skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It wasn't really a RISC. It had single address, accumulator style operands, and really high level instructions like "plot pixel".

It looks most like what the parent said, the sort of DSPs in the late 80s and early 90s used as GPUs.
Housing in the suburbs was more expensive in the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s, but that is no longer true in many cities. Excluding the most affluent suburbs higher quality urban real estate is often more expensive. Suburbs closer to city centers are also generally more expensive unless they are in poor condition.

I've wondered if the suburbs might not have been a major driver of American middle class growth in the late 20th century for a really simple reason: expansion fueled by automotive transit allowed people to escape the law of rent and the tyranny of landlords and the property market.

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

Eventually this expansion reached practical limits due to commute times and energy costs, so now we are back to the way it was before.
> Is this related to the a.out file that gcc outputs if you don't specify a filename with -o?

It is not directly related to the filename used by gcc. It is related to the a.out binary executable file format (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.out). It is confusing due to the file format, and the choice of default name by gcc, having the same name.

> Also, I thought bitrot was bits in files changing over time due to the storage medium failing;

That is the usual meaning for "bitrot".

> is this a different use of the term?

To some extent yes. In this context the use of "bitrot" is related to parts of the source code drifting apart from changes made in other areas of the source. So in a very broad sense, a similar meaning, but also a very contextual based meaning.
Also possible he was saying that people will vote in favor of keeping these companies together and not bringing anti-trust issues to court because lobbyists push hard to feed a "capitalism shouldn't be touched by the government" view which is against the consumers best interests. That would drive them to vote against Warren and her politics.

Also, do you expect people to name names of lobbyists? I think it's pretty safe to assume there are groups who feel that the FAANG companies are too powerful and need to go the way of Bell labs. And many people (wrongly? rightly?) label anything they feel is politically motivated speech as "propaganda".
Can you avoid using services that run on AWS, though? Or avoid sites that advertise and get analytics from Google? These companies are so dangerous not only because of their consumer-facing services, but the fact that they've made themselves an integral part of our online infrastructure.
> from the 90s.

From the 60s. Atlas computer had virtual memory. I originally thought it was the System360.

https://www.computerhistory.org/timeline/1962/
I think retail is dead for me. Other than grocery store for food and the drugstore for health care items, I hardly ever go to a physical store for any reason. I was at an Apple store yesterday to get an iPad fixed and before that, I was at a record store just after Christmas.

If Amazon was shut down tomorrow, I'm not going to start going to bricks and mortar stores again. I'd find new online suppliers.
Tcc4tcl: Tcl extension that provides an interface to Tiny C Compiler
Don’t forget steerage, excuse me, basic economy.
Yeah, the older I get, the more I realize the need to be comfortable on a flight, especially if you want to be productive after you arrive.
Scene has always been a closer approximation to "colorful emo" (as opposed to "wears only black emo") and nothing like a hipster. Maybe Scene is used differently in other regions?

Where I'm from it's basically "emo-style clothing but with colored hair and eccentric outfits". Just search for "scene hair" online to get an idea of the aesthetic. "Scene/emo" tends to be the description for a lot of scene or emo aesthetics and never "scene/hipster".

Tangent on the whole emo discussion, I recently heard of "Midwest Emo Revival" after the "popular" emo subculture kinda faded from the coasts. Makes me wonder how different other subcultures can become when the popularity shifts regions or the "underground scene" gains more popularity.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emo_revival
Yeah, they are not monopolies in the classical sense, so the regulatory position has to be much more nuanced.

But there are issues:

+ Amazon uses profits from AWS to dump in other sectors, selling goods and services below market value. The weird situation could mean Amazon pumps many billion dollars a year into pushing major grocers (who operate on thin margins) out of business. This is not good for anyone - but it's not a case of 'monopoly' so much.

+ Google is dumping in adjacent areas of tech - giving away Android for free, for example.

There should be some regulatory tweaks here, but it's going to be tricky.

As you point out - a much easier win would be to break up value chain consolidation over all.

Carriers, tech providers, content creators, content distributors - might benefit from being separate entities.

I don't think there are any net benefits to society from these entities being consolidated. There are no economies of scale, no proper synergies. There are however, huge incentives for investors to have AT&T own content creation and distribution obviously, so they can subsidize their own assets and not others. There's no long win for consumers so it makes sense to keep them separate.

Finally - there might be an opportunity on platforms. I think that the Apple store may be an anti-competitive issue - the notion that you don't control/own the $1K device you just bought is getting ridiculous. I would require platform makers to at allow open access to the platform. Same would apply to mobile phones being 'locked' onto a network - that should just not happen.
Exactly. Although I wouldn't personally think he built Tesla to potentially support Space X. He gave it the same 10% slim chance of success when he started as Space X, and he allocated to it roughly the same amount of funds ~ 100mm to each (for a total = to his entire net worth). So by going after Tesla as well he significantly hindered his chances of succeeding with Space X as that narrowed funds available for that project by half and if he had failed the fourth Falcon 1 launch it would have been game over for that. If all he cared for was Mars, it would have made a lot more sense for him to throw 200mm into Space X and greatly increase his chances of successfully developing an orbital vehicle and grow from there in partnership with NASA.

