skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
From the video you linked, it seems like the primary argument from the start against breaking them up is:

* We can't because they made their services so they can't be broken

and

* They're smarter than the regulators so its no use trying.

I feel like both of those are cop-outs, and to be unchallenged makes me wonder if the two talking have a vested interest in keeping the bigs together (one as a marketing professor and the other being an equity researcher... it seems like they're not ones to push too hard against the status quo).

Point 1 seems silly - if the whole business is structured in such a way to be anti-trust proof, doesn't that mean the management is so worried about a real possibility of being broken up that they've been working to shield it? "Well they've centralized their revenue generation so there's no way to take it apart"? It seems incredibly possible to do so.

Point 2 is tactical - and that can change at any time. With the generational shift starting to happen in politics, the argument that representatives and senators don't understand the business or their products will cease to be true. I'm sure there's plenty of people in the justice department that understand it well enough as well.
OneSignal is hiring Full Stack Engineers to build the future of marketing
While you say you are only talking about “the machine” it’s rather pointless. Fine, my hair is not sentient either again it’s not an argument.

Strong AI is a system not a machine. The person using a lookup table is just a portion of the system and thus can’t be used to limit the entire system.

Twins don’t nessisarily understand the same languages based on their training. Referring to the Human in “the room” as the machine following specific instructions is the same as saying human DNA don’t understand English. It’s might be true, but it’s definitely irrelevant.

Machine code is binary data used by computers that ideally maps 1:1 with ASM. A human can know ASM and with the aid of a computer produce, read, edit, etc Machine code they don’t directly understand. In effect they are part of a system that understands something that they themselves don’t.

Thus “the Chinese Room” has an inescapable though easily missed failure in logic. Saying the machine is nor the room, seems like an unreasonable objection. But, talking about the machine it’s just as relevant as saying people without exposure don’t know specific languages.

PS: Starting with a glass of water you can separate it into smaller places up to a point. But in the end water is H20, if you just look at the H that’s not water because you reached the point where subdivision results in a different substance. Saying H is not water thus water does not exist is a silly argument.
A more general approach to this is something like https://bors.tech/ where each merge is explicitly tested before hitting the main branch. Branches then don't need to be manually rebased, but there's still much reduced risk of failures due to not merging (if tests aren't even run on the potential merge commit), or "merge skew" (if they are, but not every time the target branch is updated, like Travis CI, etc., do by default).
This is a textbook example of a bikeshed: http://bikeshed.com

Nobody is calling true or false in a script with options/arguments. Nobody hss ever seen true/false fail because they crashed in setlocale. Nobody's highest, second-highest, or 1000th-highest risk to their code is the performance of their true/false implementation.

But it's a really easy thing to have opinions about. You use UNIX for one week and suddenly you're exactly as qualified as Dennis Ritchie to have opinions on the matter.
I think the consensus is that single-sex schools don't work for everyone but in a broad sense (and somewhat counterintuitively to me) work better for a larger percentage of boys than the percentage of girls. Of course these are broad conclusions; those "success" percentages may be small (I haven't followed this work closely). Anecdoctally it was great for me while my sister considered it disastrous for herself.

Despite being happy with my single sex education, I'm really glad that scouting is finally been desegregated in the US as I noticed in scouting in Palo Alto that the boy scouts had much better opportunities than the Girl Scouts did. And I can be glad even though I did notice my son benefited from having a section of his life that was male-only. That will probably still be possible.
Very enjoyable, fun simple game. Would like it to show your the highest level you have solved so far. eg. Highest score: easy level 4
Does this mean that putting #!/bin/sh at the head of scripts actually slows them down (assuming you are running from an sh like shell)?
> You mean the same ancient humans that forced their slaves to become gladiators

I was thinking more along the lines of hunters and gatherers. Ancient Humans, not Ancient Romans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladiator

I know you can find loads of cruel things elsewhere, too. Can you find them before cities?

And even for Ancient Romans I wouldn't be so sure, they kinda prided themselves in arguing coherently. Even just changing the subject like that, whether from genocide or not, doesn't strike me as something the super legalistic and literal Romans would have been so prone to do. And at any rate, they're much, much closer to us than to ancient humans.

> so that their populations could fill their lust for blood

There is no such thing as an inherent lust for blood. This kinda sounds like Freud's drive to death and all that.

> the same ancient humans that would capture religious minorities, cover them in oil, and line them up along the roads to burn

Napalm.. Agent Orange.. depleted uranium.. not even to punish for something they considered sacrilege, but just to get rid of people.

