skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You're probably right but ...

I don't have any data on my own actually behavior, only my feelings. If I search for "React" on Google and ads for react based services or other software services appear it doesn't bother me. If I'm on stackoverflow or jsfiddle and there are ads for software dev related products and services great! If I'm on Polygon and see ads for games, perfect!

It's when I see targeted ads unrelated to the activity that I feel angry, annoyed, upset. For example I viewed some apartments on an apartment site. Then I went and checked movie reviews on yahoo (japan) and every ad was for that exact apartment I looked at. It's not just creepy it's anger inducing. I'm not interesting in looking at apartments. I'm looking at movies. It's like the sales person from the last store I visited followed me into the movie theater and is badgering me to buy the clothing I looked at

So, I'd basically like to believe there's 3 tiers

1. 100% un-targeted, random ads

2. Content targeted. Video game ads on a video game site. Or BMW ads on an article about BMWs

3. User targeted. Being tracked all over the net to try to divine what I want and showing me ads for that.

It's easy to believe 2 and 3 are better than 1. I want to believe 2 is as good as 3, maybe better since it's not creepy.
Design outside-in, develop inside-out
I agree; mostly, but your last sentence misses an important point; It drives away people that aren't interested in open source projects with creators/maintainers that show this level of arrogance/attitude. The fact that it's Electron, would drive away people that aren't interested in Electron.

I've had experience both in work and my personal life with a wide variety of open source project maintainers/creators, some have been amazing, and their attitude encourages you to contribute, others have been so horrible you don't want to have to think about it again.

For me, personally, I have no problem with what this person is saying, it's how they're saying it that means I'll never touch this project, because I've formed an opinion on the kind of response I'm likely to get if I was to raise an issue.
So, download it while in the AirBnB. If it shares data permanently about the AirBnB location, fine. Delete the app immediately after using it. At your next AirBnB stay, do it all over again.
Certainly the best ISP – by a very wide margin – in Switzerland!
In practice, I get the impression that the emperor isn't wearing a whole lot: It's really difficult to demonstrate that any particular ad campaign generates a positive return at all, let alone that any particular technique justifies its cost, or that something that worked well the first time someone tried it will continue working well once everyone is doing it. The whole space looks to me like a morass of wicked high variance, confounding variables for days, spillover effects, blah blah blah.

Combine this with marketers wanting to be more data-driven - and needing to report numbers to their own bosses - and you've got a situation ripe for exploitation. I expect the adtech companies could sell pretty much anything, as long as it smells like numbers.
I always assumed the use of electron stemmed from that same lack of real-world experience and a willingness to build an app at any cost despite not fully understanding the implications of the work being done.

The attitude this person portrays seems to fit in line with that. Defending your position with arrogance and irritation shows everyone a great deal about you.

I'll go ahead and lump myself in with the rest of the group that remains thoroughly unimpressed.
UBI shouldn't be connected with "making a living in NYC" or whether. It should be enough to cover basic needs, even if it means having to move to a cheaper state.

In that light, something like $10-$12,000 is more like it -- should cover rent, basic food, electricity, and so on. It's to not have homeless, destitute, left behind people, not to cover nice living expenses.

For a family, $10 will be of course $20, and so on. A few friends could pool and stay in the same house with $1000 rent and get $40K between them, etc.
If you ask me it's pretty pathetic that Brexit hasn't already happened.
Also in VS Code you can click F12 to go to the definition. When importing something new, I will often do this & then spend time reading through all of their type information. This often makes amazing documentation!

When TypeScript first came out, this really helped me learn JavaScript & DOM types that browsers treated differently. It also helped me learn to write cross browser compatible JavaScript without depending on jQuery.
As Our Food Gets Cheaper, Farmers and Laborers Pay the Price
I guess the lesson is one might not want to implement word expansion in a shell using libc... [ed: if one has ambitions to function as /bin/sh...]
Money supply isn't the issue here.

If everyone has another x+12,000 dollars, the amount of money available for low income housing has strictly increased. Landlords are then in a position to raise prices proportionally.

The "America's poor eat too much" line is also not strong. You might argue that they eat the wrong things; this is the food desert/education argument that's commonly made. Regardless there is already artificial price fixing of many staple foods like milk and bread, which is a much better argument.
tldr: legalizing video gambling has brought in additional revenue, but not as much as expected. Illinois borrowed money in advance based on the expected rates.
I did not expect all the ants to follow the same path, but I thought maybe they'll come close since only the best generations are supposed to get passed on with mutations. I'm at generation 810 and the model hasn't improved much. Most ants (except for ~6) first go to the right to avoid the obstacle, and then they travel to the upper-left corner while about 6-8 reach the food.

I hope it would work better with minor tweaks to calculating the loss and selecting new generations :) Good Luck
I agree. The project I'm working on hovers around 70% coverage. As far as I can tell, we'd likely loose productivity pushing for any better coverage.