I think generally his core vision or at least core mission statement is to help humanity scale and survive and he'll allocate funds / explore opportunities however he seems best to achieve that.

One pillar of that vision is planetary colonisation to act as a hedge / diversification against a single planet extinction event. The other is making Earth life sustainable hence sustainably electrifying all forms of fossil fuel use cases the founding venture for that being Tesla.

All that said, I have a hard time at this point imagining Elon ever being resource constrained for his goals. He just has too many promising potential revenue lines. Hell, he could maybe fund all of it one day with a single asteroid capture for all we know.

His core constraint is time and he'll do whatever he can to speed things up. Crew Dragon was an important deliverable but ultimately obviously can't be expanded to serve the final vision and it makes sense to quickly move on with all the additional knowledge gained from the effort as a huge benefit.

Starship development should make the next few years just fascinating for us space nerds.
Amazon isn’t a monopoly the way that AT&T or Comcast are. People have a choice and can easily go to Walmart, Target, or most any other retailers online or at a physical location. In this case, Amazon is winning by out-competing their competition. That’s not monopolistic, it’s winning at competition. Fairly, I might add.

One way they’ve grown is by allowing small companies to easily add their products to their stores. Good luck getting Macy’s to sell your custom line of trollface shirts. Shelf space is live or die for small brands. Amazon has a lower barrier to entry without the strong arm tactics big retailers have used for years.

Retail is often a middleman operation with exclusivity deals and price fixing. Brick and mortar is failing for so many reasons. It’s not that there are restrictions preventing fair competition, it’s that the old guard is slow and incompetent and likely won’t survive the old model of exclusivity on goods.
> How is that different than a department store? If you go into housewares at Macy's you'll see their own branded stuff along with other brands. So at issue is not the practice itself, but rather that the digital marketplace makes it easier and more efficient.

It's 100% the exact same thing. Go to Walmart and see thousands of "Great Value" products and you'll get the exact same thing. Warren is off her rocker on this one. We have real tech monopolies in the Cable/ISP industry but we're talking about Amazon and Facebook.
It seams to me that the closer you are to the city the more expensive the living becomes (at least on the East coast) unless you are willing to live in or close to the undesirable pockets of the metro area. It's not until you move quite far out before home prices begin to drop. Suburbs have expanded so much that people give themselves massive commutes just to barely afford a single family home.
Same Stats, Different Graphs: Generating Datasets Through Simulated Annealing
That depends. For example, I fly Air New Zealand to and from Australia fairly frequently. AirNZ PE has more legroom, yes, but also fewer seats per row, wider seats and better meals. For a time they had the Spaceseats, which were 1-2-1 layout. That was great though the attendants told me they hated it since people had trouble with the tilt controls.

I've flown PEs more like yours but this seems to be a factor more of US domestic airlines and is certainly not universal.
If it is a specific route and time, that flight is in danger of being cancelled. I have had it happen to a flight time I liked.
> two non-viable businesses

1. Search company earns money by selling ad spots to ads company.

2. Ads company earns money by selling ads to merchants.
Didn't people say the same thing about Trump when said he was going to build a Wall?

Funny how that election turned out.
Maybe that's not the right line to split across.

Keep search intact but mandate that it must offer equal access to 3rd parties to match any access it has internally.

(How you do this without a privacy disaster I'm not so sure about)

I'm thinking along the lines of privately held public infrastructure like local loop unbundling in telecoms.
This is the only good reply I've seen so far.

I think a lot of information economies suffer from oversupply. I've heard it said that there are too many books, too much music, too many different open source projects trying to solve the same problems, and so on. It causes information overload on the demand side and perhaps paradoxically increases the odds of something genuinely important being neglected.
It's commoditised very effectively. So the cost is capital(buy computer) + operating(electricity+sysadmins) + margin(tiny).
Yeah someone else pointed out a similar point about the bijection of evens and odds, good point. My initial claim is incorrect, so I'll concede that. I was operating from the idea that there is no bijection between the naturals and a parity check function, but you're right that if one sequence is normal the second set should also be normal regardless of invertibility.
Yelp Evades Fire but Isn’t Bulletproof
Legals Tools and Resources for Startups
Chelsea Manning found in contempt of court, jailed for up to 18mo
I just tried this out, using all 4 arrow keys lands me around 52%, just the two is 60% like you guys.

