skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I live in a world [...]

> My world [...]

> There's plenty of things you can do in Japan you can't do other places because [...]

That’s you. How about that bubble... I guess in “your world” there are no locks on cars and houses. No need you say, right?

But the OP was talking about Montreal. And my answer applies basically to all western world. It’s literally in the law of most of those countries and it makes sense. You don’t need to agree with it but rejecting my explanation will not make it any less accurate and true to the reality of far more than “my bubble”.

P.S. If you don’t want to let the thieves/terrorists in just lock the doors like I suggested.
I think arandr0x has captured the reason for the poor replies -- people aren't clear on what it is you're really after.

If you're committed to work that's fundamentally just you working alone, there's probably not as much value in my suggestion as I'd hoped.

Even so, perhaps finding some way of turning your planned extra-work-day-per-week into a formal commitment, would help.
I agree that this looks a bit early, but it also seems like a genuinely useful innovation if it can be pulled off.

It reminds me a lot of the first MacBook Airs that sold to a niche market at a premium for a few years until the technology had advanced to the point that they could target a mainstream price point, at which point they became exceedingly popular.

I could easily see the same thing happening here.
I don't think of RDS as zero-maintenance, but I'll agree it's probably less. You get different and arguably more complex problems under load with things like EBS performance. I'd rather have local disks which are simple for me to understand and debug.

Basically, with his skillset, maybe it makes sense. With my skillset I'd rather have the hassles with the dedicated setup.
> On the other hand, for centuries it's been recognized that the best antidote to "bad speech" isn't censorship, it's more speech. Don't ban, convince.

The problem with that here is that the medical industry is actually wrong. They want to censor speech because they are the bad science, and people are figuring it out. If they were right, then yes, "more speech" would be a great strategy.
The list of things that are true is orders of magnitude smaller than the list of things that appear true. Randomly generating plausible-looking bullshit is a thing we can do now, but ascertaining the validity of a factual statement is tantamount to solving the AGI problem.
What if you mow it short regularly?

We would have the same mess if we didn't mow. Things grow like crazy for six months here
Swim diapers don't look like conventional diapers; they look pretty close to normal swim briefs (and in some cases are worn under other swimwear and are pretty unnoticeable.) They are a solids barrier, not filled with absorbent material like conventional diapers.

They also, contrary to GP, are not at all intended to control urine release, only feces.
Technically CAN-SPAM does not require an unsubscribe link. It requires providing instructions to be removed. That could be using the text, "reply back with the word 'unsubscribe'". We put the burden of legal compliance on our users, and the tradeoff is complete control over your message content.
A basic linter does not resolve the semantic question. The linter could be satisfied by changing the code syntax given the rule to always include curly brackets after an if to:

if (something) {}; { do_something(); }

But, the question is the empty bracket correct or should the contents of the subsequent scope be cut into the scope of the if bracket or copied into it or should the if condition be removed altogether? Code styles do not change the intent and always requiring {} after an if is unnecessary for single statements given the intent is correct:

if (side_effect()); else { do_something(); }

Alternative syntax styles for the same semantics do not clarify the intent of a program.
It composes, personalizes, and "clicks" the send button. Google/gmail actually sends the email.
Well yes, those instances would be companies that aren't on the train quite yet of understanding what a toxic worker actually is.

Which is the whole point of these sorts of studies: education

In areas where "toxic working" is ID'd as the risk it really is (i.e. this study is old, old news), it's never a term thrown around as a political term like you're concerned about. It's a specifically cancerous, horrible way of working that's seriously easy to identify. It's like trying to play politics with the term "water leaking" to describe anything other than water leaking.
All these new transforming devices remind me of my old Nokia N90. Due to their initial cost, way too few people had one and the ecosystem was lacking.

This one is way too expensive for me but I really appreciate the form factor and the technology innovation surrounding it. I'd love to see someone like JerryRigEverything [1] stress test and disassemble it.

