skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I do wonder if we're just a bunch of drunks looking under a lamppost for our keys because that's where the light is.

We've discovered a bunch of phenomena that happen to be able to be described by the mathematical tools we have because those are the only way we can understand them.

There's no reason to believe that any of them are fundamental to nature. There may be an uncountably infinite number of phenomena out there which are fundamentally unable to be formulated in any way which we can understand or predict them.

Our minds aren't constructed to understand reality, they're constructed to help our bodies survive in a savannah a few hundreds of thousands of years ago.
The Pancake Sorting Problem
There's a lot of problems to go around.

If you're a founder, you're usually going to cash out for the right price. Everyone has their price. No one wants to grind forever. This isn't a problem if you're profitable enough that you can hold forever (Basecamp).

If you're an investor, you're struggling for returns right now (to your point about interest rates and the Fed). You're going to squeeze whatever you can get your hands on as hard as possible (as an investor myself in real estate and small SaaS companies I've bought, I try very hard to not do this, but you're hedging against a multiple you paid for the asset; you don't want the asset's cashflow to disappear and watch your capital evaporate).

Interest rates rising would help, but so would orgs more tilted towards employee ownership. You have to align incentives. Are you happy with a lifestyle business? (Not derogatory! I'd take a lifestyle business any day over any sort of possible unicorn status) Are your coworkers/shareholders? Would you customers be willing to be shareholders thereby becoming stakeholders? These problems are solvable with corporate structures and governance.

Such a shame to see this happen. Great opportunity for GitLab and their CICD team though.
> Maybe. In Australia, 'bleeding heart' used by people on the right to describe people on the left who act with conscience, ethics, compassion or recommend a course of such acts. It's a term of abuse, because they think such actions and desires must be pretense, as the right doesn't feel those things themselves. (The right has and doesn't want others to have, a position that hardens the heart.) I took the phrase in that sense.

That is a laughably bias interpretation. The phrase "bleeding heart" is used as an insult, suggesting the targets lack reason and are completely guided by their feelings. Your descriptions paints those you disagree with as mustache-twirling cartoon villain caricatures and comes off about as genuine as "They hate us for our freedom".
I’ve always wondered how the insurance would pay out. This doesn’t seem promising.
$1bil for $3.2b post money valuation (2.2 pre) seems like a lot of dilution? Or am I wrong in thinking that?
I tend not to listen to serial podcasts for this reason (unless traveling and I can binge on the plane).
All of your arguments focus on one thing. A possibility. A possibility that an evolutionary trait is either a neutral trait or an outdated trait.

None of these arguments prove that Ego is an ineffective or negative trait.

First off people need to list examples about how a big Ego can be a neutral trait or an outdated trait as a supporting argument. If the ego is outdated at some point in time it must have been a positive trait, how can this be? If the ego is a neutral trait there should be an example about how a big ego can be inconsequential to the overall group or positive to the individual. Of course we are talking in terms of possibilities but the absence of examples of the above possibilities makes for weak arguments in my humble opinion.

My argument offers that the ego exists because humans need self delusion. They need to lie to themselves and see their existence as consequential in order to be happy.

Why has everyone ignored this statement? No argument is completely effective until every point is addressed. Perhaps it's because none of you could come up with a counter retort to the self-delusion argument so you chose to ignore it. Isn't that a form of self delusion? Are we all participating in an argument or are we just trying to win? Perhaps the participants in this argument is not us per se, but our egos. Perhaps all arguments are a meeting of egos.
Onlinestats.jl: Single-Pass Algorithms for Statistics
So, like Java?

I'd say the case was good to highlight the absurdity of it. And sometimes speaking your mind has a cost.
Podcasting is probably the closest thing right now to the authenticity, diversity, and creativity of the early web. There's a massive diversity of podcasts out there on every subject and even many of the purely amateur ones are of very high quality.
The Nokia E66 (released in 2008) supported microSD cards of up to 8GBs. Together with the Nokia Podcasting app downloading them over Wifi, it didn't feel very different than today.
CS246: Mining Massive Data Sets
Are you saying the question doesn't apply to individuals? IMO it should probably even more so. I guess you have to be insanely rich to not actually care about a $xxM investment and related diligence.

