skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Obike failed because of bad execution. Bikes were malfucntioning, hard to find, and they upset the locals. A few of their competitors seem to be doing better. I've tried out a few in Berlin before settling on Mobike. Obike has all but disappeared here. But Mobike seems to be pretty popular and is very similar conceptually.

Part of the attraction is flat fee subscriptions. You can either pay like a euro for half an hour, or just get a flat fee subscription and grab a bike whenever you need one. I'm currently on a 20 euro for 3 months plan with mobike; which is really good value. I grab one a few times per week. Multiple times on some days. I'm saving a ton of money on public transport. And I get a bit of good exercise (these bikes are hard work).

Financially, this makes a lot of sense. They are getting reliable revenue from me and probably a couple of thousand users plus some less frequent revenue from maybe 10-20k users. To keep the money flowing, all they need to do is make sure that they have enough bikes distributed around the city.

These bikes are not that expensive. Probably they cost around 100-150 each. Maybe less. Very sturdy, not a lot of parts that can break, etc. So, Mobike did the obvious thing: flood the city with bikes. From what I understand they have at least around 5000 bikes on the streets here and are planning to deploy even more. Whatever it is, the end result is that I can find a mobike whenever I need one with relatively little effort.

At 100 euro per bike, we are talking half a million of investment for 5k bikes. With thousands or tens of thousands of users, this becomes meaningful revenue pretty quickly. In my case, if I keep on paying their flatfee, I'll end up paying around 80 per year. Only a few thousand people like me means they earn back their investment in a year. I imagine there's other cost as well but probably the per bike expenses are pretty modest. Ballpark, they should be making money.

From what I can see most of their competitors are trying to compete with far less bikes and failing. The trick is having enough bikes on the street to keep users hooked and doing that in as many big cities as possible. That's more or less what Mobike and their VC funded competitors are doing.
> For all their flaws, Wikipedia is one of the few web information sources that are globally accepted as more or less correct.

Only for things that aren’t politically fraught enough for one person, anywhere on the internet to decide to camp on the article. Look at what you get if you look up “Cultural Marxism”.

It redirects to the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory article, with the subheading “Cultural Marxism Conspiracy Theory”. This when there was an excellent article on the academic movement of that name.

Very introductory reddit thread on the history of the academic movement

https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/8q8p6n/cult...

Cultural Marxism and Political Sociology

https://www.amazon.com/Cultural-Marxism-Political-Sociology-...

Talk page for the Cultural Marxism Wikipedia article, which now redirects to Frankfurt School Conspiracy Theory

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cultural_Marxism
From past experience, about four months after I've tapered off anti-depressants I'll want to die. It'll take about a year to recover once I'm back on them.

But that's me. What works for me may not work for you. Unfortunately, a lot of it is trail and error, along with a lot of hard work, to figure out what is the best treatment for each individual. It sucks that this is the case.

At I wrote once upon a time[1]: "There is no silver bullet. Pragmatism trumps opinion. If, and I stress, if what you are doing is working for you, then I wish you good fortune, and would never tell you you're doing it the wrong way."

[1] https://dhubris.livejournal.com/14447.html
12 Guidelines for A/B Testing
The day when Bloomberg pushes communist propaganda. What a day to be alive. Any person who experienced communism knows that this ideology is the most sinister on the planet, only fools who never experienced it think it is something to consider.

"The market, in its pure, unadulterated, Marx-era form, can’t provide satisfactory answers."
I've never used Streisand before. What I normal do is using Shadowsocks directly (part of what Streisand offers). It has Windows, Linux, OSX, and Android clients. Third party IOS client is also available.
Many teachers accept other secondary sources, though. News article that summarizes a scientific paper? Ok. Wikipedia article citing that paper? Not ok. My impression of this has been a mix of misinformation (anyone can edit it, it must be wrong!), and the fact that it’s just too easy: it really doesn’t make students “work for” their information, so it completely throws off their schedule because everyone has quick access to a reasonably high-quality source.
We'll see. For example, Portugal has already said they will keep DST despite what EU decides. They already tried removing DST in the 90s and most people there disliked it.
Waymo Sign at Ahwatukee Foothills
Not the Kafka I thought...
> I wouldn't say Breitbart is wildly different in accuracy to any of the rest, not because it's great, but because so many other outlets (like the NY Times, BBC and CNN) routinely publish things that are false as well.

I agree that many mainstream outlets have a slant, however this is a frankly ridiculous equivocation between legitimate news organisations with bias reportage and a hack conspiracy website that among others peddled knowlingly false 1) pizzagate and 2) Obama birther conspiracies.

Please provide evidence of the many false stories you refer to, because they just don’t exist.
>One Shockwave game in particular that I remember was a 3d car game where other cars were chasing you through a city.