I wonder how much Xiaomi's foldable equivalent will cost, which has no visible hinges.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/user/JerryRigEverything/videos
I am curious about what that Google-driven deadline might be. Care to elaborate a bit?
Thank you for pointing that out. We will make this clearer with a pricing section. Here is the pricing model:

Avo is $15 per seat per month for schema documentation and codegen.
Or even simpler: the assumption that I/we are right (we aren't always).

For one it isn't true:

I've read my fair share of vistory.

I'm provably smart, and yet one of the things I'm most happy with when it comes to my time on HN is my ability to recognize when I'm wromg and change my opinion.

Also I think it makes me more interesting to discuss with.

PS: not saying anyone should belive people at work who honestly believe in chemtrails.
But eg sardines should not contain much of any heavy metal? Salmon is also pretty low in mercury.
Brb, taking out a second mortgage.
this was a completely useless run of the mill red scare piece whose only real argument is "things can only get better slowly you squirmy discontents, I have tenure so don't rock the boat"
There are people with degrees who can't code. I'd prefer we don't hire them, so we ask for coding.
I'm beginning to notice a trend with these kind of organizational pop psychology pieces. There is usually (especially in this piece) a bias towards overvaluing the risk contribution of an individual and a devaluing of the risk contribution and ownership of the leadership structure.

This piece is, to borrow a term, "not even wrong." There's no proof that "toxic workers" are more productive. By all accounts, toxic workers come in all shapes and sizes -- and what is a toxic worker, really? Is it someone who is physically and psychologically harmful to everyone in their lives and should probably seek rehabilitation before being reintroduced to society? Okay, that's one thing.

Is it someone who is not being managed properly, pushed into the wrong role, not given the right tools to do their job? Are they stuck in a dysfunctional culture run by sycophants, idiots and bullies? Are they unintentionally paving a road to hell with the best of intentions and the worst of consequences?

What I'm trying to get at here is the necessity of supervision. Organizations have command structures and hierarchies, whether implicit or explicit. The risks and consequences of those structures ultimately lies with management and leadership -- after all, it's with them that the true agency lies!

If it's not the job of management and leadership to train, manage out or fire misfits within the organization, what exactly is their job? After all, it's not individual contribution. There's sales, marketing, fundraising -- but except for the last one (and even that's a stretch), these are all team efforts. You maximize output from your team by removing unnecessary friction. If that can't happen passively, active changes need to be made.

Of course, such a brain-dead thinkpiece never couches with such responsibility or collectivist realities. They're comforting kernels of individualist tactics, sold to give the illusion of control. They're as attractive as a trendy new diet built on poor foundations, but about as effective: that is to say, not at all.

Nothing can kill a company as quickly as poor leadership. As a company gets larger, logistics rears its ugly head. Pragmatic structuring can mitigate that, and good leadership can bring about directional change towards that. But, nothing can stop bad leadership until it wants to improve.
"A map of the world that does not include Utopia is not worth even glancing at, for it leaves out the one country at which Humanity is always landing. And when Humanity lands there, it looks out, and, seeing a better country, sets sail. Progress is the realisation of Utopias." ― Oscar Wilde

"It is our utopias that make the world tolerable to us: the cities and mansions that people dream of are those in which they finally live." - Lewis Mumford

The sentiment is true if Utopia is persued at a mass level, but what we need are more attempts and experiments at small utopias.
As a recreational cyclist, I wouldn't like dedicated cycle lanes that had a too-low (and enforced) speed limit, for example.
I'm sure he's happy to have made $115k in a month and he doesn't really care about anything else.
I put it more bluntly, the Smart People who have all the solutions greatly overestimate their own intelligence, to the detriment of the victims of their hubris. This is by and large independent of political leanings.
I want a phone that I can read books on, and spend quality time with, rather than reading crappy stuff like Twitter. I fully expect to buy a foldable (not sure which one) and would easily pay $2500+ for it.