This is kinda cool, our brain's RNG does better with more "mental outputs"...
I'm not sure about the fish sauce or coconut milk but you need some fat in there to allow the nutrients from all the plants to be carried into the body. You might consider throwing an ounce or two of chicken in there. Otherwise most of it goes to waste.
> 1) How is that different than a department store? If you go into housewares at Macy's you'll see their own branded stuff along with other brands. So at issue is not the practice itself, but rather that the digital marketplace makes it easier and more efficient.

The difference would be Amazon's [alleged] monopoly power.

> 2) The consumer (along with Amazon) is a beneficiary here. The losers are brands trying to sell commodity items at a markup. The play is not to undercut all the power strip sellers (to take an example) and once they are out of business, jack up the price. The play is to take the margin due to marketing and brand equity from the sellers and split it between the consumer and Jeff Bezos, so rather than being harmed, the consumer benefits from this.

That seems like a very charitable way of describing the situation, and even if accurate may only remain true in the short term. Whether undercutting branded sellers is the goal or not, that's exactly what's happening--even as you charitably describe it. What happens ten years down the road when those brands are gone due to Amazon's allegedly benevolent undercutting?

I'm not sure about the ultimate merits here (in fact, I'm a bit skeptical of the claim that Amazon has all of the market power that some say it does). But I think you may be dismissing this all a bit too quickly.
The quote was taken from: https://www.weeklystandard.com/adam-rubenstein/steven-pinker...

I posted it to give context to the "debate" Pinker was engaged in. I don't have much of an opinion on whether or not it is "Serious Discourse."
Depends, if you replace it with private jets like many climate change advocates (al gore, Leo di Caprio), it's gonna get worse.
CVS and Walgreens put their branded products right next to the name brands they are copying. They even color the packaging the same.
'I have a point I want to be the truth, so I will selectively filter facts to portray it as truth'.
This isn't news.

Premium airlines (eg Qatar) have long since realized that there simply isn't sufficient demand for first-class so their newer planes don't even have a first class cabin. A big factor is the business class is the new first class. To compare to flying 20+ years ago on international long haul:

- You'd be flying on a 747

- Economy would be slightly larger probably

- What was then "business" is probably more akin to premium economy now with better food

- Business now is better than first class then but first class then probably has more hand-holding. I mean look at a Qatar Qsuite if you want to see how far business has come.

I heard a story when Concorde was shelved that the decision to retire the product was:

- Planes would need to be brought up to modern standards, which was going to be expensive for 13 (originally 14) planes for a relatively small market. Seriously, the interior of those planes are small; and

- Retiring Concorde would bring passengers who would otherwise fly Concorde to flying first-class, which at the time was much more profitable.

Not sure how close to the truth this is but I can believe it. Obviously it's sad that we lost a capability we once had (crossing the Atlantic in <4 hours) but I wonder if BA/AF looked at this too short term. I mean sure first-class is (was) more profitable but then you're competing with every other airline when supersonic was a duopoly with a barrier to entry that was practically infinite.
'(a b c) is considered an S-expression in Lisp dialects which support the 'X <-> (quote X) shorthand. It's just a shorthand, and it is read-print consistent, like other such shorthands. If '(a b c) isn't a S-exp, then we have backed into uncomfortable corners in which #(a b c) isn't an S-exp.

Every character in a S-expression must be "dealt with at the reader level" (and produced at the printer level).

The term "S-expression" was originally in contrast with "M-expression", but that's a historic usage.
Even more specifically, a graduate degree of some kind. Because most employers don't want to put in the effort to justify a BS visa hire whereas justifying a MS or PhD visa under H1B is much easier.
The suburbs are much cheaper than Seattle proper. Granted, there are a few small communities that are very expensive.

Mostly suburbs (the Rentons, Tacomas, and Monroes of Puget Sound) are very inexpensive compared to Seattle proper.
I just tried tout for refirsttime, and although the keyboardspace on my phone is barely large enough to cran five characters in there, the input scrolls sideraysautomatically if you litt your finger long enoy gh. So longer words can be entered as well. It doesn't seem to reevaluate previously decoded segments baselon what follows, though, so you can end up with weird misspellings at the beyinning of words. I dont think! Im going to use it from now on, beaurthere cognition is balenow ghto requiresigniti cant editing and the frictonisatittooncomfortable vihout a stylus.

Edited with the QWERTY keyboard:

I just tried it out for the first time, and although the keyboard space on my phone is barely large enough to cram five characters in there, the input scrolls sideways automatically if you lift your finger long enough. So longer words can be entered as well. It doesn't seem to reevaluate previously decoded segments based on what follows, though, so you can end up with weird misspellings at the beginning of words. I don't think I'm going to use it from now on, because the recognition is bad enough to require significant editing and the friction is a bit too uncomfortable without a stylus.
> If Google would be just search I wouldn't have anything against them, but they are notorious for using the market position of one of their products to push another.