On The Run. It too was a staple of my many hours spent playing flash and shockwave games.
I'm wondering when the Google brand is going to go down in reputation.

It seems to me that the majority still sees them as a badge of engineering excellence and firmly believe that people working there are way above average. I don't think that's the case anymore despite the huge amount of associated koolaid.

This product is a typical example of Google using their brand name to get a product out that otherwise nobody would even look at.
> As is sometimes said in management theory "it was a great measure until it was made a target".

Wikipedia already is a target. It has been a target of distortion almost as long as it exists.
It handles these exceptionally well. Not perfect, but given how attractive Wikipedia manipulation is and how easy you'd think it is it's incredible how well it fights it off.
I don't think schools ban Wikipedia because it's a secondary source. Because then they would also have to ban most textbooks.
yes true. the article deliberately focuses on reset-vector onwards steps. perhaps it should make that clear in the beginning. the ME mention is just to create a context for the starting point. of course ME is a huge topic in itself
No, the left has recently adopted anti-centrism, which is just a form of the ultimatum “you’re either with us or against us”. Attacking the center to try to force moderates to lean further left. I don’t agree with everything the Republicans believe, and I don’t agree with everything that the democrats believe, and I won’t be told that there is no such thing as a middle ground.
That's not a very helpful reply to a post lamenting how people can't discuss their differences in a civil way anymore. You literally responded like this:

Q: I remember when people who disagreed could still be friends. Can't we get along a bit better?

A: (you) No, because people I disagree with are basically Hitler and aren't based in "reality" so we can never be friends.

One side now lives in an alternate reality and is forcing somewhat objective people (scientists, FBI) to parrot that reality or face punishment...

But both sides of political extremes think that. Several people are pointing this out but it doesn't seem to be sticking.

Let me try. I read an interesting story on Hacker News recently about a scientist who gave a talk, and was punished for his views. He wasn't being punished by Trump-like pillars of conservatism. He was talking about discrimination against men and was suspended by his university administrators, because even though there is great consensus amongst scientists that women and men think differently, this 'scientific reality' is completely rejected by one political tribe (but not the other).

See... more or less any extremist criticism you can make of the other tribe can be easily turned around on you.
Looking at the graph, an at least equally accurate headline would be „inflation-adjusted median US income stays flat since the last 20 years while share of expenses for medical, housing, childcare and education costs skyrockets in the same time“
Show HN: CoinMarketBook – CoinMarketCap, but with a different metric
Why would it be? You’re just mining like any other person, except you’re doing it faster than anyone else. I think the poster has mentioned that this is purely for educational purposes; they’re not trying to steal everyone else’s money.
Yes, hopefully we can find a balance between a system that rewards effort and ingenuity at the same time as providing opportunity for everyone.
I am using Withania Somnifera to cure my depression. I've not experienced the loss of emotions using it.
The cultural marxism article being deleted was far from the result of "one person". There was a deletion discussion [0] with input from multiple users, as well as a deletion review. [1] In fact, the discussion was closed by three independent and uninvolved admins. Additionally, the contents of the article were merged, so it's not as if any mention of the topic fell off the face of the earth. You should familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's notability guidelines for standalone [2] and what they entail, as well as the criteria for reliable sources. [3] Lastly, the Wikipedia article explains quite clearly that the so-called "academic movement" you're advocating is a term that was later co-opted by conspiracy theorists. Wikipedia is not for fringe theories. [4]

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletio...

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability

[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable...

[4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_theories
That's a really simplistic way of looking at it. To most people, red and blue are very distinct colors. No one would argue that they're the same. But are crimson and pink different colors, or different shades of the same color? What about #f00 and #f11? It's both arbitrary and contextual.

Categorization is easy when a difference is so large as to be irrefutable. But thinking in terms of continuum is much more useful when looking at small differences.
Have you every tried taking candy from a toddler? It’s not easy ;)
The main problem with bike sharing schemes is that there are too many competitors, none of which has enough bikes to actually be useful. Few people are willing to sign up with five different companies and deal with five different ways to unlock the bikes.

If they somehow found a way to work together, grant mutual access to the networks, then it might work. Otherwise, you'll need a massive investment into bikes to get critical mass, and cities often increase that problem by only allowing each company to deploy a few hundred bikes.

Also, as the article points out, those locks... I've yet to see an electronic lock that would actually work reliably, and for the bike sharing scheme I use, I feel like the ride works well (e-bike present, unlocks on first attempt, battery is charged) about 50% of the time, ignoring a stretch of my commute (to/from the public transit stop) where I know there will be no bikes available at the time I'll be going.
Because belief is not rational. The people that passed the polygraph tests and administer them to others may acknowledge the flaws but they still 'know' that a lie detector is the best they have got. They also know that some people will just confess at the thought of being wired up to such a machine, to give evidence that, unlike the lie detector, is admissible in court.