We get some bugs/issues that could be identified by better coverage, but most of our "bugs" stem from real world issues or differing views on functionality. Getting that right takes a ton of effort that simply isn't worth it right now.
So is robbing old ladies...
> You're still confussing weather with climate and an atmospheric phenomenon with global warming through CO2

I don't think I am. Let me clarify my position; I see CO2 as a potential factor in climate change, though it's not clear if reducing anthropomorphic CO2 levels will have a positive (or enough of a positive) impact to justify it's opportunity costs in economy, freedom, etc.

Another factor that is rarely discussed is plant growth. As CO2 increases, plant growth increases, which would sequester CO2. Less solar output would reduce plant growth, as would pollution, conventional monoculture till petro-chemical agriculture, habitat loss/ecosystem collapse, among other factors.

I think we would get more bang for the buck if we focus on local/distributed initiatives such as regenerative polyculture agriculture, localized permaculture solutions, water/ground/air pollution, & embrace the complexities of ecosystems. Pesticide usage should be reduced in favor of using natural solutions (such as predators). Putting on the blinders to only legislate CO2 levels is a mistake, rife with unintended consequences & opportunity costs.

Local solutions requires localities, individuals, & nature to be empowered, opposed to a reliance on centralized entities & technology. Local/distributed mindsets accounts for the qualitative complexities of nature whilst centralized entities seek simplistic quantitative one-size-fits-all metrics to drive bureaucratic policy; which explains why a simplistic measurement (CO2) is an attractive boogie man to our climate issues.

Even our discussions are dumbed down due to the obsession over CO2 (a singular quantifiable "cause"), because the possibility space of both causes & solutions are constrained...
That's part of the deal of being a corporation. If you want pass-through taxation, that's what partnerships and LLCs are for. Of course, if you also want outside investors...

This is one of those instances where yes, of course it would be nice for you if you didn't have to give as much money to the government in taxes. But that's just not how it works.
The thing that's always bothered me about this argument is the translation between proof and code+underlying system. Bugs can still be introduced there. Certainly significantly fewer bugs in the final result, but I don't think I'd be confident in calling it proven 100% bug-free.
YC pushes against solo founders. Dropbox was a notable one (even though Drew Houston added a "co-founder" right about when they were accepted...)
On the other hand, maybe so much peer rejection means something... just like when we say that if some problem happens constantly for years to people it must mean the process should be blamed and not the people, if there are so, so, so many complaints it must mean something about them is probably true...

The fact is that Electron is a good platform for ONE application. Once everybody jumps in and makes their application with Electron, and all applications running in your machine are electron, then you as an user have a big problem, basically no battery life.

I wrote an incomplete PopcornTime clone with QML, I've also practiced by cloning the UI of some known apps such as Slack and Spotify, it was very pleasant and immensely saner in terms of resource usage of the machine. But alas, yes, you need to know C++, and that means you need to know about memory managenent and fine details of how things are done under the hood (although maybe that one is not a bad thing at all...)
I would have called Airbnb as soon as I found there was an issue and made them book me in somewhere else. You are paying a service fee to them for a reason.
A company decides to do business in China knowing that it means handing over all data on Chinese users to the Chinese government.

This company is:

1) Apple?

2) Google (project Dragonfly)?
He wins either way. He sold some of his WeWork stock, bought buildings with the proceeds, and then had WeWork sign leases with them. If WeWork folds, he still owns the buildings and can sign new tenants. Before it does, the faster it expands, the more often he can do this, and the more money he can make.

That's the conflict of interest. WeWork shareholders want WeWork to build a great business and eventually IPO, but it maybe better for him personally if WeWork simply grows as fast as possible at any cost by doing things like signing expensive leases it can't make the unit economics work for.
I'm not sure why there's so much Electron hate? Big and bloated, sure-ish? But my 2014 MacBook AIR with 8 GB Ram that I didn't pay much for seems to run several Electron apps just fine? And I don't care. Sure, sometimes I shut down WhatsApp and Slack when I'm going mobile to make sure I maximize my battery life. But I do the same thing with Chrome.

Electron does allow people to build projects quickly using simpler HTML/CSS/JavaScript technologies than prior-era desktop applications, and you get cross-platform for almost nothing.
Ten years ago evey respectable device had DLNA support, an agnostic way to browse and play all kinds of media content available on the local network. Sharing a song with a friend could be easily done by sending the whole song (duplicates were not an issue since well-formed MP3s usually included Musicbrainz UUIDs that the media players compared), or by simply linking to Youtube or Grooveshark.