So does every department and grocery store in the US, and they have for decades, but nobody seems terribly bothered by Great Value at Walmart, or the the notorious contract negotiations with Walmart that put suppliers at a huge disadvantage, because if you want to be a national brand you need to be in Walmart.

But it's much better to talk about fantasy monopolies because they make nice sound bites.
I'm terrible at checking my threads, but yeah! That's what I meant :)
> Also, while FAANG occasionally do things I don’t approve of, they don’t actively lobby congress for things that will make my use of the internet objectively worse (NN, SOPA, etc...).

Is this true? It depends on your use of the internet and definitions of “worse”, but I know that both Google and Facebook have been strong opponents of state-level Internet privacy legislation. They also spend huge amounts on lobbying, SV outspending Wall Street about 2:1 for the last few years. Do telcos spend more?
The obvious place to start splitting is to separate search from other things, like a non-search ad business, an OS, a browser, a mail client, a mapping and navigation business, and hey, another OS.

But I don't think it's impossible to split up search, either. I'm sure that Google doesn't just have 1000s of people working together in one big room with no structure. Their current organizational lines could tell us a lot about useful ways to break it up. Historically, for example, there were search infrastructure providers like Inktomi that sold services to consumer-facing search engines. Maybe a crawling-and-archiving group is separable; there are times I sure would have paid Google to use their crawl rather than doing my own. Parts of search were previously separate companies that perhaps could be spun out again. E.g., a lot of the structured-data stuff was once Metaweb.
To clarify: I was just explaining what the above commenter meant, not stating my own opinion on the matter.
Surprised nobody has mentioned the Aaronson Oracle [0] yet.

[0] http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~nick/aaronson-oracle/
Yes, very small turbines have a variety of military applications beyond just cruise missiles. Small turbine driven reusable drones are one possible application.

I'm not sure if you're trying to imply it, but YC funding defense tech under the guise of funding toys for the ultra-wealthy would be interesting, but I don't honestly think that's what's going on here. I don't think they're likely to develop novel turbine technology, and the concept of a one-person turbine flying device left the US military unimpressed decades ago. There doesn't really seem to be a tactical niche for it on the battlefield.
Definitely. I fly once or twice a month, often for very short periods (2-3 days). I wouldn't be of any use whatsoever if I ahd just spent 9 hours in an economy cabin... I used to organise my trips to stay the weekend and do a bit of tourism, but since I've had children I feel too guilty :)
Different teams, but Kenneth Auchenberg of Microsoft had quite a take earlier this year, when the Edge team announced the switch to Chromium.

I wouldn't rule out a general attitude of not caring about other browsers/engines for upcoming projects (in other words, returning to IE6-era behavior, but with the hand-wavy alibi of open source)

https://twitter.com/auchenberg/status/1088587621721231361
How high above local ground level?
How many users get compromised if a bank gets compromised vs. if one user installs a keylogger?
Sorry if I'm asking something which is obvious to most people, but is it apparent that Comcast has out lobbied FAANG?

I recall Google having the highest expenditure on lobbying for one of the last few years.

The point about Comcast's anticompetitive practices still holds, but not as a "they do this worse than them" IMO.
I agree, I just think its Wal-marts playbook, and to single Amazon out is more political than do-goodery. In Wal-marts case its floorspace, in Amazon's its eshelf and datacenter storage.
See http://www.jargon.net/jargonfile/s/softwarerot.html ("maybe be semi-humorously ascribed to bit rot")
Wouldn't the loss of close integration between Google's ads business and services decrease their respective values though?
> and lately, in sporadic calls for us to read fiction about those especially under threat in our time: refugees, victims of mass shootings, transgender people, etc.

Is this really a common thing? People promoting fiction as a means of understanding popular political issues of the day?
What about Ma Bell?
that doesn’t get the headline as much. don’t worry she won’t break anything up. she just wants to stand out in primary
Could you explain? I don't date online, so I don't understand the relation.
A Woman Is Betting on Balloons in Space – Bloomberg
it might be in different countries, I don't know.

From my experience, the engineers in search are very aware they could do monopolistic things, and really try their hardest not to.
Knowing After Hour Trading
I'm sure there will be an emulator for those, the next time you need it!
Also, does the public have the image of Comcast and Verizon CEOs as being specific people who are really rich and dislikable? So that taking them down a notch will make the public happy? And so taking them down a notch is a good political stance?

To be fair, I think there is some argument that some of the larger tech giants would benefit consumer welfare by being broken up. Facebook probably less so since people already have choice.

Warren does herself no favors by using $25 billion as the threshold of a monopoly. What a real monopoly is is when there is no consumer choice at all, leading to large corporate profits that hurt consumers at the pricing level.

By not using consumer choice or harm as the standard (which is what the court uses), Warren comes across (and perhaps actually intends) to be against large companies, regardless of welfare.