skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The selling point of the 737-MAX was that for purposes of type rating it was a plain old 737, no retraining required. So on paper it wasn't advanced at all.
Yep, that was going to be my first guess.

If they can delay delivering your part till next financial year, or the end of the production run for that model, the books look that much better.
Hmm, so the branch names are part of the commit's metadata. I'm not sure I agree with that, but I guess it's a valid choice.

The first article also states that unnamed branches are useful for small, temporary diversions, and notes that git has to name branches, but I think that's somewhat misrepresenting git since you can throw away names as soon as they are no longer useful. To me it seems kind of silly to have unnamed branches, given that names are free and much easier to remember than commit hashes.
And addiction to Facebook causes depression and robs you of your abilityvto focus. Both measured and proven.
"As the compiler will stop you from borrow checking or something unsafe again and again, you are being distracted constantly by focusing on the language itself instead of the problem you are solving."

This is very much true while learning, and very much not true once you finished learning. It would be very concerning indeed if it were otherwise. As is, it is very concerning for Rust adoption, as this post evidences.
Samsung Galaxy Fold and Huawei Mate X Were the Highlights of MWC 2019
Underneath the rhetoric, Spotify’s aim is to make more money off others’ work.

Wow. It is astonishing to read this from a company being widely accused of an unfair 30% tax.

Correction: the revenue share is 15%, it was originally 30%
With "normal" cars, there are two differences between front and rear wheel drive: one is the tendency to under vs oversteer, which does not affect your ability to get going. The other is the fact that front-wheel drive cars have the weight of that heavy IC engine over the driven wheels, giving more traction. Grandparent was pointing out that's not the case with a Tesla.

When I grew up in Sweden everyone had RWD cars and got around fine. But it was common to put some sand bags or lead shot in the trunk to get more weight on the rear wheels. The other thing you need are real snow tires.
As someone that still has Bitcoin tied up in the Gox civil rehabilitation suit, I feel justice is adequately served here.

Karpeles was clearly in over his head, and made terrible decisions after the hacking, but I don’t believe imprisonment would serve any meaningful purpose, and I do believe he feels genuine remorse for his actions.
The tricky thing with dynamic programming is realizing that it fits—you have to understand how the problem you're solving decomposes into overlapping subproblems that are worth caching. Once you know what the subproblems are, implementing the algorithm is mostly a matter of getting some fiddly indexing logic right.

Take string edit distance for example: the key to the dynamic programming problem is seeing how the exponential blow up of possibilities actually has a rich overlapping structure that you can cache in a table. If you didn't know string edit distance was amenable to dynamic programming, you might not realize it at all even if you are constantly thinking about caching results. Once you see the structure, the algorithm becomes relatively straightforward.
So they thought before being able to produce the other models in a reliable way, why not release yet another model?! Great idea publicity wise, I doubt that this can be sustainable in the long term though. Why not focusing on getting one thing right?
I used to buy M:TG cards at Mt.Gox back in the day. It was really confusing when I heard they were now a bitcoin exchange
> I've seen a few interviews in my time. On the order of 5k of them)

That's actually pretty cool. May I ask how?

> Because "knows DP" is pretty much the only bit of information you get

Yes if the candidate meets with only one interviewer or if every interviewer asks only DP. I hope most companies don't interview that way - that would truly be a broken interview process. Obviously you ask about other stuff in the other interviews.

> The interviewer picked them up somewhere, is now familiar with them,

Lol, isn't that one reason every interview question is asked? I've never asked a question whose answer I wasn't familiar with. I know how you meant that though.

There are plenty of companies that don't do whiteboard problems or ask DP. Here's a few: https://github.com/poteto/hiring-without-whiteboards

> We could ask people to, IDK, write code that solves actual problems

It's pretty hard to get someone solving actual problems in a single day. Do you have some examples of how this might be done?
> Spotify wouldn’t be the business they are today without the App Store ecosystem, but now they’re leveraging their scale to avoid contributing to maintaining that ecosystem for the next generation of app entrepreneurs. We think that’s wrong.

I think that's a very hypothetical claim.

> Let’s be clear about what that means. Apple connects Spotify to our users. We provide the platform by which users download and update their app. We share critical software development tools to support Spotify’s app building. And we built a secure payment system — no small undertaking — which allows users to have faith in in-app transactions. Spotify is asking to keep all those benefits while also retaining 100 percent of the revenue.

I think we should be clear that Apple built the app-store ecosystem to improve its iPhone adoption and lock-in. And Spotify isn't asking to keep 100% of the revenue. Spotify is asking for a choice of letting users pay how they wish.

The problem really is Apple wants to milk its App store ecosystem now that its popular and 30% / 15% is a very steep price / revenue loss for any significant player in that eco-system. And FWIW, Google provides a similar App store service, while also allowing users to what they choose with their phones (i.e., install side-loaded Apps).
Sounds like there's a liberal sprinkling of 'noble savage' being applied in the article.