And maybe it highlights an interesting lesson: it's much easier to hoodwink individual investors with charm and lies and Holmes nailed that part down to perfection.
> Well, it matters in that if you don't live in the EU, it is unlikely that they will be able to target you for anything.

I guess he means you can't escape the law simply by hosting the site outside of Germany, if you still want to live in Germany, because then they can sue you, even if the country where your site is hosted does not require you to display your home address, phone, etc.
SoftBank Is Leading a $1B Investment in Logistics Startup Flexport
Brilliant and pragmatic use of an existing infrastructure that promotes individual data freedom
I’ve never understood what the real world-changing part of Theranos was. Ok great you can do lab tests with less blood, is it to save people squeamish about larger blood draws? Maybe I don’t understand it but this always seemed silly to me and more about convenience. The disruption was about replacing phlebotomists? We make plenty of blood.
> The team has 3 Product Managers right now so we always have tons of feature requests, asks to investigate future work, etc.

This is a red flag to me - 3 PMs should be collaborating together to get to the root of the customer needs, and coming up with new functions that solve problems in simpler, better ways. You should have fewer requests that each have larger impacts. Likewise, why is a PM asking an engineer to do product research? If you need technical analysis, get that into your backlog. Outside of that, the PMs should be doing it.
Or if you trust the clock.

With the broken clock, you can't ever trust it.
The ads may be annoying, but consider that ad reads in podcasts are a much more ethical and sustainable advertising model than almost any other model out there. In addition, ad read time takes up at most 5% of the total run time of your average podcast.

People who do podcasts as a living or companies where podcasts are their primary revenue source need to make money somehow.

Take How Stuff Works for instance. They have some great informational podcasts like "Stuff you Should Know", "Stuff to Blow your Mind", "Stuff they don't want you to know", and "Daniel and Jorge Explain the Universe". These podcasts cover very interesting, and sometimes, very important topics. How stuff works makes their money from selling ad reads in their podcasts and ad space on their blog. They are providing a valuable service and paying people to literally do nothing but research and produce podcasts. These people need to get paid.

My point is, while nobody actually likes ads, the model which podcasts employ is at least tolerable; especially when compared to something like ads on Youtube.
hospitable* ?
My pragmatic take is that if we keep buying their stuff - and we will - they will soon become rich enough to clean up their environment, just like all rich countries do.

If you're familiar with the history of industrialism, all currently clean and rich countries went through a phase of horrible dirtiness as they rose out of awful poverty.

Fortunately, China seems to go through the same steps as the west 3-5 times faster than we did.

Sometimes, the only way out is through!
More succinctly: https://www.nayuki.io/page/fast-fibonacci-algorithms
Is it hard to just buy a phone number? I can buy a prepaid SIM card for something like 1.5 eur and put it in a burner phone from a pawn shop for 5 eur, and I'd have a legitimate anonymous phone number that'll work for some time.
From the tweet [0] it seems there is going to be a huge tech debt. I don't know how Idera is planning to expand upon the acquisition after letting go people like this.

> Some know the skinny on dozens of different open source projects and ecosystems, others understand run time and dep mgmt for like 17 languages and even more tooling, and automated image mastering to handle it all.
> Others are rewriting what it means to manage communities in this era. They had to garden github issue repos with 1000s of tickets and find the patterns, and know a wide swath of the open source community in ways most people will never get to again

[0] https://mobile.twitter.com/carmatrocity/status/1098538650525...
I didn't. But in all likelihood I'm guessing it means I didn't get one
>I think it is a problem if people or companies are advertising a non-existent or unsubstantiated medical benefits of a procedure.