> Humans both ancient and modern are not peaceful creatures

I'm not talking about peaceful, I'm talking about sadism and cruelty and greed for their own sake, and about being numbed to it. If you say humans have a lust for blood, that doesn't convince me at all, but it's proof positive that in 2019 (not still, since hundreds of thousands of years, but by now, since a few ten thousand maybe) we live in a world where that claim goes mostly uncontested.

In my books, very sick people have a lust for blood because they need to destroy persons, because they haven't developed into a person. Other people probably have stuff like, for example, a desire for vengeance that gets created alongside the crime to be avenged, or a strong desire to push back when they are threatened, which gets created when they are threatened, but doesn't exist before or after. But just some kind of lingering dark thing that needs to be fed, some spooky "lust for blood"? I doubt you can find that without a form of abuse being somewhere in the equation, systematic or otherwise.

> [Humans] have been genetically programmed through hunting behavior: cooperation and sharing. Cooperation between members of the same band was a practical necessity for most hunting societies; so was the sharing of food. Since meat is perishable in most climates except that of the Arctic, it could not be preserved. Luck in hunting was not equally divided among all hunters; hence the practical outcome was that those who had luck today would share their food with those who would be lucky tomorrow. Assuming hunting behavior led to genetic changes, the conclusion would be that modern man has an innate impulse for cooperation and sharing, rather than for killing and cruelty.

-- Erich Fromm, "The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness"
That does seem capricious. At the same time, I’m not sure how old your daughter is, but it might be better that she’s not performing for an audience when she plays with her toys. I’m not convinced that sort of thing is healthy for a child’s development.
Yes that what I meant.

I was intending it as an rhetorical question.

Agreed personal autonomy, and personal responsibility are the interesting questions, not really where the comment I was responding was leading though.
I only trust California Olive Oil Council products.
https://www.cooc.com/

I don't even trust the IOC process, or store reputation. It either has the COOC seal and the testing that backs it, or it doesn't. Pretty binary and therefore simple.
Unlike greenhouse gasses, it matters a lot what type of 'AI' you mean. But until we reshape society to be ready for it, yes, it would probably be a very good idea to forbid or heavily regulate/limit the use of human-level or above general AI.
I know these types of comments are frowned upon on HN, but this made me LOL. Nicely done.
GOV.UK Service Manual: Collecting personal information from users
So we are supposed to dismiss dysons conclusions because he’s a genius? That is the most astounding contortion of logic I have ever seen. If you disagree with him, then go find out the logic he uses to justify his conclusions and discuss that.
The only arguments I hear against the linear history model are:

1. A branching history allows use of git bisect to identify where breaking bugs were introduced.
2. An aesthetic argument to the effect of: it's awesome to have that branching history to explore, to see alternatives and choices. A linear history is a recitation; a branching history is a multiverse.

I don't find either convincing. 2 is a personal preference, but seriously, who has time to go wandering through commit histories looking for precious gems?

1 seems like a more valid argument, but against it: who actually uses git bisect? In both essays I've reading arguing for it, they cite "once I used it to find a really gnarly bug". It doesn't seem like a useful everyday tool, or am I missing a larger set of use cases for it? Is git bisect happening a lot more than it seems to be?
If she's under 13, it's likely that's the reason.

Even if you're paying for G Suite, you can't have someone under 13. There is a special, limited type of Google account for sub-13 kids: https://support.google.com/families/answer/7103338
I think if that were the case they'd be pushing for bio-degradable butts and also coming up with some solution to throw-away vape cartridges like Juul pods which I see on the ground outside every gas station.
Very good points, agree with it.

However - I don't think this is about 'ego' or even 'humility' - I think those are not the right words.

It's a lack of contextual understanding both in 'self awareness' and also the interviewers plight.

I think the premise can be taught.

Also, I think interviews can be structured to find qualities independant of background.

+ Questions that don't measure a person's ability to 'memorize algorithms' are a good start.

+ Allowing devs to pick their language of expression, i.e. sometimes they are more comfortable in one lang than another.

+ Don't get syntax/code structure confused with the abstract problem if that's what one is going for. Google has a nice interview example [1]

+ Open ended questions with many possible turns allow for a 'good' thinker to just go a lot further, and be more impressive while at the same time allowing junior devs to still walk through and complete something. The Google example is again good here.

+ Time/on the spot - one of the worst issues. Personally I'm about 50/50. Sometimes 'in the flow' sometimes 'not', but surely just given a little bit fo time, I'd be fine on most things. For this reason, giving interviewees an intro to the problems, and giving them as much time as they want to think about them before the interview starts, might be worthwhile as well. 'Let us know when you want to go over a solution'. This could work well for pedantic things such as 'here's some code, find some bugs' or 'how would you structure this differently' etc..

