skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Has Boom Supersonic solved the problem that when the government tested the impact of frequent sonic booms on the populated centres in the 1960s it drove people nuts, caused building damage, and people hated it?

https://paleofuture.gizmodo.com/when-the-faa-blasted-oklahom...

I assume Boom is like so many startups in that they have ignored history and have barreled ahead anyway.
Yes exactly, we need a progressive capital gains tax as well as a progressive income tax.
> * The configure script now accepts appending options to CFLAGS using the syntax 'CFLAGS+=OPTIONS'.

Was this due to an autotools version bump?
Wow, having better typing support is a really big deal. A lot of data layout is just put ad hoc into IDA comments because their struct labeling is trash.
What does "maxed out on apps on their device" mean?
I used to work at Epic as a software developer. My take on it is that the key explanation for why medical software is so bad is that it is so hard to even attempt to compete with established EMR's.

I could go on at length about this but I'll try to keep it short. Basically, imagine that you're a startup and you want to compete with Epic in providing a comprehensive IT solution to health systems. You will _at least_ need to:

1. Write software for every major medical specialty that is comprehensive enough to satisfy the specialists' expectations of domain-specific tailoring

2. Also ensure that these modules are flexible to accommodate intra-specialty variation (for example, oncologists vary a lot in how they divide stages of cancer)

3. Ensure that your software will comply with and help your customers perform well financially with federal, state, local, and program-specific (Medicaid, Medicare...) regulations

4. Go into a room full of health executives who are deeply weary and suspicious of health IT people (for better and worse reasons) and convince them they're better off risking a multi-year, extremely expensive transition project on your startup, which might not be around in a few years, instead of going to an EMR vendor that's almost-not-even-mediocre but stable like Cerner or Epic. (The "nobody gets fired for buying IBM" effect here is real.)

Clearly all of this requires a lot of work, and would require millions of dollars in funding and the poaching of some top talent in healthcare IT who know the lay of the regulatory land. As a result, most HIT startups (that I know of, at least) target something less ambitious than an enterprise EMR. Some target only a specific specialty (like home health or care management), others target small family practices (which are becoming increasingly rare as they are bought out by major health systems).

This is in a way bad for everyone except the software vendors, though, because without a competitive threat, there is little incentive for companies like Epic to undertake the risky, major rewrites which are vital for the company's long-term technical health. Epic still uses a typeless, (almost) data structure-less language called MUMPS for its server and DB code, and on the client side, all of it is still either in VB6 (yes, 6, not .NET) or a quite spartan home-grown JavaScript framework. The result is that bad code never gets totally thrown out, and Epic's developers are not able to benefit from the productivity-multiply amenities of modern languages, which include type systems and abstractions more powerful than subroutines and goto statements. Development then takes an order of magnitude longer than it might have, and the feedback cycle continues.
Maybe that's location dependent? They'll sell us a lower commit than the full circuit, but we're in the SF bay area.
Some industries require higher table stakes than others, in the form of a defensive patent portfolio.

A principal of a failed medical records startup described it to me as an incumbent coming to them and saying basically "You have a nice disruptive startup. But we don't want to be disrupted. We have some patents. Their details don't matter. Our <unit of time> legal budget is greater than your last round of funding. End of game."
The article has a lot of problems. It tries to conflate "net producer"="net saver"="morally good" but this is not clear at all.

1. If everyone is a net saver you get paradox of thrift [0].

2. For every buyer there is a seller. Being a net seller depends on somebody being a net buyer... it is strange to say "i am moral by depending on somebody being immoral"

3. As others pointed out, distribution of wealth is a critical component as it grants influence multipliers to people. It is easy to pigeon hole majority into having no money (and thus no spending choice) by hoarding all of the money (especially when the "service" you offer is arbitrage, which doesn't increase net real commodities).

4. Rather than thinking about producers/consumers, it is probably more useful to think in terms of utility [1]. Spending money can increase overall utility (most clearly -- direct investment in a utility increasing business). The growth in overall utility can actually increase total production (which the author equates with "good") despite his argument totally missing this.

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_thrift
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility
Most bankruptcies don’t result in liquidation, just total loss for shareholders and a haircut for creditors.
On a commercial plan, business travelers accounts for >70% of an airline's profits. My read on the article is that Boom is targeting the business customers on a commercial flight and faster transit time is one of the biggest wants for business travelers.
Probably could burn less virtual karma if you made your comment more interesting by saying WHY you hated it. The plot? The characters? The typesetting? The pages gave you paper-cuts? Tell us Why!
Complicated Sounds: ‘Really the Blues’
Do we have to parse what you said word by word?

did not apply to "any argument" [...]

What you said is plainly preposterous and ridiculous. I'm happy to discuss anything you said and anything I said. But, sputter this came out of your own effin mouth. I am not going to talk about how it's something other than its plain meaning.