Ok, now this sentiment I don't understand at all.

Here in America (and other countries), we already have *entire "medical" fields" which consist of nothing but claims of unsubstantiated medical benefits. Chiropractic, Homeopathy, Acupuncture, TCM, etc. are all unscientific and make all kinds of claims with no evidence whatsoever, however the FDA allows them to operate with impunity, and even serious hospitals have these practitioners in them as "ACM".

But now they're going give a hard time to a company for doing something similar?

Seriously, I have a much easier time believing that maybe, just maybe there could be some health benefits from getting blood transfused into you from a really healthy person, than I would ever believe that 1) any ailment you have is caused by "subluxations" in your spinal column or that 2) someone can test if your body "needs" some "supplement" by pushing down on your outstretched arm while holding it in front of you or that 3) you can be cured of something by ingesting highly purified water.
I think there was a Blind post a few weeks ago where 40% said they were depressed despite most making $300k-$600k/year
Various sources say that lime production for concrete creates around 1/12th of the anthroprogenic atmospheric carbon.
On the other hand, wood is a temporary carbon sink until ot burns or decays.
Watch this drop out of ycombinator news rankings fast.

Criticism is verboten.
> the question doesn't apply to individuals?

Institutional investors have an institutionalised diligence process. Individual investors have their own diligence process. For some, it’s nothing more than a gut check. (Which is okay. There are plenty of successful companies that were founded on checks written on a gut feeling.)

The bigger question is why a few of those people kept doubling down, to the point of attacking whistleblowers, after they had enough evidence it was a scam.
I'm not sure why it's hard to understand why someone could be convinced by words that match their bias backed by confidence. That's sales 101 and there's a reason why it works.

Now, yes, the medical breakthrough part should have been a red flag to serious investors, but my guess there is that once someone bought into it, other investors were scared that they might miss out on what could be the next big thing and jumped on it.
Chat over SMTP/IMAP/MIME just doesn't sound right, or does it? We also thought of Chat over Email, or Chat over Mail, But Chat over IMAP gave us the COI (fish), which we love. Decision made :)
Flexport Hits $3.2B Valuation After $1B Investment Led by SoftBank
Hi there! I'm the OP. I'm not affiliated to YC, and I didn't even notice the change till you pointed it out. I haven't been contacted by an admin, so I'm just as in the dark as you are.
It feels like lots of cookies are limited by the device life cycle rather than their expiration date. Get a new phone, get a new cookie.

The difference between a one-year-cookie and a sixty-year-cookie is probably small. If you're not going to visit a site again within one year (and get a new lease on that cookie), you're likely not going to visit the site in the next sixty years (because either it or you no longer exist, you're no longer in the audience of that site etc).
Like having a comment form on your blog?
maybe they wouldn't have been laid off if they took themselves and their work more seriously? I mean honestly, looking at the team page at https://about.travis-ci.com/team/, we have titles such as Mermaid on board, Tyranjasaurus Specs, Tortilla Builder, Sausage Dog Wrangler, Customer Avocado, Head Catwoman, and Conjurer of Avocado Patronuses
I believe most enterprise shops sell what they don't have. But they also know by the time the customer is ready they'll have it built & ready. The customer is also aware of the current state and timelines.

For theranos and fyre festival. I'd say it was less playing timing to their advantage and more fraud.
What do you mean by "right wing" here? Do you just mean "capitalist"?
> how are they supposed to be able to check for copyright infringment against every single upload?

"Did you create this item from your own efforts without the inclusion of material copyright to other entities? Y / N"

That's a filter. Not a particularly sophisticated one, but the majority of websites shouldn't be hosting anything that answers N to that anyhow. Little Northville Cycling Club, for example, probably shouldn't be hosting satire based on copyright works. It's just too legally risky.
But we've done research on this. Fine grained permissions don't work, even for people who claim to be knowledgeable. It sounds like a good idea until you look at the papers.
It's not. I had a Nokia X6 w/ 64GB storage and 6GB RAM shipped to me from HK for US$300. Lots of good deals on devices from Xiaomi and Huawei as well.