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKu_SEDAykw
Careful: If you go by "longstanding behavior" instead of standards, you quickly get to the point where you have to ask yourself the question which longstanding behavior you want to honor for "consistency". This may not universally be true, but in the case of the shell(s) and everything that surrounds it, I'm pretty sure it is.

Shells are pretty much the wild west out there. I wouldn't be too surprised if some AIX shell variant or something came along and consistently bails out with an error when any argument is given to 'true', including --version. It might not be a common shell variant for you, but it might for other people. Hence, standards.

I'm not really arguing in favor of --help and --version to 'true'. I just don't see much of a problem with it.
Here is a step in that direction: https://github.com/tldr-pages/tldr
Well, show me a "slack" client that Iranian hackers can use (yes, they are really useful).

> How can you people not see

History, I guess? Any sort of online communication tool that requires a master isn't one; it's simply contributing to a network effect that needs to be monetised. That it exchanges messages is almost coincidental.
It seems like the argument is for large-scale IP protection reform. What one could do there is create an actual new class of asset in "data" with different rules so that traditional asset law doesn't apply.
Those problems listed in your 3rd paragraph would not be issues of concern at all.

Nobody wants to take the bus. It doesn't run 24x7. It doesn't go direct, door to door. At the beginning and end of the trip, nobody wants to walk 7 minutes in unpredictable weather while lugging a bunch of stuff. Nobody wants to endure a slow trip, stopping every couple blocks, with a couple bus changes that take a half hour each. Before you get your groceries home, either your ice cream melts or your hot chicken gets cold. You just wouldn't do that. You'd hop in your car, go a couple miles without any traffic, and use the free parking.

Heroin addicts aren't normally a problem in reasonable non-city areas. Yes, you could choose to live in the worst neighborhood, maybe renting for $200/month, but that isn't normal for a "software-engineering" person. More likely you'd be in a neighborhood where calling the cops about a suspicious person would get the cops there in a couple minutes, and/or you'd be in a place where burglars get shot at with full approval of the state legislature.
That is, considering that your shell interpreter is bug free.
> Currently shell code is limited to one language. If you have bash, you can only do bash. But we could imagine a shell that understands webassembly, and hence we can use it with many languages. We could even imagine tools to inline webassembly generation, so that you can code directly in your favorite language in the shell, and it gets transparently compiled and executed.

We might even compile directly to native code, nay, automatically identify the format and pass it to the appropriate interpreter, and then provide an interface to call arbitrary modules that conform to a particular interface―

... and then expose it as a library function so the shell can use it, let's call it execve().
True - you were hoping for advice in the construction of rules that everyone would ignore. (A bit masochistic.)
This is pretty smart. When I'm making one-off scripts I use the interactive flag

python -i script.py

I've programmed Python for years and never knew this. I'm not sure how well this handles errors. Tab complete works, only thing that is missing is needing to wrap help(<func>) to see signatures. I'm enjoying the standard lib interpreter.
> Tarbell’s 19-part exposé on Rockefeller’s Standard Oil would mark a turning point in setting public sentiment against the trusts.

Seems modern tech monopolies have it much better, with far more control over the information the public sees and can share with each other. Particularly when they start buying up newspapers. Whatever the practicalities of going against them in this way, that's going to cause complications.
I don't know why so many commentators are taking a polar stance.

I sometimes hang out with people from my native country; that doesn't mean I'm unhappy with the USA or Americans born here. Some things still strike me as weird, and some things I do strike others as weird so it's occasionally nice to be immersed in a group of people who understand that.

And I come from an English-speaking country and am treated like a white male (not true for me as a kid before I came here). I think this phenomenon of sometimes stepping into a "subset community" would be far more useful for folks who don't fit that dominant model.
Reseachers identify hackers who lifted 90GB in data
Well worth reading. This was one of the major sources that helped me learn SMT, and I now have some projects in the area (yet another superoptimizer).

Z3 has been very good as an 'external brain' for all sorts of problems.
It's ActivityPub, not OStatus!
There's an infamous story at my shop. Twenty-some years ago, we used a software tool that was an important part of our mission, and it only ran on Silicon Graphics boxes. We needed to buy a new SGI machine, and SGI had started shipping all of their machines with built in monitor cameras, the first company to do so.

Digital cameras were at that time strictly prohibited from even being on the premises.

So my friend goes ahead and buys the machine he needs, on the assumption that if he doesn't everybody is out of a job, and he can always disable the camera. The machine arrives, he sets it up, and calls security asking for whatever official process they use for disabling webcams. Epoxying over the lens or something, was what he figured.

At first they are very confused. It's like they can't parse the words he is telling them. It's as if he was trying to tell them there were six legged iguanas with Russian flag patches on their backs running around the server room.