The "teaching through storytelling" thing rubs me up the wrong way, too. We yell at our kids if they deserve it, but we do our best never to lie to them.

And of course, any time someone expounds on "the" way to raise or discipline children, you know they're talking through their hat, because children vary wildly in terms of how they behave and what will work with them, even within the same family. There is no one-size-fits-all approach.
I wonder if we can improve our own behavior by telling ourselves the right stories? And what would those stories be?

(One phrase that sometimes helps me avoid bad habits is telling myself: "You've been down this road. The consequences won't be good!")
XML didn't work? use more XML.
Everybody has a breaking point, and they reached theirs.

I have been studying rust for embedded since January and I am not really impressed by what I have seen. I am mostly hacking around the deficiencies of the libraries, the crazy organisation of the stack, and the issues with the community.

I am sticking with rust for now because I feel like there is a bandwagon and there might eventually be money in it, but I am certainly not a convert.
There was no substance to your comment to address. You can't make a bunch of unsubstantiated claims and then demand that you be proved wrong or else require that everyone default to assuming you're right. You made a claim, the burden is on you to support it.

You're making many scary claims about AI with no evidence to support your theses, along with a unrelated reference to natural selection. Both of the key arguments that you pointed out, 1) "the substrate for AGI to spring from is basically here or around the corner", and 2) "Human level ai is fundamentally incompatible with human society" were presented without any evidence and are unsupported by nearly all major experts in the field. FUD was not a distraction from your argument but a title for what it is: Fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

But, in case you want to read up, here are some experts contradicting your first claim:

1: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/608911/is-ai-riding-a-one...

2: https://www.quantamagazine.org/machine-learning-confronts-th...

3: https://www.axios.com/artificial-intelligence-pioneer-says-w...

And here are some experts contradicting your second claim:

1: https://80000hours.org/problem-profiles/positively-shaping-a...

2: https://medium.com/@deepmindsafetyresearch/building-safe-art...

3: https://openai.com/blog/ai-safety-needs-social-scientists/

4: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/artificial-intell...

5: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/602410/no-the-experts-don...
Anyone who, at the same time, claims that "we're all gonna die" if something is not done in the next decade, and doesn't want to consider nuclear is a hypocrite, and not a very bright person. If you believe in the first premise (for the record, I do not, although I do believe in man-made climate change), then you have to concede that nuclear is the only way out that's anywhere near viable without pretending that we can spend tens of trillions of dollars on infrastructure that needs to be replaced every 20 years.
The article rings very true, about the wumao and other trolls infesting reddit.

Go back to about 2016 and note the trends through today. Subreddits r/china, r/sino, and r/worldnews have seen an obvious influx of postings pushing the CCP viewpoint, then using downvotes to suppress opposing views.

I left reddit after growing weary of the never ending predictions of China's gangsters leading the world and the thousands of ways Western civilization is failing.

Those hyppocrite oligarchs are first to quietly buy homes and send their children to Canada, while threatening any Chinese critics overseas.

Reddit trolks as just one finger of the state fist, otherwise threatening: "Delete your anti-Party social media posts and Github code or we'll throw your mother in jail."
> As the compiler will stop you from borrow checking or something unsafe again and again, you are being distracted constantly by focusing on the language itself instead of the problem you are solving.

While anyone is obviously free to use any language he or she likes the whole article comes across to me as someone arguing why they dont want / need seatbelts: "They constrain my movement, I'm a good driver, etc.".

These are also the same kind of arguments one could make for wanting to use a weakly typed language instead of a strongly typed language.

Personally I like my types strong and my memory safe...
I don't doubt the line is much more efficient and flexible as claimed, but the article doesn't do a very good job explaining exactly how the gains are achieved beyond hand-waving about clever contraptions that are faster than robots and the ability to dynamically move stations around. It seems difficult to imagine that hordes of industrial engineers haven't done the calculations on each of these methods countless times at all car manufacturing companies. There must be deeper, more subtle factors that explain why Toyota's particular combination of techniques yields such superior results. Perhaps it's just the culmination of a lot of long-tail optimizations that only Toyota has had time and capital to let mature or maybe there really is just "one secret trick" that underpins it all - the article doesn't really give a good sense of what it might be. In either case it'd be interesting to see a detailed breakdown with numbers comparing the various lines with explanations for why particular decisions were or weren't made to truly understand why the system works so well.
No, it does make perfect sense in a way. Safety in these terms means that things are extremely unlikely to go wrong by themselves. Interventions are simply not a part of that model.

There is some, but not a lot of awareness in the industry that the implicit trust between components in these systems is insecure and ultimately jeopardizes their safety. It is too easy to spoof process values that are sane, but do not reflect the true state of the system. The systems fundamentally miss any mutual authentication between their components.