Samsung sells smartphones from $50 to (now) $2000. You are taking the highest possible price point and using that to push an argument about phone prices in general.
>It is hard to see how moving things from China to Vietnam is an improvement.

It's an improvement in the way that multiple competitors are almost always an improvement. Say the world wants to pressure China to reduce CO2 emissions or release the Uighurs from internment camps, having another producer of certain critical goods weakens their negotiating position.

Also Vietnam is a lot more likely to be open to democratic reforms than China is in the foreseeable future.

>Nearly all passives

Also this is not true.
How to Measure Happiness
That's fascinating for me. It certainly comes across like "best for all parties" kind of advice, but only magnifies the need for clear separation of business advice that is fully aligned towards founders.
You should validate any email addresses, just keep in mind that proper validation requires you to attempt to send an email to it and check if the user received it.
He is, but he also had a show where he tried to encourage kids to read.

Nowadays I think people mostly remember the theme song:

> Take a look, it's in a book, a Reading Rainbow!
“Can kicking” the data retention? What’s the eta on your solution to stop logging user data?
This is really sad, I can remember the days where Travis was the only CI solution free for open source projects.

It raised the standards for a well-maintained project, farewell.
Current thinking is that the IMAP servers connect directly, but via SMPT for message transfer, but without the store-and-forward, once they are trusted via a token exchange. May be blocked though in server deployments (ports).
People who will do violence in support of their political beliefs are in the wrong. People who support people who do violence should be questioned, regardless of where on the political spectrum they lie, or whether they are an "your side" or the "other." The people who are going around in masks, with clubs and guns committing assaults and other violent crimes need to be recognized as the terrorists and proto-terrorists they are. The media that preferentially cover one side over another, and people who give their tacit support to such things need to be called out as well.

What disturbs me the most, are the people who are supposed to be peace-loving giving their tacit support to such political violence and intimidation. The remedy for violent extremist tendencies is to let people talk. It's when people feel like they can't talk, that they seek more extreme means.
So why is chiropractic and homeopathy allowed?
I think the obvious glaring flaw here is deciding to have a remote control for an amplifier run Android. Why on earth would that be necessary?
$207M Revenue in Just 4 Years: The Rise of Daniel Wellington (2017)
Naturally. But I thought we had em beat in terms of rocket propulsion.
Are you trying to draw an analogy between market-friendly policies and stealing your wallet?
For me the hidden video starts (hidden) when I open the page, so when I click 'Watch the video' it's already part way through.

Firefox 65.0 on MacOS 10.14.
> I don't think that is possible without creating new loopholes elsewhere.

It's totally possible, especially if the tax code is simplified and different mechanisms are used to incentivize behavior. Many loopholes are side-effect of complexity, and many of the others were deliberately created to benefit some group or other. Both of those are solvable without creating more loopholes.
There's a bit of history to this. Not going speculate too much on this, but I bet it has to do with some events in Germany a few years back.
> A close second is some podcasts have started putting reruns into their feed.

"Stuff you should know" and "Stuff to blow your mind" do this. However, they sprinkle these in once a week and still release their normal 2 new episodes per week. It kind of makes sense for these shows since they have a massive back log and the nature of the subject matter is not really time sensitive.
If anything the Elizabeth Holmes story should be a lesson as to the problems with venerating the average tech CEO and the whole "disruptive" culture. She and her partner Sunny lied, bullied critics and employees, and put people in harms way - all for a technology that was essentially nothing more than the existing standard fare in a pretty box. No different what most of the major tech companies and start-ups do every day. But the standards for the medical industry as significantly higher than in tech thus she and Sunny are being punished.