So he finally gets them to acknowledge that he is, in fact, speaking English in sentences that adhere to the rules of grammar, at which point they have to take his question seriously.

So they ask: “did you procure these computers through <our base's> government procurement office.” To which he says, yes, of course, there's no other way to do it.

They think for a minute and reply: “by policy, you cannot purchase a digital camera through the procurement office. Therefore, your computers do not have digital cameras in them.”
The documentary, "The Art of the Steal", which discusses the move of the art, did not portray the people behind the move in a very flattering light. My recollection is that some called it the biggest art heist of all time.
Maybe Google should have put that in the explanation instead of not giving a reason.
> The only exception I think is seatbelts since it's illegal to drive a car without wearing one in all but one state.

I know in Arizona if the car didn't originally come with seatbelts then you don't have to install them. Used to have a '53 Dodge that didn't have them and it was fine -- kind of freaked out my sister though...
Exactly, we prefer that too. But we haven't found a way to enforce that on GitHub. Is there builtin precommit hooks for that on Gitlab?
Then you'd think it would be easy for Google to have said that instead of giving him no reason beyond "yep it's legit"
git bisect is actually easier to use with a linear commit history. And it is useful; I've root-caused regressions with it multiple times. So I think this is actually an argument in favor of linear commit history.
Ok we know that ultra-capacitors carry about 10x less energy/kg than current li-ion batteries.

This means they have limited use in small consumer cars, other than maybe helping the brakes or conditioning power.
What they lack in weight, they make up in charge/discharge times.

Being that a truck weighs multiple times more than a sedan, it's batteries are unlikely to absorb regen braking. So a small capacitor bank makes sense. A large capacitor bank would be useful if the truck was using overhead charging cables for a small section of the road. Or if a public transport bus was quickly charging between every few stations, it could then function all day.

The large weight of the capacitor bank isn't a problem if it's used in a charging station, where 3-phase 400+ volt power may not be available. This means that any level 1,2 charger can be upgraded to a level 3 without needing to dig any trenches, further improving the user experience of the car owner and reducing range anxiety to a minimum.
On Windows I've never put anything in C:/, yet I have a shitload of install.res.xxxx.dll files, shitload of eula.xxxx.txt files, globdata.ini, vcredist.bmp, install.ini, VC_RED.msi. In my home folder I've .QtWebEngineProcess folder (never installed qt), .mongorc.js (which is empty), .v8flags.xxxx.json, .dbshell, and so on and so on. I'm not delving into insanity which is /Program Data, Windows/Temp, or [user]/AppData
That's assuming they travel the same speed.

Because Lada 4x4 has a much higher top speed it is has the potential for much more serious accidents.
Why can't you use bisect on linear histories?

git bisect bad on the bad commit, git bisect good on the good commit, and as long as there is an unbroken path in the graph from bad to good, you should be able to do a binary search.
For what it’s worth I use git bisect at least once a month. I tend to use it when fixing bugs in code I’m less familiar with, and the fastest way to track it down is bisect.
Asking the real questions here, I'm seriously interested in knowing the staff breakdown by role.
eslint is written in JS, and runs over codebases far larger than people are likely to have in terms of stylesheets and runs fine. Do you have evidence that this tool will not run in under a second on a single file, or within an acceptable timeframe over a project?

As to Atom, I didn't care for it... VS Code is a better example of what CAN be done with electron in terms of decent performance. Yeah, it's slower to load than sublime or notepad, but I typically open against a project directory and leave it open for a considerable time.
Can't tell whether this is sarcasm or not. Perhaps the expectation is that those things will be acquired naturally; certainly I was immersed in both within two weeks of arriving at MIT. (Admittedly that was in the latter half of the Carter administration; things may be different these days.)
This circles back to the original point of the article about consumer welfare as a top priority when it comes to anti-trust.

Yes, Slack no doubt provides some value by easing access to some technology for people who previously could not access it, but if this comes at the cost of deep innovation and hard performance, it will compound long term issues.

This seems to be a general theme of the web. User acquisition and comfort is placed above all else, while performance and structural innovation are neglected.

If aerospace engineers would build planes the way we build webapps the planes would double in size and fuel consumption every five years. If those engineers were employed by a web startup we would tell them not to worry as long as the user numbers grow and the seats are comfortable.

when it comes to anti-trust, and evaluating technology in general, we need to be a lot more critical of consumer welfare as a meaningful measure. Yes. 'dropbox guy' was wrong when the metric is collected startup money and user convenience. Will he have been wrong in 30 years when we evaluate what the web is and what it could have been if it was built with more rigor?
But he also has YouTube Premium family. Family members are often sub 13.
Having spent time in all the US cities on this list, I feel that Seattle should be ranked much higher.