skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If there's an actual cost to the items it now means other providers could actually compete, which is the goal. It would now be possible to sell cheaper than Google if you can make something the consumer wants at a lower cost. Competition benefits consumers.

More importantly was that Google were doing various forced things (like requiring installing all Google things on all devices, heavily limiting possible competition). Ending that is important, even if it shifts costs around.

Edit - a simple way of viewing this is if this makes more money for Google, why weren't they doing it anyway? If not, can it really be costing consumers more?
expanding on that, from microG's site: "While the core operating system is still released as part of the Android Open Source Project, the majority of core apps are not. It gets worse: More and more libraries and APIs are only available on phones that run various Google apps pre-installed, effectively locking third-party apps to the Google ecosystem. For these reasons Android is described as being a “look but don’t touch” kind of open."

MicroG is a project aimed at developing open source alternatives to those android components.
https://microg.org/
I wouldn't trust anything facebook says at this point.

Just yesterday my wife deleted her facebook account and left a private message about how to contact her to some of her friends. She has never entered her phone number into the details and she has an unlisted/secret phone number due to working in the equivalent of the norwegian IRS.

A few hours after making this private post she started getting phone calls from england from "Microsoft support" regarding her the infection on her windows computer (she is using linux btw). She has never ever gotten spam calls on that number before. It might be coincidence and it is anecdotal but it seems very far fetched as this number is about 10 years old.

For the record I would personally not trust any company to put a device that records activities like that into my home. Not from facebook, google, apple or amazon. It's time to cut the online crap and start having things locally again.
The intro on Conway's law was more fun to read than I expected going into this.

It is interesting, because I've seen Conway's law used as a weapon against modularizing something. I think the key is that you need to weigh what you are getting out of the modules. Even if it is, in some ways, more complicated, if you can more meaningfully delegate ownership of parts of the problem out because of the the modularization, it is a good chance it is still worth doing.

I don't think I can give a brief example. In my case, we had three teams, rather than trying to put everything on one team, I was trying to ask for what the three major components of the system were. If we couldn't agree on that, it seemed unlikely we were using three teams well.
Your theory that a large systemic problem is only real if it blows up quickly is puzzling to me. I was working for financial traders at the time of the Orange County crisis in 1994 [1], and even then people were concerned that the rise of complicated financial instruments was concentrating and perhaps even creating risk in ways that were poorly understood.

Those concerns got louder during the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999 [2], as that removed depression-era regulations that kept banks from a lot of financial speculation.

But this all didn't really blow up until the financial crisis of 2007-8. [3] Financial instruments with long time horizons (e.g., mortgages and long-term loans to governments) can be dangerous a long time before the truth comes out. And large organizations like banks and governments may end up exacerbating the problem by smoothing over what they think of as small problems but are really the canaries in the coal mine for major systemic issues.

Closer to home, we could look at Theranos, which took a full 15 years to go from founding to criminal charges despite never really working. Enron and Worldcom are two other good examples where booming markets covered up all manner of sins for years before the music stopped.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/1994/12/08/business/orange-county-s-...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aftermath_of_the_repeal_of_the...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007%E2%80...
Thank you for that answer!

Would you mind briefly expanding on "Because it's so clear that Tether is simply used as a way to circumvent AML/KYC"? Not being contrarian, I just don't understand how this part works.
Run for office. Failing that, vote. Progress is everyone pushing in the right direction.
> I doubt the extent to which that gap is caused by extant social forces. It strikes me as far more likely that the lion's share of that gap is historical; at a certain point discrimination sharply declined but by that point whites and blacks were on different tracks.

I don't buy that speculation. Until 1998 (the year Google was founded), a majority of Americans disapproved of interracial marriages. If you think they were like "yeah, blacks marrying whites gives me the heebie-jeebies" but were nonetheless free of discriminatory mentalities when it came to hiring, promotions, etc., I don't know what to tell you.

> I'd guess the next biggest driver of the household income gap (or perhaps the number one driver) is the fact that white households are more likely to have two parents (thereby more likely to have two incomes), which is a social force but not an external one and certainly not one that affects all blacks.

External forces have impacts on marriage rates: people are more likely to put off marriage if they are financially insecure, incarceration breaks up marriages, etc. Unless you're positing that black people just want to be married less than white people (which is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary proof), the cause must be external.