"But I can always fall back on the fact that to prove that there are no security holes in iOS you would have to solve the halting problem"
Yup. It's frustrating.

One benefit of switching to mail on my own domain (powered by FastMail at the moment) is that instead of username@mydomain, I can also use antispamlabel@username.mydomain. Which is hopefully less common and too dangerous to automatically filter out in "data cleaning".
The former and latter are both rich. Your point is fair but the example is weak.
Or we could just make medical records private.
You reason in industrial terms, though: nation-states "won" because they were bigger and more resorceful. In a situation where this is not necessaily advantageous, or even disadvantageous (because of centrifugal forces), those considerations are somewhat irrelevant. The URSS had the bigger army (and in some areas, the bigger industrial capacity) and lost the cold war. Turkey has the biggest army in NATO and still struggles to stay together.

In a world where everyone sorta-speaks English and the power is in know-how and transnational market access, it counts very little that you can mobilise this or that amount of tanks. It counts even less if those tanks are coordinated at a higher level anyway.
>The latter is providing economic value (maybe, maybe not) through mere ownership (rent-collection)

I want to point out that "rents" are something else than collecting dividends. People who hold equities are not rent-seekers(for the most part). They are compensated for taking on risk in the economy. This serves a real, very important, function.

Rents are when political/other power is used to extract money out of a situation that you do not contribute to in any way. E.g. tax prep companies lobbying to make filing taxes complicated so their business can have a problem to exist for. That sort of behavior does nothing to contribute, it it is zero sum(no net wealth is generated by this behavior for anyone), as rents tend to be.

Not to be confused with rent, that you pay for living in a property, which is something completely different.
In the kickstarter, $2,000 let you design a personalized item. Wasteland was released in 1988 so somebody who graduated in 1992 may have had fond collegiate memories.
I tend to use it when I don't want to overwrite the currently printed lines on the terminal and don't want to open a new window. It also helps it doesn't grab the whole terminal screen.
You can tell these kids aren't serious about coffee yet because they dilute it with creamer.
"It's called Rubisco, which is short for an actual chemical name that's very long and hard to remember."

Anybody else wish he would've let us be the judge of that?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RuBisCO
How do you define 'toxic'? How often do you fire workers for being 'toxic'?
With the senate, it's important to frame thoughts not as a percentage of the population, but as a percentage of the states that make up the United States.

I would say that if 15% of the population could control the house of representatives, then there would be something wrong.
I'm fine with accepting a system that's better than humans, given some a priori evidence of such.

But this isn't the case. This isn't the case of a company launching a system that performs better than humans through extensive testing and carefully weighting the risks. This is the case of a company intentionally false advertising something and resulting in preventable human loss.
I think your calculation is a little pessimistic: even if we include all sorts of things that today aren't powered from electrical generators, 200,000TWh is plenty to power the whole world for a year. Assuming 8 hours of sunlight per day of 200 watts per square metre (not an unreasonable figure), that's "only" an area of ~400 square kilometres (assuming I haven't dropped a zero somewhere).

That would be difficult but not impossible to fit in Britain.

This of course ignores problems of storage, inconstancy of supply and so on, but there's no problem with total capacity that means we cannot maintain a standard of living way above what we experience today.
One problem is that the two are difficult to separate once people have an incentive to confuse them. Note how much compensation now comes in the form of stock, for example, which is partly driven by lower capital gains taxes. It wouldn't be hard to shift things the other way: create a company for your assets and then pay yourself a healthy salary and bonus plan for managing your assets.

So however much they might be separate in theory, I think I'm fine if we just start with a 70% tax on all income over $500k, no matter the source. The more complicated the plan, the more likely people will dodge it.
It's not $15B lined up before the first prototype flies, it's $15B that might happen, eventually, after Boom has delivered on its technical promises by flying and certifying the airframe, if the airlines at that stage decide the finished article fits with their operations at that time, they're happy with the operational risk and they can raise the capital to finance the aircraft acquisitions on adequate terms.

JAL putting in $10m of seed investment is showing a bit of faith, but the rest is just pieces of paper.

Concorde had firmer commitments for 74 aircraft back in the day, but only ever made 20, most of which were sold off at a subsidised price and spent most of their time on the ground.
> Taxing capital gains means that everything you ever own will also be taken from you in the form of taxes on inflated dollars.

How? You're taxing gains so by definition, what you already own cannot be taken.

> The reason this website exists, and all the startups that have gone through YC, is because the tax on capital gains is low.

[evidence needed]

> You can’t increase the tax rate and expect people to just make the same choices and end up with less to show for it. The more the government confiscates the upside, the less people will take the risk.

Maybe, maybe not. The relationship between upside and risk is not purely linear. The human mind doesn't work like that. Rather it works in thresholds.