(It's not like I can buy laptops any more, since those are all garbage even when I pay $4000 for a supposedly high-end system, so I certainly have spare device money laying around!)
the only purpose of this article is to shut off the possibility of an alternative to the status quo.
Not sure your post deserves to be taken seriously as it seems sarcastic/arrogant and incredibly pedantic, but I will assume that's my own emotional response and try to distance myself from that knee-jerk reaction.

IMHO, most people live on autopilot with some sense of ignoring the reality of death. I think this decision we often tend to label as "feeling we are invincible". There's some underlying feeling that death is so far off that it almost doesn't seem real to us. Yes, intellectually, in a cold, logical sense the fact that we die is known to the majority of humanity. But I think that is irrelevant to the post to which you replied.

By total awareness of impending death, I believe the parent post was clearly implying that the author has had the gravity of the reality of death thrust upon them and made real to them in a way that few of us experience or choose to dwell on.

Once you are aware your time alive has been essentially quantified- in much more stark terms than "eventually", especially when the time remaining is rather short- I believe this is likely a unique psychological/emotional experience, one that is difficult to understand without ones self being put in that position.
Naming the property as a suit defendent seems like pure legal sophistry. The whole civil forfeiture scheme should run afoul of the the 4th amendment against unreasonable search and seizure.

Originally, they had the phrase "life, liberty, and property", if I recall, but "happiness" sounded more poetic or something in the Declaration of Independence. They definitely had protection of property from the government in mind when writing the Constitution.
Yes, but not due to instruction decode costs, which is really all this article is talking about.

The real heat comes from actually doing the work, not decoding what work to do.
I agree with most of this. Some ways to save money are

1) Switch to the newest instance families

2) Save up the cash then reserve your instances.

3) Don't bother with the provisioned iops volume type, just use GP2 volumes large enough to give you the baseline IOPS you need

4) In general you have more block storage and snapshots than I'd expect, maybe that can be cut back?
Going off topic, but did you use a password generator to create your username or something? Or does it have a meaning?
>> But, who is we in this case? And what specifically are some things and how narrowly are they defined?

> We is you, me, and society at large.

But that is not who would be passing judgment in this brave new world of customer service reps and AI. Do we just ban everything mildly controversial?

> Expertise matters and the opinions of experts matter much more than a nonexpert’s opinion.

Are you a qualified, cited expert in this area that you are holding forth on?

> If a very large majority of the people who study an area of science agree on a conclusion in that area then it’s more likely they are right than someone who has no expertise in that area.

There is some room for intelligent debate in nearly any 'consensus' opinion. Some percentage of even experts nearly always disagree with the consensus, and consensus has often been proven wrong. If society went along with the expert scientific opinion concerning eugenics, for example, many of us might not even be alive today.

> Non experts deciding for themselves what is right/wrong is a recipe for disaster. Peoples’ intuition is usually wrong without a lot of experience to back it up.

Non-experts deciding for themselves what is right/wrong is exactly how the world has existed for thousands of years. You seem to be saying that the answer is to just shut down this debate if it occurs among the great unwashed.

> It’s why we don’t let just anyone practice medicine or structural engineering. Expertise matters and the opinions of experts matter much more than a nonexpert’s opinion.

And, yet, we do. In most free jurisdictions, you are free to practice medicine on yourself or do design your own structure or home.
There's a name for what you're doing. It's called "cherry picking". And also there's a name for the act of pulling something out of context to support an arbitrary point.

Let it be said that I'm not actually a Go but a C programmer, and there might be about 1 legitimate use of this syntactic construct per few thousand lines in my code (you are free to checkout my language project from github and verify my claim). It's not that I don't know the construct, but more that most experiments with it end up being reverted again to the longer form, to preserve the rhyme and rhythm of my code.

I won't take sides, but I guess their idea was that like so many other features, this little syntactic sugar construct does not carry its own weight.

