure that other manufacturers can effectively compete on hardware.

I used Android for years (mostly Nexus devices), but eventually gave up because Apple's phones had higher build quality along with fewer bugs. Their security posture and snappier response time (when I switched at least) were just bonuses.

When they finally had text forwarding and iMessage after Google let Voice languish for years in favor of an ever increasing amount of not very good chat applications there was no longer anything I missed.

At best the other devices are at par, mostly they're just cheaper with trade-offs in quality.
You say that, but a quick Google search undermines your assumption.

At least in the US, the number of people holding a license has dropped off a cliff since the 80s. More folks in urban areas are turning to pub trans and other sources.

There are numerous studies to back up the notion that the era of ubiquitous private ownership of a personal vehicle is about to screech to a halt.

Costs of purchase, maintenance, gas, insurance, environmental concerns, and easy to use options available to an increasingly urban population are the most common responses provided to numerous surveys.

Future generations aren't inclined to babysit and nurse previous generations pet projects. Ubiquitous car ownership is barely a generation old idea, and there are a number of signs, IMO, it won't last many more.
You are confusing fiscal policy with monetary policy.