Wealthy people can never make as much money by working than by investing. So they have to invest. If the return on all means of investment is similarly increased, the situation doesn't change.
> If you are doing safety critical

Well, Tesla clearly isn't doing safety critical work on autonomous systems (it wouldn't have even launched "autopilot" if it was), so 4 years is indeed a big lag.
I'm sure in 40 years kids will be saying that we're still stuck in the turn of the millennium.

But I also hate Imagine. A world where no one plans anything, and there's nothing worth fighting for and all of our culture is gone, replaced with godless communism. Sounds like a real dystopia to me. I can imagine Lennon's world, and I'd fight it to the end. The music is solid though, as expected of Lennon.
Get some SSDs
There needs to be more focus on the capital gains tax. The super rich do not make most of their money from income. If we were to reclassify capital gains as income, the system would be more fair to people who make a living from wages while providing the government with additional revenue.
Those aren't the high-end of the volume market. They're the private jet market which is circa an order of magnitude more expensive and correspondingly smaller.
I just got permission to advertise smaller subnets than a /24 during a move.

They have install times orders of magnitude less than competitors - we're talking 2 days lead time vs. 45.

And while they're not as cheap as Cogent, they are still lower cost than most other transit providers and actually have full IPv6 tables (unlike Cogent.)
Indeed, but it seems that the V2 and V3 TPUs are quite appropriate for NN training.
Not a big fan of it either, though it's important to recognize that given the era it was released (early 1950s), it was quite ahead of its time. Perhaps ahead by at least 2 decades in anticipating American youth's punk culture, that we see from the mid-70s onward.

As a side note, you might give his later Franny and Zooey (1961) a try, finding a more nuanced Salinger at work.
Except it doesn't work where it refuses to work and the cars don't actually send back any meaningful amount of data (unless you want to train your model on lossy compression algorithms).

You'd need a storage rack in your frunk to record any amount of raw sensor data. That's before you consider their production AP hardware doesn't have cycles to spare to do any of that recording.
>Wealthy consumers are a fraction of the problem

Agreed. It's still a model that provides an entrance point to wide distribution being possible. (Legislatively, economically, general awareness).

It's not suitable as a single solution to go all-in on - As long as this isn't treated as a false-dilemma and solely relied upon, it has value.
Thank for your work, dang. Long-form personal opinions seem to be better suited on Medium, Twitter, other social media.

TGIF! :D
My first 2 thoughts as well:) I suppose you'd need to RE it using a tool you trust. Might need to do that one, too. It's like a compiler trusting trust problem, but in reverse:)
Would this be useful for reverse engineering proprietary graphics driver and wifi driver blobs?
I sympathize. I trained in a technical field, and thought I'd spend my day doing that, but probably 75% is spent on email, 10% is technical and the rest is errata.
The vast majority of wealth is stored in abstract things like stocks and bonds, not possessions stored in a bunker somewhere.

To pay high taxes, that means liquidating those stocks and bonds (or in the case of income taxes, never buying them in the first place). That limits the financing that corporations can get, preventing expansion or causing them to downsize.

In other words, taxing the rich actually takes from corporations. Maybe that's the goal, but it has consequences, like job losses, greater dependence on foreign investment and imports, etc.
start with a shellscript, then a REST API (+REST aware CLI), then a website, then a mobile app.
The TL&DR I'm getting from the thread is that everyone should stop flying because it's so bad for the environment.
They are going to fly transoceanic routes to start so they don't have to worry about sonic booms over population centers.
Can you elaborate a bit on how such testing is done, or share a good article on the topic? It sounds like a hard problem to need to get things right this bad, or else.
I am very, very sparing about installing apps. However, I'm even MORE cautious about browsing to websites, unless I can disable all client-side scripting.

At least I can firewall apps to mitigate any abuse they may engage in. That's much harder to do with websites.
And this is before you realise that your identity may have been incorrectly matched against someone else leading to you having somebody else’s treatment on your record.
Looks like 3-4 Linux-cannot-be-worse-than-NT-in-any-way apologists here to deny facts.

The NT IO completion port model has handle asynchronous IO, to disk and network, since NT 3.5 in the mid-90s. It has none of the problems of (1) accidental fd reuse due to compact range; (2) synchronous-by-default IO APIs like read() and write(); (3) inelegant AIO models that require disabling caching.

There are definitely areas Linux wins at (path lookup; metadata operations; cost, license, and open source nature) — but AIO to files is not one of them.

I'm an open source user and developer, but we could stand to learn some lessons from NT rather than shove our fingers in our collective ears, as it seems some people are doing.
>Fossil fuel driven flight is not viable in a sustainable future. We need to understand this.