> skin color as a proxy for lived-experiences

Skin color is not a "proxy" for lived experience. It's a determinant of lived experience in a country that treats you differently based on your skin color, independently of your socioeconomic status.
The US has $21.6 T in debt, and a total of $71 T in public and private debt.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Starbucks and Amazon provides wages and benefits to more people (who pay taxes) than Ed Sheeran.
> China regularly disappears its citizens

The difference here is that SA killed a citizen of another country. I'm not arguing the morality of it, just pointing out the important difference.
GitHub Actions – GitHub Developer Guide
> A system that has O(n) code artifacts for n "business requirements" (e.g.) is far more costly than one that has O(1), say.

I understand what you are saying, I'm just objecting to how you are saying it. Unless you are interested in the limiting behavior as the number of "business requirements" goes to infinity, big O is the wrong tool. An O(1) approach that requires a foundation of 1M LOC is probably worse than an O(n) approach that requires 100 LOC per business requirement.

Sorry to obsess over the details here - I just think big O is overused in general and saw an opportunity to make a bad pun on complexity worship.
The author describes a YAGNI approach. The interviewer and you seem to want a solution that's already generalized and future proof. YAGNI is always the right approach to take at the beginning of a problem. But that's one of the insights that often come with programming experience and reflection. Unfortunately, seniority is an unreliable indicator for either attribute.
If you really think Jordan Peterson is a right wing nut job then I just don't know what to say to that. And the fact that there are other reproductive behaviours besides the lobster one doesn't really disprove the point. You can observe the same behaviours (that of a male hierarchy of competition) all across nature. I find it interesting that the thread you quoted didn't actually deny the lobster thing either. Nor really show that the alternative mating/sex behaviours of other animals disprove the hierarchy thing. I mean, I'm skeptical of some of the things he says, but just claiming he is wrong doesn't make him so without something to back the claim up.
Yup. Also, they'll reason that the way from junior to senior is knowing and using design patterns. I've seen plenty of inexperienced cow-orkers overcomplicating things because they thought that's how good programmers build things. I know I did that too, when I was first learning to program.

(Popular books on OOP and code style definitely do not help keep things simple.)
It's bad analogy, but the candy bowl in this particular example is "revenue available to companies selling this stuff". The cost to duplicate these things is 0, but the available income is fixed.
And that is likely to help you not at all if another party with controlling interest decides to try to screw you. See the histories of Facebook and Zynga for a couple of more high profile and recent examples. Back when Microsoft was founded, I don't think there really was even the notion of vesting back the shares in your own company... you were either a partner in a partnership or a shareholder in a corporation. I'm pretty sure it was VC's who later came up with the concept of earning back ownership in one's own company.
If you want to compare numbers you need to know what metrics are used in each. Here is the S&P report that everyone's headline is based upon: https://www.spratings.com/documents/20184/0/ChinasHiddenSubn...
While it does not go back to 2012 I see nothing suggesting the kind of increase you are quoting.

It is also difficult to compare the Detroit number to a Chinese city unless we know what are included in the numbers. Detroit doesn't own many of its infrastructure. For example its prison borrows separately, and so does its water and sewer district. Presumably comparable numbers are included in S&P's LGFV total.
For the past couple of years our average engagement was full-time and 8+ months long, so we only needed to look for new customers once or maybe twice a year.

We took some time to create our consultancy website and make sure we're communicating our value and principles at least somewhat effectively.

It also helps having satisfied past clients who will speak well of you when someone calls them up.

We don't really do any speaking, blogging, traveling to conferences to network, or anything like that. I just advertise on a couple of websites like HN who wants to be hired, for hire subreddit, angel list, startupers.com, etc to let people know we're on the market looking for a new project. We usually find someone who is a good fit within a couple of weeks.

We are also involved in the local tech community and in the past we would get some projects through word-of-mouth, but those were at lower rates near the beginning of our careers.

You could also try platforms like codementorX and moonlightwork until you manage to connect with someone yourself.
Why not just release it into the public domain then?
Vote how? Both parties [with a chance of winning] will increase the debt. The exact amount will be different, as will the exact things they spend money on, and how/if they change taxes. However both will continue to spend more than they take in and blame the other party.
I think part of the problem with the Kindle fire was manufacturers couldn't make a device with Amazon and another with Google due to Google's licensing. That was part of the antitrust suit.
That's really interesting, but it's be nice to also know the average population of those cities. The per capita debt is probably the more relevant statistic. Or maybe the ratio between the debt and [assets/income] of the city.
Nice! I too, would love to read more on the OT/CRDT trade-off.