Maybe instead of trying to lower the standards of the medical industry, we should raise the standards of the tech industry.
>“I feel like I’m wasting my life,” he told me. “When I die, is anyone going to care that I earned an extra percentage point of return? My work feels totally meaningless.”

Capitalists are realizing the fundamental emptiness of capitalism. It's hard to have a sense of purpose when your entire life is spent making a number on a spreadsheet into a slightly larger number for the benefit of someone even more elite than you.
Relevant: https://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/14/money-can-buy-happiness-but-...
I was just thinking about this in the bus.

Most of the time, it's not really the fault of politics making us sway one way or another. It's also the routine and the whole we-ve-always-done-things-this-way. Society is not always really competent and organized in a way that brings improvement, but it's not really the fault of anyone, it's just civilization being too rigid by definition. It's a communication problem.
Travel Risk Map for All Countries
Precisely so. Let me give you an example: in medieval times it was taken as fact that the king's authority came from God, that god wanted you to obey, and so forth. That sounds absurd today, but at the time no other point of view was available. The way to see through that belief is to ask, who does that belief benefit? It was in the material interest of the king to promulgate such a belief system regardless of whether it was true. In the same sense it's now in the material interest of the investor and political class to promulgate the belief that unfettered capitalism is the only rational economic system. But who benefits?

This isn't my own original idea mind you. Marx called it "dialectical materialism".

Certain scientific facts can be proven. You can measure things like the speed of light for instance. But ideology always reflects the material interest of some group or another.
I highly recommend the podcast "Make No Law" [1] to help understand the US's 1st Amendment. There's a whole episode on yelling fire in a crowded theater.

[1]: https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/
It was on public broadcasting since around 1983 and was hosted and produced by him.
Could I ask what concerns they had with your child being tall and thin for his age? I was a 99%'er growing up but I don't remember there being health concerns.
Privatization isn't the issue. A lot of the abuses you see in private prisons, you see in public prisons. I recommend anyone read "Locked In: The True Causes of Mass Incarceration and How to Achieve Real Reform"[1] by John Pfaff, a professor at Fordham who focuses on these issues. It addresses a lot of misconceptions about the criminal justice system and suggests reforms. You can find a 1 hour talk by Pfaff that gives a good overview of the book[2].

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Locked-Causes-Incarceration-Achieve-R...

[2] https://cdn.cato.org/archive-2017/cbf-04-26-17.mp4
You do have to prep for those as well from experience on TWIWG (this week in wargaming) - you also have to prep for actual play ones look at the work that Mat Mercer puts in.
Far less authoritative, because people are starting to see through the flim-flam. More authoritarian. Definitely. Did anyone notice that even tenured professors can't say what they want anymore?
Saying knowledge is particularly human is very weird, even when you distinguish it from information.
A Movie Changed One Man's Vision (2012)
This is not a investment. It is a tool for leverage. The goal is not to grow the company it's to get as many contracts as they can and lower the ebita. Once they do this they will take out huge loans for the next company to destroy.

I don't blame the founders. But at the same time I think if enough of these deals for bad these types of investors will stop their bad practices.

This sort of move not only hurts employees. It hurts those who use the product too. It's a net bad for everybody but a few.

I am still digging into how these things work and how the money gets out. But I would not be surprised if sometime in the future this sort of business engineering would be made illegal.

Look what PE did to solar winds and general dollar. Both had huge piles of cash and were drained and put back on the market for the general public to pay the debt.
“And by launching a card, Apple would prove once again that, given enough time, all companies eventually become banks.”

Is this true? I can think of GE, but who else? What percentage of 100+ yo companies do this?
Pixar Story Rules (2011)
It's complete BS, but for some reason C* people often don't understand how dumb this is, but for them it might mean a big payday so they don't care. The inherent knowledge walks out the door with the engineers, and all that is left is code and no knowledge. Hire cheap devs and before you realize it it becomes a write-off for the acquirer. Everyone wins except the people who worked hard to build it in the first place.