> I read the slides, but didn't hear the talk

You absolutely should hear it! The slides probably do not contain actual experience reports, opinions, and arguments.

> the golang code bases I worked with would be quite a bit shorter in a supposedly verbose language like Java

that's hard to believe. Any code samples for illustration? (I invite you to cherry pick!).
You are exploiting your workers then, good job you capitalist bastard.
Emoji License Plates Will Soon Be Available in Queensland, Australia
> Being hit how? What type of accidents are more likely to happen?

95% of bicycle deaths are a result of motor-vehicle bike collision, and the vast majority of collisions are between the front of the motor vehicle and a bicycle.[0]

> there will still be bike-bike collisions and other types of accidents

Sure, but these collisions are far less deadly and injurious. Exchanging car-bike collisions for bike-bike collisions is a good tradeoff from a public health perspective.

[0]: https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/...
It's used for crpyto acceleration AFAIK. E.g. I've used it to expose a beagleboards AES acceleration to OpenVPN via OpenSSL to make a small VPN client go faster.
> This author is trying to make an actual argument

Is there such an attempt? I see a lot of discussion of Dystopia, a few restatements of the thesis, but I don't actually see anything attempting to prove the thesis. The logic is "Not everything bad is a dystopia. Dystopias really suck. Trust me, Dystopias come about from trying to achieve utopia.

The author DOES distinguish speculation from perfection, so your criticism of the above post is correct, but even with the author's provided definition, I don't actually see any ARGUMENT being made, just a claim with some disconnected but true statements around it.
There was a discussion of the SR-71 a few months ago that I found excellent. One of the comments took the opposition approach - The SR-71 was an engineering failure, because it leaked fuel, it required tight tolerances and most of the parts were thrown out because of it, etc [1].

I think it's a correct view. I think they're absolutely right about the SR-71. I posted a comment arguing they're wrong, because I think my comment is also a correct view. The SR-71 is the wrong plane for many, many applications. For the few that needed it, it was an absolutely vital tradeoff. Engineering isn't just about optimizing a metric. It's about optimizing many metrics, and finding a set of tradeoffs that fits. It's about finding the point on the line where people are satisfied.

Perhaps - Engineering is about finding the proper fitness functions, and then finding the optimal solution from there. Both are hard problems. Having the right fitness function/requirements gathering is the most screwed up stage of any development, and software developers are no exception, but I feel our industry has gotten away with a lot. Optimizing globally is often an unbounded problem, so finding efficient approximations (like evolutionary algorithms or hill climbing functions) is often the right approach - But that doesn't mean you shouldn't try for the correct one.

[1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17675996
I still don't get why anyone would use the web interface when you can use it through POP3 or IMAP and SMTP with the proper desktop e-mail application.
Fuck you for enabling spammers you shithead.

Fuck HN for upvoting a spam bucket shop.
Wait, so you shouldn't have rights to a device you paid for?

Yeah, you're not going to sell me on this line of bullshit. The amount of money you pay for an apple is a fucking purchase. So why do they maintain control of it? Eh?
I thought this too! Then I picked a weird expression and was wrong lol.
And my point is more power concentrated in the hand of fewer people only leads to the tyranny of a bureaucratic elite and less democracy.

> I think we should learn to be careful not to be exploited for this craving.

You mean "we shouldn't trust the people with their intelligence", that's how every elite thinks.

Well I hope someday there is enough democracy left for the people in Europe to undo the EU bureaucracy peacefully. For the record I was pro EEC.
Though interestingly, it can be according the article's summary of the study?

More than 70 percent of the urine samples contained
bacteria, including at least 33 types of bacteria
(at the genus level) in normal urine.

This suggests that 30% were sterile.
Accused College Students Deserve the Presumption of Innocence
Create a Two-Player Pong Game with React Native
> Seems like a good approach, if you use asymmetric encryption. Keep the private key in a safe place, and the public on the machine; then you can store new codes (by encrypting them with the public key) without having to access the safe place.