DLNA is slowly going the way of RSS. It's too open of a standard for the current times. Google is already mounting an Embrace-Extend-Extinguish attack on it via the Chromecast protocol. I'm scared Bluetooth audio will be the next to be forgotten. Meanwhile, cloud music services are current trend, and it's not crazy to think they will follow the Nextflix-HBO-Disney steps and start creating walled gardens full of exclusive content.

So, which options do we have now? Users can surrender power and gain convenience by going with, say, Spotify. The app's slick, the multiple device support is awesome, and the social features, while nowhere near Audioscrobbler/Last.fm, are enough. Keep in mind Last.fm is more than 15 years old. 15 years without progress on the music social media front. Also, disappearing songs are a huge problem. A company that pulls a song from their catalog without notifying the user is borderline evil. I feel connected to music. It's almost like the company is deleting a memory from your brain, hoping you won't notice its absence.

Another option is to keep living in the 00s and maintain a home music library. You ensure no songs will disappear from your library without notice, which is good. The bad thing is you are more isolated. There's no easy way to access your library in other devices, there's no easy way to integrate a personal library with a cloud service, and there's no easy way to share your experiences with friends in the same way you can do it with Spotify.

What do I do then? I decided to go the Spotify way, while keeping a small "memories" library which contains the more obscure songs, plus the ones I want to keep with me forever. I'm wary, though. The day Spotify decides to become more profitable, it will be over. Half the features will be gone, and we'll have to start all over again in a worse position than before, because our hardware will be less open than it is now.
>And while there are homeless people in America, most sleep in shelters.

You'd be surprised.

https://www.npr.org/2012/12/06/166666265/why-some-homeless-c...
I did AirBnB with a group. The place didn't had the beds advertised (I don't count defective inflatable mattress as bed) only 4 forks and 3 knives, the swimming pool was closed for 3 a months planned maintenance. The place had good ratings but from what I understood, the guy operating it had left and the new one was lost.
To be fair, AirBnB gave me a $30 coupon. Thanks but I'm not using that one.
I'm not clear how that would work. How does NYT enabling ad exchanges enable advertisers to target NYT readers or the NYT website?
LAPD deploys controversial drone for the first time
Freaky Spinning Ice Circle in Maine
There are a number of structural things you can do to push back on the long-run capture of parties and therefore the political process. None of them play super well with party-list proportional representation, but here's what people should be thinking about, especially in places with party primaries:

- Require party primaries to be as open and competitive as general elections. This is the traditional American approach, and for all of its own the failure modes that we've seen since 2013, you can't say that the problem has been beigeness enforced by party elites. Ask Eric Cantor, Jeb Bush, and Joe Crowley about that.

- Replace party primaries for single-member districts altogether, with open primaries with STV or approval voting. That gives even more room for policy entrepreneurs whose appeal may cut across existing party power bases.

- Make heavier use of Sortition and/or policy juries, delegating decisions to randomly-selected deliberative bodies. That gives you lots of democratic legitimacy in a way that's very hard to capture. Tellingly, this approach is already used for the State's most dangerous powers around criminal punishment.
Okay. Again, you're highlighting an is-ought problem. I'm not saying the problem doesn't exist. I'm saying we can't just "build a society in which people don't have to choose between losing their livelihood and being a moral hazard."

It is at the very least extremely nontrivial and not at all straightforward, even if everyone agrees it's not ideal. I'm not asking you to "cry about the deals of immoral industries" - rather as a pragmatist, I'm asking you to consider that unless we have a concrete way forward, suggesting to kill the industry is not productive.

Categorically speaking, advertising as a problem has several notable properties:

1. Reasonable people can disagree about whether it is harmful (contrast with e.g. murder),

2. Reasonable people can disagree about how harmful it is (contrast with e.g. financial fraud),

3. It enables a significant portion (perhaps the majority?) of growth in the tech sector, which itself has empowered the lion's share of economic growth in the past decade,

4. There are few opportunities even within tech which will both pay comparably and which are not either directly or indirectly funded by advertising profits. Of those opportunities, some (such as fintech) are similarly disagreeable to another subset of the population.

The state of the world we live in is such that problems with these characteristics cannot be realistically solved by reducing or taking away the livelihoods of people who enable the problems to exist. I'm not telling you to not care about the problem. I'm also not telling you it can't be fixed. But I am telling you that you can't be so cavalier about what solving the problem entails if you actually want it to change.
I wholeheartedly support the claim that art cannot exist in a vacuum - I've ranted plenty of times about the whole notion of "autonomous" art (an invention of modernism), being problematic for that very reason.

But I disagree with idea that suffering for art is just "a corollary" to that. That would ignore that The Suffering Artist is an age old trope with a long history of examples of (IMO misplaced) hero-worshiping, which has nothing to do with this "complacent vacuum".

Yes, art (or science or tech or social change or whatever) is always created within a certain context, and this context may have obstacles that need to be overcome to create said art. Sometimes those obstacles involve suffering, and not everyone is willing to pay that price.