Companion reading (the approach taken in ProseMirror, which was implemented in significantly less person-years): http://marijnhaverbeke.nl/blog/collaborative-editing.html
Looking at both links it is completely obvious which is the political of the two. You are really stretching calling the Advocate Circle the same as the various FSF campaigns. Some of the FSF campaigns listed are "surveillance", "upgrade from Windows" and DRM.
The incredible thing is that these homes are often not purchased with debt financing either, and when they do, it's with a much larger downpayment than in the US as required by law. Chinese citizens have a much higher savings rate compared to Americans.
It's a "oh shiny" thing from my point of view. People get bored with the old, and want to try the new Google/Netflix/Microsoft tech, irrespective of its suitability. Once the client/customer signs off on it, internally it becomes political.
I was with him until the very end, where he said that the cloud, microservices, etc. were the simpler approach, that other companies (not Google or Amazon) are trying to avoid.

What I see is the opposite; companies that would do perfectly well with a server or three, and a simple monolith, trying to instead use Kubernetes and an Amazon service salad because that's what Amazon and Google say to do.
This comes to mind: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-police-office...
none, paywalls suck. It's just locking content away.
> non-approved license and therefore IS NOT OPEN SOURCE.

You don't own the term "open source", and nobody requires your approval for its usage.

"May not carry the OSI trademark or logo" is not the same thing as "is not open source".
Lots of fringe people were predicting an imminent real estate implosion in 2005-2006 as the market got crazy.

The real collapse didn't occur for several years.

They were wrong on the timing, which is fairly common, while being right about the cause and ultimate outcome.

China of 10 or 15 years ago is not China of today, as it pertains to their debt situation. Going from a 130% debt to GDP ratio, to 300% (or higher if you count shadow debt), puts you in a fiscal place that few nations have ever navigated successfully. Now China is reversing course on deleveraging and proceeding to leverage up further, likely making the situation worse.

300% debt to GDP may be sustainable with 8% real growth. How about at 5.5% growth? 4.8%? How about 450% debt to GDP, at 5.5% GDP growth? There are limits to this sort of approach to propping up an economy with very large sums of debt and slowing growth. How much does their growth drop off if they can no longer continue to expand the debt so dramatically? And when that happens, can they still service their debts well? The question is exactly where the limits are and what the consequences will be as they're hit. That varies from country to country, depending on the unique circumstances, and depending on the type of debt. What you can be certain about with China, and what it's doing, is that it's not good. Even if that immense pile of total debt - which continues to grow rapidly - doesn't implode their economy, it is very likely to stagnate it at a minimum by robbing the economy of the growth capital it needs (diverting it to rather incredible debt interest payment sums, as is the case now). As that debt goes higher, more and more of each incremental dollar of GDP growth is going to maintain it.

While all of that is happening: China has large pension funding problems, very high real corporate tax rates that are smothering its economy, a weak social safety net, a shrinking small business market and expanding government-corporate sector that is far less efficient than the private sector, a rapidly aging demographics problem, contracting labor force, and soon to be contracting population. Now juggle all of that with their debt load, before they get rich/affluent at the median, and before they even build out a meaningful social safety net for the bottom billion people (social safety nets & welfare policies being the usual primary cause of large debt accumulation in the developed world).
Tough to say, really. If your O(1) is just a constant 2000 code artifacts, but your O(n) is 5 per business requirement, it is amusing to consider that 400 business requirements might be better spread over more systems.

My view is that, even in algorithm analysis, Big-O has been overused. Too many people will point out crap like "That is 4 items per entity!" When I point out we only have 50 entities and that 200 is an easily handled number, I just get evil glares.
If I am using an open source project I make sure to understand the license rather than blindly trusting some organisation.

Seems pretty amateur not to do this.
I'd add "redistribute" to the GP's definition, but the point stands that the definition of "open source" is not "licensed using an OSI approved license"
Awesome to see other people from polimi :)
Thanks for sharing that thread!
Let's go back to the late 19th century and give the physicists of the time a peek of what would come to be the future of dark matter -- that it would not only end up needing to be a rather exotic form of matter, but that it would need to account for nearly all matter in the universe, along with all the countless negative conditions we can also now apply to its existence as a result of various experimental failures. Of course we would also give them the pros of dark matter in that it also explains, after substantial 'refactoring', some other otherwise difficult to explain issues. The dilemma that they then face is pondering whether this material seems more probable, or whether it might be the case that e.g. Newtonian dynamics is somehow missing something? For brevity, I'm sidestepping relativity.

I think you'll see a lot of the issues with alternatives such as MOND are a 'lack of elegance', yet we've happily accepted that the universe on a very small scale is far from elegant, so it seems peculiar to insist that on the very large scale it must behave with elegance. Another issue is that MOND generally also has a requirement of some dark matter, but the critical difference is it's just that - matter (including baryonic) that cannot yet be observed, not the increasingly exotic material that dark matter has morphed into. And it also only requires a small fraction of the amount that current dark matter does.