The most interesting story is how the authorities nabbed the guy who was most dedicated to dismissing the lie-detector baloney:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/12/polygraph-cr...

His consulting work of helping people pass lie detectors was his downfall. Had he just stuck to campaigning against the lie detector and not wanting to offer services to those needing to pass a lie detector test then all would have been okay for him and he would not be having to serve one of those silly 100 year sentences that American justice demands.
Transparency. Artificial systems designed to work with and support human activity, should not have hidden agendas. And the reason for being transparent should not be to avoid bad press or fines, but to actually care about the ethics around continuous extreme data collection/processing or automation overkill or any of the other concerns with AI.
Good read, I like JE's posts. But I definitely feel like this falls into the trap that a lot of similar posts fall into - attempting to "bullet-point" a role description inevitably will result in people criticising the inclusion or exclusion of individual points. Which is a shame because it detracts from the overall spirit of what's being said.

Struggling to find the link now, but I read another post on the subject of seniority, and it basically summarised the crux of it for me. This unravelled everything. Seniority is measured contextually by asking: "to what degree can I leave stuff with this person and expect it to get it done with high quality? Further, to what degree can I NOT leave stuff with this person and _still_ expect that to get done."

From this, one can derive their own context-appropriate "check list". In an environment such as finance, where an engineer is absolutely not the expert, can I trust that this person can work with the experts to get to an appropriate solution? In an environment where you have many intermingled teams, will s/he be able to propose solutions and get buy-in across the org? In a consulting/client scenario, can this person represent our company? What might they need help in? In a bootstrapping startup scenario, can I entrust them with the entire build of (some major component)?

In different contexts, the above set of questions would unroll a different set of measurements for seniority, and may require a different mix of soft/technical skills. But that's fine, there's no one-size-fits-all seniority ladder.
No, cars aren't too blame, the car owner is only liable for damage, and why does that law exist? Because cars have mandatory liability insurance, bicycles and pedestrians do not. It's not about making drivers more responsible, although it helps most Dutch don't understand what liability means, it's too make sure there is always money to pay for damage, especially if the damage is severe.
Blockchains get their history rewritten all the time too, it's call a re-organisation and occurs naturally whenever two blocks are found close enough together that the network splits over which one came first. You can also get longer rewrites of history when there's a bug or an explicit decision to fork the chain.

The idea that blockchains are 'tamperproof' or can't be changed isn't really true. At most you can say that participants can become aware of such changes. But that's also true of git.

That said, there are a lot of good uses for the tech as long as "the tech" is understood widely. If you look at the enterprise blockchain space they're moving away from classical proof of work type systems, they all use BFT algorithms instead, and some of them don't have blocks at all (like Corda). They're more git-like and they provide most of the advantages but without the disadvantages; which can indeed be very useful for many types of business.
With CoinMarketBook, you can evaluate cryptocurrencies by a different metric: "buy support".

Buy support is the sum of buy orders in USD equivalent from top 20 exchanges (planning to include more in future). It shows the actual amount that people want to buy.

One might say that it's easy to place a large buy order at very low price & increase buy support artificially. However, because of low price, the increase will be negligible.

What do you think? Tell us in comments.
> “Your [sic] literally arguing that 'Whether you’ve enjoyed working at some place is not relevant' ... and then you provide a bunch of data points to try to prove 'job happiness' one way or the other, as though it's relevant?”

I have not argued that.

I have said that you should consider other reports of someone being happy at a job for reasons other than compensation, benefits or job security as irrelevant because if you infer you’ll be happy based in other factors, which are more easily changed on a whim (thus leading to widespread reported unhappiness at jobs), you set yourself up to make a choice that makes you unhappy.

> “You [sic] arguing the sky is blue, and then not blue in the next sentence? Which is it?”

It seems you’re in a rush to argue, so I’m going to disengage here. I’ve read and reflected on your comment, re-read your source, my five sources, and the polls they link to, and I am just going to agree to disagree with you. You’re invested in “being right” about this but the data don’t support what you’re saying. The interpretation is not “more nuanced” in this case, and it is only one single study claiming that fewer than 10% hate their jobs, with a methodology that conflicts with the surveys historically used to guage that.