There is a romantic notion of believing in something greater than yourself and suffering for it, and sometimes that is true: Snowden was willing to suffer to get the truth out, and without it we wouldn't have known what we know now.

But knowing the context and the price of what you want to do, and paying it willingly does not imply that great art (any kind of "greatness") requires suffering, or worse: that an artwork becomes better if the artist suffered for it. That's an utterly banal reversal of causality.
Doug Demuro on his youtube channel goes into some detail about why the old Supra was so popular. Basically it was way overbuilt allowing for massivly increasing it's abilities (and the first Fast/Furious movie).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwKAS9vQq90&t=1186s
As someone used to osm, you can show me my home town on Google maps and I won't recognize it anymore. There is so little detail on the map, it might as well be blank. Osm is fine, it's you who has only trained yourself in using Google maps.
Quote "At every key point, state officials made decisions that undercut taxpayers and helped the companies that market video gambling"

And that is one reason why I left Chicago. Both city and state are corrupt. I remember receiving an automated ticket for running a stoplight on a date when I wasn't even in Chicago.
I haven't seen a source clearly saying that Amazon had been using MongoDB - I thought the DocumentDB release last week was the first MongoDB product they offered?

EDIT: and searching HN comments, there's multiple people claiming AGPL is entirely banned inside Amazon too
Ask HN: Who is the most positive impactful person you know?
I help out with a positive news podcast at my high school and we're looking to interview people that have made a positive impact! We've currently interviewed people like Austen Allred and TurboVote.

You can find the podcast here, https://anchor.fm/somethinggoodhappened

Please give interview suggestions!
judging by the atrocious management of remote history I've seen at workplaces, "making work presentable" is pretty far down the line of priorities
That's a good idea. However, I've tried my rocket blower. It generates insufficient air pressure to remove detritus trapped under the keys.
Which phone? If you're willing to unlock the bootloader and flash a custom OS load, you could probably get 8 or at least 7.
This kind of conflict indeed looks sketchy, and I don't think Neumann should do it, but the risk and opportunity still run both ways.

Neumann is assuming the capital risk. Does WeWork and its investors (including Neumann!) want these assets and associated liabilities on its books? Probably not. Is Neumann making money from this transaction long term? No way to tell; he himself probably doesn't even know if these deals are profitable for him now.

What he is definitely doing is increasing his levered bet on WeWork, which could be good or bad for WeWork, and good or bad for him, depending on how everything turns out.
Partly, yes. Or, I'll be working on a task overall, and have to touch multiple files in the process. Then when I'm ready to commit, I review all the modified files on disk, and look for ways to break those down into smaller discrete logical changes. I prefer to avoid "big bang" commits as much as possible, because smaller individual commits are easier to inspect, easier to back out if necessary, and provide a better "story" when inspecting a file's history sometime down the road.
Easier said than done if you're worrying about it anyways, which I suspected OP might do.
I don’t believe it broke out the earnings cases, but they were significant enough to feature in the article (even in the subtitle, which you can see). No one claimed the opening example in the article was speaking directly to your point. I only did a simple google search about it because you offered no evidence to support your claim, and the results I got suggest to me that it is entirely possible to face shareholder suits if you retreat from a market rather than staying and continuing to make profits. I’m not interested enough in the topic to research it any further.

I think I disagree with you a little even regarding false statements suits, though: Just as a thought experiment: let’s say you lose millions in company X stock because they pull out of a market you think they should have stayed in. I would think going through the company’s public statements and claiming that you were mislead about their commitment to said market would be a decent angle from which to attack them. But that’s just thinking out loud, and I am no lawyer.
Yes, you can. You have obligations if you distribute it.
Even the AGPL simply gives you obligations.

There have been arguments about whether the AGPL is discriminatory, and those have been mostly waved away (wrongly, i think, but c'est la vie).

In that vein, SSPL is arguably a free license. It simply changes when obligations to distribute source occur.

Compare to the the commons clause, which is not a free license - it says you have no right to sell the software as a service at all.
Notably, this hacker culture has become more diluted over time after the takeover by KPN. But some of it is still there.
> work together

Say like, combining their inventory into one source (say a supply side platform) and then offer that inventory to buy (say via an exchange).
Show HN: Highly Questionable, a monadish TS/JS lib for paranoid programmers
What books can I use to learn CISO?
What books can I use to learn CISO?
No, they have to say that it's illegal by using their flyswatter.

However, that makes you safe anyway :P
Yeah, I remember liking the auto-currying, that makes sense it has a downside here.
Can I become associate professor/professor by self-learning?
Can I become associate professor/professor by self-learning?
Also one could remove the UBI part already covered by pensions -- e.g. the millions of government employees getting X pension money, can get (X - UBI) + UBI (so the same as they already get).