I tend to agree that dark matter is the most probable explanation. But, at the same time I think the resource allocation for dark matter as opposed to everything else is probably not the one we would choose if we were being completely impartial.
So many competing, incompatible protocols. So, so many.

Also this is lacking a column for "stickers". Seriously they are one of the things that has my and my crowd using Telegram, especially since it's really easy to make your own custom sets instead of relying on whatever they pay someone to draw for you.
AGPL does not require the copyright-holder to license the work exclusively under the AGPL, only those that received the work under the AGPL. People and companies are free to receive from copyright-holders their works under different — even commercial — licenses, irrespective of which (and how many) (non-exclusive) licenses the copyright-holders have used in the past for the same works.

In the matter of allowing commercial licensing by the copyright-holder, the AGPL and this new license do not differ.
These numbers are meaningless on their own. Detroit went up in flames when it lost it's auto industry. Otherwise the debt would just get bigger and Detroit would be fine.

China might undergo a crisis when they start losing exports due to other countries re-industrializing (ie the US).
My guess would be that they won't go into the red on average. Their growth will slow and some very export-oriented industrial areas will suffer, but their internal market is huge by now so they'll just keep growing, but not as fast.
This is explicilty the plan, it's all there in plain sight:

https://video.foxnews.com/v/3179604851001/?#sp=show-clips

https://www.newsweek.com/stock-market-1134867
Ok. O(n) also through a away a lot of useful information. It seems simpler in every sense to just say "several classes for every operation."
By social progressivism I meant the affirmative action reference you made. As far as I was aware gay marriage is pretty centrist these days.
More Azure billage to the customer, more kickback from MS.
Different cultural norm, Chinese are willing to spend 100% of their savings on buying house. And having a house is a prerequisite to getting permission from father/mother-in-law for marriage in Chinese culture.
Another factor that makes a difference -- but perhaps should not -- is whether you are reducing them from $10 billion to $1 billion or $100k to $80k.

In the first case, you might think "eh, they'll be fine anyway." But the magnitude of the money is not directly related to what is a fair reduction.
If makers dont have a fundamental understanding of how the users will utilize it, the makers are making a bad product. Every developer should do customer service and a sales call on a regular basis.
Yeah... Pretty much
The vast majority of accidents are due to distracted driving. The millions of humans successfully operating a car more or less prove that the problem isn't our sensors. Alternative sensors may help, but marginally.
Many countries don't have the US concept of public domain, including the one where I live ("in the public domain" actually means something quite different in British English). But the WTFPL also makes a statement and one of which I approve.
Most US houses are "cheap." SF and NY are not normal.
"Big O" has evolved beyond its original intended usage. In informal and semi-formal setting, it just means "roughy proportional to". It's showcasing the first-order shape of growth, not just inviting to do analysis in the limit.

I.e. it's coder slang now.
You assume this "Intellectual Property" or "Copyright" thing exists in China. After working for a Chinese company, the concepts don't have an analog in their culture. Actually the concept of licensure in general doesn't have a good analog. They see open source as free and sort of brush off the strings that are attached.

(this btw, should not be interpreted as bad mouthing them; I'm merely pointing out a communication problem between two cultures).
They're smaller? Houses in the US are crazy large (Australia too, apparently)

https://www.elledecor.com/life-culture/fun-at-home/news/a765...
I definitely agree about the audience.

For non-programmers, the visual approach is very attractive, and provides an intuitive way to display the workflow in a manner that is easy to make sense of.

For programmers (i.e. pretty much everyone that uses GitHub), I think a more DSL-like approach would be appropriate, though this doesn't preclude a visual editor as an alternative. As gbaygon mentioned, they do have a DSL, but I think the approach is suboptimal.

In a project I'm working on at the moment (which extends the work from my thesis), we're targeting two audiences - programmers write the workflows, but "business" people can see a visualisation. Essentially we take the Scheme code that comprises the workflow and render it as a graph, similar to BPMN. I think that's a nice approach when you have people on staff who have the necessary programming skills and are working alongside non-technical people. But that doesn't apply in every situation, so visual design can be useful when you don't have experienced programmers creating the workflows.
>Open source for most people means whether you can see and modify the source code.

Do you mean legally? If not, Windows 2000 is open source. If so, then that's what the OSI tries to ensure.
> So where is the massive debt crisis you are talking about?

https://www.npr.org/2018/10/16/657790901/federal-deficit-jum...

> The federal deficit ballooned to $779 billion in the just-ended fiscal year — a remarkable tide of red ink for a country not mired in recession or war.