But it's the reality. Electrification of individual ground transportation, and the phasing out of gasoline cars, is absolutely inevitable over the next 20 years. But jet fuel isn't going anywhere for a long, long time. It's just a matter of physics. It's foreseeable to have small scale electrified commuter aircraft shuttling people within 400 miles. But any type of long haul flight will be done with turbine engines burning kerosene. Even with a 10x increase in energy density for LiPo batteries, we still wouldn't be there.
It seems that today is it is hardly a good strategy. Unless you are giving something so valuable and scarce, poor documentation is pushing away adopters. The average engineer will think about building the service on their own.
Let me expand on that: Medicare has recognized the problems you mentioned and has, fairly recently, begun directing efforts through payment system at the first broad class (inefficient interventions) through adoption of a variety of quality-incentive payment systems. But those aren't going to be as broadly effective, even for Medicare fee-for-service patients, as they could be if delivery systems and practice is shaped by conflicting incentives from different payers (who may be involved in covering some of the same claims, because coordination of benefits is a real thing, and even when they aren't for the same claims, will often over time be for treatment of the same patient.)
Valuing Apple or Amazon or Google or Facebook or Netflix or Microsoft or any other large consumer-oriented tech company at a trillion dollars is kind of idiotic.

But this article is about Apple, so let's take stock of why Apple, for the moment, isn't actually worthy of the magical 1 trillion dollar value.

ONE: They are now years, past Steve Jobs, and there's no one slated to operate the helm, with the type of aggression that characterized his personality.

TWO: Weak design decisions, that lack depth of strategy. Minimalism is cute, and Apple is capable of crafting devices with a degree of charm, but they are truly failing to grasp that a device must command degrees of multi-faceted utility, and without that, a device just isn't very charming. Fewer ports, and reduced diversity of ports has been much more punishing than any of Apple's key decision makers would have guessed.

THREE: Marked hostility toward repairs. Apple products can't be classed as anything other than disposable appliances with a two year shelf life, with near zero resale value, and a total lack of customizability. You can't fix them, change them, or do much else, except return them to the store you bought them at, if you kept the receipt. It may be tempting to laugh this off, and turn a blind eye to such facts, but anyone who might dare ignore this fact is absolutely tone-deaf to the concerns of anyone and everyone making less than $200K a year. If you'd rather not associate your brand with individuals below that pay grade, that's fine, but don't expect to be valued at ONE TRILLION DOLLARS, if that's your attitude.
One could make the argument that the senators still represent the state, because they represent everyone in the state, whereas a representative only represents their district.
feel free to reach out I'm in the bay area
From the linked sources: "One of [my children] browsed a book and said, 'Here, read this.'" It was a textbook on the Haskell programming language, Lee recounted. "One day that will be my retirement reading."

He did get a CS master at Cambridge (UK) though, so the C++ bit is likely true.
Perhaps "labor value" would disappear but it grants workers "spending choice" which generates "happiness" (workers can spend money on luxuries), "influence" (middle class is more capable of political action that subsistence farmers), allows for further downstream effect to increase production capacity (additional capital investment into yacht building business). Basically, there is much more to life than labor value and exchange media have effects other than shifting around labor value. At any rate, there is something fundamentally wrong suggesting that either party in exchange is more moral than other since for every buyer there is a seller, and i don't buy that someone can say "i am moral because i exchange with someone who is immoral."
I have one question. How does taxing the rich make the poor any better off ?

At the end of the day the poor will still be poor right?
"adequate performance" in a dubious early 1960's automotive application isn't the starting point for adequate performance in a 2010's airframe.

Not to mention the material differences between a machined billet crank and part cast in sand five decades ago, subsequently salvaged and reworked.
My first reality check in paying taxes came when our startup finally generated some real revenue. It was exciting... We started hiring employees, investing in a bigger office, etc. When time came to pay our taxes - it was a humbling experience. I felt sick to my stomach... We worked so hard for that cash and had to hand over SO MUCH MONEY to Uncle Sam. He was the greatest silent partner we had all along!

All of our money was going back into the company, so our growth rate of hiring new employees was directly impacted by how much we paid in taxes.

Do people honestly believe that it would better we pay Uncle Sam, than to hire more employees in our growing company?
I'm not a semi-regular user, but a few months ago I wrote an ed script for batch modification of some stuff that, for whatever reason (I don't recall the exact task), was really annoying to do with sed (which I normally go to for that sort of thing).

ed is just one of those things I keep in the back of the toolbox that gets pulled out occasionally.
Is the data open sourced too?
Why does the state exist if not to "use force" to make the lives of the people in the state better?

Also why are all these people who object to use of "of force" to levy and collect taxes but not you know, literally everything else that the state uses force to do?
"Yikes, when did HN become so full of haters?"

When it became clear that there was absolutely no way this could work for more than a token number of flights without absolutely devastating consequences to the planet we live on.