I believe you’re wrong, you are responding in a purely reactionary way, and I’m not taking the bait.
Why wouldn't you want a student seeking a secondary (or more) source? Just blindly believe what the teacher says and don't question it? That education system is failing that student.
Washington DC Metro (WMATA) Brand and Style Guidelines [pdf]
Why not have each of those sections as a separate file?
Wow. This is everything that's wrong with modern electronics and consumerism.
GPL draconian? How do people misunderstand it so? The GPL is there so that your contribution will actually benefit society in the long term.
I know the validity of the CPI is controversial, and I'm expressing no opinion on its makeup and accuracy, but in theory the CPI is meant to adjust for all those items.

https://www.investopedia.com/university/releases/cpi.asp
This is a really important point that many companies don’t seem to care about. Some companies seem to operate on the assumption that everyone absolutely wants to work for them and that applicants will spent lots of time.

This lack of respect of or recognition of the value of applicants time will filter out what’s likely your most desired applicants, people with low amounts of time due to current employment or lots of leads.

There needs to be some interaction with the applicant to show you are worthy of a mini project or multi-hour hackerrank test. Your job description better be amazing with details to motivate an applicant to spend time on a test off the bat.
Yes. It's a very strange and basically un-contested idea that trade integration discourages war. If that was true then civil wars would be the rarest form of war, but the only type of war going on in the world today is civil war. And if you look through the 20th century, then other than the World Wars, most conflict was civil in nature. You can't get more integrated than a countries internal trade. So this idea that trade deals make war hard doesn't seem empirically supportable.
Folks who retired at 50 and want to earn a little extra cash occasionally? I doubt most Amazon packages are that heavy.
>philosophical exports are the kinds of thing that, once you internalize them, just seem like the way things are

Yes; if you like a philosophical idea that's usually sufficient for you to have 'adopted' or 'accepted' it. Yet, in addition, philosophical problems have been solved. It's just that ipso facto they then become part of science or some other discipline, so we don't notice so easily. For example, the theory of evolution was an example of philosophical progress (a new way of thinking about something, in this case life). But it's now part of biology. Another example is that Karl Popper solved the problem of induction. It's controversial that he did so. But if it shelves off into some other field, e.g. AGI, then perhaps his achievement will be more widely accepted as such.
Does this happen if you’re just laying over in China as well? Planning on flying through China to Thailand.
yes CS not SS. i should fix that.

regarding how the CPU addresses 0xffff.fff0 is not exactly specified in the post. actually CS register is loaded with 0xf000 and normally this would yield a segment selector address of 0x000f.0000 (CS left-shifted by 4 bits). but on a reset, like the post mentions, first 12 address lines are asserted so the base address ends up being 0xffff.0000. these address lines remain asserted until a long jump is made, after which the first 12 address lines are de-asserted and normal CS segment selector calculation resumes.

instruction pointer contains -16 as you mentioned, the resulting address is:

base address + IP = 0xffff.0000 + 0xfff0 = 0xffff.fff0

i am not sure if this is worth adding to the post but it is definitely useful.
It's crazy how you complain about the lack of recognition for your time but refuse the shortest pipeline of interview. It's much easier to take a quick coding test online anytime, than to schedule phone interviews with HR and hiring managers.
I'm astonished they accepted Breitbart in the first place. When I first heard about it, I checked it out and literally the first discussion in their comment section was about how to most efficiently gas the maximum number of jews in the US. I'm not kidding.

Breitbart is not the only problem of people who read it, many of them are mentally ill (schizophrenia) or they were raised in a way that makes it almost impossible to discern facts from fiction. Before you argue about that, I can guarantee you that I would - and in fact do - say the same about similar radical left-wing "news sites".

One problem at Wikipedia is that there is generally not enough vetting of the citation sources.

To be fair, that's not entirely their fault, because especially in the US there is a vast network of fake science and news sites powered by lobbyists, and it takes a substantial amount of effort to discern these from reputable sources. I've seen some interesting network analysis of the lobby sites of the US oil industry, and have to say that I wouldn't have been able to easily recognize their think-tanks and science information sites as fake. They're well-disguised and you have to look at interconnections, board members, and funding sources to find out who is really behind them. For example, some of them looked like legitimate sources about green energy technologies, but were in reality designed to poison the climate change debate and further the interests of oil concerns.

Conclusion: Don't focus too much on Breitbart, there are plenty of other seemingly legitimate associations, news sites, institutes and think tanks whose primary purpose is to bullshit people, and they are funded from the left and right.
Out of interest, how long have you been taking them for? I've heard lots of stories of fantastic short-term benefits, but not very many (in fact, not any that I can think of) where they continued to work long term. I'm not saying they can't work long term, in fact I guess that's why I'm asking, to see whether you are or know of examples where they have worked out long term.
That weight has been on Wikipedia's shoulders ever since Google started presenting it as the #1 result on most "established topic" searches.
How is this not an antitrust issue, particularly considering past wage supression behaviors?