Interesting idea. I had just been picturing a second keepass db with a different passphrase (or use a usb key with a keyfile kept offsite) but I like yours too.

(I'm also trying to brainstorm solutions scalable to non-experts so "&Ok fire up the CLI, we're doing GPG*" might work for me, but not everyone in my org :) )
Dystopia is when you get frustrated with your societal model not producing appropriate outcome metrics and up the learning rate of the algorithm so it happens faster and remove a lot of democratic metrics like elections that are hard to tweak effectively and get a horrible overfit to your small training set.
It's good that this design puts the foldable screen in the inside. The surfaces of these screens probably won't be using scratch-resistant glass any time soon.
This just isn't true. I really only interact with CS/CpE students/grads and I'm constantly shocked at the ability of universities to force their students to use version control without actually teaching them anything about how it works.
The path does leak some information but in that case the bad actor would also need to know the username along with the password (both of which would be encrypted).

But you have to ask yourself. Who are you protecting against here? Are people browsing around your laptop / workstation without you monitoring what they're doing?

If someone has your machine without your consent, then you're pretty much screwed because 99.99999% of people will leave themselves logged into things like gmail which requires no password to access it once the machine is powered on. It's basically this xkcd scenario: https://xkcd.com/1200/
> chlorine itself is pretty much fine for you.

That's...not why it was used in warfare.
Probably not a slur.
Yep. The internet of today feels so much different than the internet of the early 90's, it may as well not even be the same medium...
>No ecosystem.

The ecosystem is Android. The vast majority of apps should work just fine, even on a display with an unusual aspect ratio.
Linear Network Coding
Find me the instructions. This mostly seems like a website about a project - not how to recreate it.
Not totally certain, but I believe it'd be used if a userspace program used the Linux Kernel Crypto API, using a socket of type AF_ALG.

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.11/crypto/userspace-if.ht...
CVE-2019-6454: Systemd (PID1) Crash with Specially Crafted D-Bus Message
> to the creator: Good on you for creating a successful business. I hope you take these resources and do something positive for the world.

Not good on him. It's an immoral business. I don't see why the hn community would endorse this just because it makes money.

If the emails were also a tool for privacy, decentralisation or some good objective behind it, i could see the pros and cons. But here it's all pros for him, and all cons for the rest of the world.
So how do they have a continuous display across the hinge?
I have written quite a bit of SPE code. The primary issue is that the SPE processor could only read/write to 256kB localized memory (without doing a DMA). So literally object orientated code doesnt even work (because of VTables). The c/c++ model is not designed for this type of architecture. Yes there were also limitations like vector only registers and memory alignment but the biggest issue was the local memory.
>this world is fallen

Makes the entire article essentially meaningless. How can I trust somebody with such a bizarre and unconnected worldview?
I use Windows 10, Git for Windows (with Git Bash) and I'm productive.

Occasionally, I turn to VirtualBox. Either I'm doing something completely Linux-related (mount points, loopback, linux-headers) or not at all.

I'm also trying out options like ImDisk but really wish Windows would allow -o loop; Have used Docker with Hyper-V; Not used WSL yet. Plan to do so once Microsoft add Linux FS mounting support.

As far as Ubuntu goes, no - not really a fan; I just seem to be liking Fedora more these days.
I don't know why you are getting downvoted, but I swam and played water polo in the US and we don't have a culture of 'just pee in the pool'. I don't remember a single instance of someone announcing peeing in the pool, let alone it being acceptable.
Are you talking about OSS that solves some business need, but lacks a commercial entity / support? (Like as the core product?)

Netlify is one example.

You'll want to look into the particular projects license to make sure it is ok.

Our SaaS is built / runs on a phenomenal amount of OSS. The core is not OSS yet, we create some OSS for non differentiating code, contribute back to the web framework we use.