Process measurement devices typically even offer a simulation mode in their firmware to do just that. At worst, all you have to do is to crack a simple password to gain access to this feature remotely.
I don't get why Teslas have bonnets! The Y even has a flat panel where the radiator traditionally is! They are trying to look like a conventional car from the distance!

I remember when the first Renault Espaces turned up. Suddenly a car without a bonnet! (Okay, technically, perhaps it wasn't the first. But it was the first different-looking car to suddenly be everywhere that I remember!) That was revolutionary and different.

Its a pity that Tesla feel the public need them to disguise their cars. I want an electric car which can seat 6 but on a normal 4-person footprint. I want a people-carrier!
Probably not:

"That is the whole idea of the intelligence community, they are trying to control the narrative that goes across the mainstream media, and how people get their information and what information they get." [1]

1. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/08/15/nsa_whist...
Seems to me that the model X is a saloon car, while the Y is a fastback. Don't most car manufacturers make cars of both types?
How to Migrate a Website from Drupal 6 to Drupal 8 – A Step-by-Step Guide
I think most current examples of sandboxing also implies app signing and whatever restricts users' own control, hence the confusion. Users are sometimes allowed to lift the restriction but it's mostly an all-or-nothing bet.
They made one of Elon's Roadsters into the space model.
So I skimmed the page, am I right that TL;DR is:

1. This is to the model 3 what the x is to the model s.

2. Expect to pay around model 3 price point + 25%.

3. Range for high end models is further than high end model 3's.

Missing anything important?
Exploiting commutativity for practical fast replication
I believe it is not the problem of 30% cuts. It is the Problem of Anti-Competitive behaviour when you have a competing services without the cost of cuts.

This is not the same as Amazon offering their own label in their Store. Customers could shop in dozens of many other online retail or local retail. And Amazon does not charge other label 30% cut for stocking fees.

I believe Apple should charge a fair amount only when they have a competing product or services within its locked system. Had Apple Charge 15% for the first year on Spotify and 10% for all subsequent subscription it would have been much better. I don't believe the 5% would work, as I have seen many saying 5% should be enough. The cost of running microtransaction, processing, billing, legal, etc are just about break even at 5% even in the scale of Apple. I don't see charging 10% would seem unfair. ( In US at least, in EU the processing fees are much much lower )

Or Apple should never have made Apple Music in the first place. I still don't see any value in Apple offering it. iTunes was required for iPod. And it changes the whole music industry as a whole, along with iPod sold which ultimately saved Apple. No one will buy iPhone because of Apple Music, and Apple Music itself isn't even profitable.
> They have so many sales, with such outrageous discounts

That was a long, long time ago. Nowadays Steam sales are pretty mediocre and almost never the cheapest discount you can get. If you want discounts, go to IsThereAnyDeal [0], if you only want Steam keys, you can check that option.

That is not to say that I don't think Steam is the best launcher and storefront of all the options I've seen and used. Even if I buy a game somewhere else (including GoG [1]), for information about the game I go to steam because it has all the info I want (and that is excluding the reviews which, as the biggest store, are also the most useful)

[0]: https://isthereanydeal.com/

[1]: https://www.gog.com/
To be fair Apple capitulated and reduced it to 15% for after the first year, and leave a lot of money on the table from freemium/ad-supported apps.

I'm honestly not sure what the big deal is. You can subscribe outside of the App store (by not using in-app payments) and not pay that extra $$, and Apple doesn't get that extra $$.
I prefer to have an optional locking differential on the drive wheels for snow.

In my experience, the most common problem with snow is getting enough traction to move out of parking spot or up a steep incline. Like most AWD vehicles, the AWD Tesla has an open differential which does not help much in these scenarios. When traction gets dicey it behaves like a 2WD with torque spread between one front and one rear wheel.
This is such a stupid argument. If 5 people do something that the 6th person doesn't want to ..doesn't mean the onus is on the 5 to stop doing it.
I think Apple is going to find itself standing alone by the time the dust settles on this issue. Their 30% tax is a disservice to its own customers, not just app publishers.

Apple tries to counter that the problem is Spotify. It's Spotify that is money-hungry, Apple claims:

Underneath the rhetoric, Spotify’s aim is to make more money off others’ work.

The only problem with this argument is that Spotify is just one example. App publishers of all sizes have expressed grave dissatisfaction over this issue. Ultimately, this has led to a poorer experience for Apple's own customers in the form of higher fees for in-app purchases or weird, convoluted checkout flow that requires you to goto your browser to finish a transaction.
The main thing is that bucket namespace is global. There is only one bucket "foo" worldwide. That means that every bucket mutation event (e.g. bucket deletion or creation) requires co-ordination between regions. When that big us-east-1 region outage occurred a year or so back every other region worked fine except for bucket mutations.
Christchurch Shooter Told Viewers “Subscribe to PewDiePie”
Solar roofs in Johannesburg, South Africa would be huge.

Power supply is a big problem as the state owned utility Eskom is very unreliable. We have "load shedding" at least every week at the moment.

Yesterday the power was down from about 08h00 to 12h30.
The first few comments here seem to argue against the article, as do comments below the post but I am very much with the author.

I strongly disagree with the Rust mentality, and the general mentality of statically typed languages with extremely prohibitive compile time checks, that seem to become more common.

Underlying that model seems to be a concept of software like a sort of renaissance master's marble statue, error free and perfect at time of production.

The downside that the author points out seem to be often neglected. Constant interruption and battling with the type system during development, when mental overhead is a problem. Coupling components by types propagating through software, increasing time and effort to make changes to your software, increasing the overhead for others to contribute.

In my opinion the dominant metric to evaluate the usefulness of a language's type system should be its overall effect on cost, time spent, productivity, ease of development and capacity to change. Everything else is very subjective or just an aesthetic concern.
In my country where there is usually snow on the roads, or at least ice, for most of winter, BMW saloons (RWD) are pretty common here too. I think people buy them on purpose so they can slide around tight corners.
Age Salary Job Title
--- ------ --- -----
16 ~$10k 1 Software Developer (MI)
17 ~$10k
18 ~$10k
19 ~$10k 2 Research Assistant (MI)
20 ~$15k 3 Software Engineer Intern (MI)
21 $35k Software Engineer
22 $35k
23 $45k
24 $70k 4 Software Engineer (MI)
25 $130k 5 Senior Software Engineer (Seattle, WA)
26 $160k Principal Software Engineer
27 $165k

The ones beginning with "~" were part time jobs that paid hourly. None of the jobs offered bonuses or stock.
Π Delivery
I was looking at the Model Y AWD, is 5.1% more expensive than the model 3 AWD.

The Model Y range is 280 miles vs 310 for the model 3 AWD.

There's no model Y that matches or beats the model 3 LR which has 325 mile range.
> Underneath the rhetoric, Spotify’s aim is to make more money off others’ work. And it’s not just the App Store that they’re trying to squeeze — it’s also artists, musicians and songwriters.

Uh, I seem to recall Apple being forced to reverse some brazenly greedy policies for their music service when a high-profile artist called them out and withheld content in protest. For Apple to characterize itself as a champion of exploited artists is pretty disingenuous.
software engineers are aware of <DST, weird person names, malicious users, 4-byte UTF characters etc> yet they still write software that doesn't handle them well.

The fact that people abstractly know a situation exists does not mean they will handle it correctly.

Also, remember the issues with "racist" face recognition systems that were trained on non-diverse data sets?

It's not like google engineers forgot black people exist, but I think it's not trivial to pay the proper attention to some problems if they are outside of your daily experience.
> Its a pity that Tesla feel the public need them to disguise their cars.

Tesla's success is due to the fact that their vehicles look like normal cars. The products further up their roadmap are likely to challenge the status quo of vehicle design (like the "Blade-Runner" Tesla pickup truck).
Apple won't find itself standing alone. Other major distributors like Google and Valve are both happy to take 30% off the top of app sales too, and if the chance comes to speak up in support, they will. But the difference is both of them can be circumvented by competitors, for instance Epic Games, who is challenging both. (Epic is launching an Android store soon.) Apple can't be, and that's likely to be the crux of any action against them.
Absolutely, but I attribute the ability to decompose a problem into overlapping subproblems as an understanding of recursion, so I had implicitly assumed such an understanding.
they do, due to subsidies and high income.
> My theory of the awfulness of phone games is that it's more about the fact that phones don't have any input devices.

My theory of the awfulness of phone games is that awful, cookie cutter games on phones can make lots of money, so lots of firms are happy to churn them out on an assembly line, knowing that a certain percentage will succeed.

There's enough not-awful phone games to establish that the platform doesn't inherently mandate awfulness, so it's about the market not the inherent platform features.

> If the game had two commands, it wouldn't work on a phone.

There's plenty of games with multiple commands on phones (one or two virtual directional sticks plus a handful, often contextually switched so the total number is greater than is onscreen at any one time, virtual buttons is not uncommon.
My bet is they decided to respond due to PR issues. The response from the EU will likely depend to some degree on the public reception of Apple. The Spotify post looked very strong, so even if they don't fully dismantle it (as you noticed they dodge some issues) they provide enough arguments that it isn't immediately clear to bystander who is right.
I was thinking the same thing. Unless the angle is off in all the videos, it's not much taller than some sedans/hatchbacks like the Avalon and most Subarus.

Even calling it a crossover seems like a stretch, since it appears to have a foot less headspace (or more!) than crossovers like the RAV4 or CRV.