skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not really. The government has the authority to print money. They can ensure banks never run out of cash. But it may cause inflation if they overdo it.

I suppose inflation is paying for it, but I get the feelings that the semantics around whether inflation is "paying" for things have changed recently (or maybe I've been hearing too many ardent MMT evangelists).
It's not just projections or worries. Companies have real hard data, such as sales pipeline, inventories, orders etc. If your sales pipeline is down, inventory is stocking up, and your warehouse is idle compared to a year before, it is a manager's job to lay off employees.

a few interesting reports: https://www.reddit.com/r/StockMarket/comments/aydpbu/first_h...
https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/1110161228507348992
I had a nice comparison because I first tried to do a native implementation in C++ and - wanting to do some custom low-level "stuff" for my simulation actor system (related to allocation and networking) - I ran into so many footguns that it slowed me tremendously. As soon as I tried to do the same with Rust, it was a breeze and I was able to write a lot of unsafe code that does very particular things that I need, while exposing a completely safe API for the rest of the engine and game. Being then able to also use Rust in the browser quite seamlessly with WASM allowed me to have a super straightforward and high-perf communication channel between the simulation backend and browser UI. The only real Rust disadvantage that hurts a lot is compile times. Sometimes I do fight types/the borrow checker, but only when I try to do weird things, in general I perceive it as a huge help in scaffolding things.
Why did you decide to make roads the atomic unit over cars for traffic?
>millennials better start thinking about how they can retire as soon as possible

Most millennials have been blackpilled to the point of just accepting that the way things are currently going means we'll never be able to afford to retire.
Yeah, I'm holding out for AMD to do something big. At the moment I don't do anything that justifies a ton of cores - my home PC is a gaming machine, and that still likes a couple of fast cores than a bunch of smaller ones.
> It's all accounting! I can't emphasize this enough--you can pay the employees 2x as much, or 10x as much, or 1/2x as much, and Fortnite will be EXACTLY as fun as it is now. That's what people are outraged about.

Yes, but there is a difference if it takes 20 devs to make it and there are only 10 available vs there being 200. Competition among the devs as to who gets to make it means each of them will tolerate worse conditions to get the offer over the other. Effectively driving down the costs of producing the game. With a union in play, the cost of production would be stopped from going down.

I'm not necessarily arguing that it is worse with a union than without. But an expected side effect of forcing high costs (high wages in this case) would be that it would make it much harder for aspiring game devs to enter the field.

> you unionize because it will get these people paid better and feel happier at basically no economic cost

This is not true. Again, unions might produce a better outcome, I don't know otherwise for sure. But to think that you can tweak the economic system to behave exactly as you want it to, producing all the positive outcomes with no negatives, is absurd. We can often fail to achieve anything similar with simple software systems, much less with something as intricate and complex as humanity.
Yeah I read your reply above and I do see your point. For our own services that we continuously deploy this really just doesn't come up. If we have an http or rpc service it's going to have a deployment, a service, and maybe an ingress for pretty much all of time. If we needed to remove a thing in that scenario it might be the ingress if we change architecture, but it would be a big enough deal that cleaning up manually wouldn't be an added burden.
I was part of a union and was even on the union board that did the bargaining. Bargaining was incredibly stressful and a really terrible experience. Each time it made me want to quit my job. You learn just how little the company actually cares about you. Then you can't help but let the other members of the union know, and morale plummets overall. This happens every year...

I'm lucky at my current job that my employer does care for the employees. We are paid well, have amazing benefits, they are open about earnings and such. I much prefer this scenario rather than a union, but I can totally get why some companies need a union -- companies that treat their employees terribly. I just feel bad that it has to be a thing at all :(
There are a few people working on similar projects, which I can use if absolutely needed (CheerpJ, JSweet). But you're right. It makes me sad that Oracle doesn't do something like this - ideally by bringing some of these people in.
Typing with a Piano
Not to minimise accessibility concerns, but I think Matt's getting pissed on because rather than focus on the (impressive) achievement here he's diverted attention away from that and has (I think perhaps inadvertently) created a discussion that's beginning to resemble a social media pile-on. Accessibilty matters but this isn't an edifying spectacle and focussing on it in the way this discussion does is taking something away from what is otherwise quite a cool tech demo. I.e., it is raining on the parade.
Ok, but even then, surely it takes about as much time?

The time component of having to go somewhere + get your order + get back is mysteriously ignored all. the. time. Not just with coffee, but with making your own food. Like, you don't want to meal prep it takes too much time--but then you probably spend more time overall getting lunch every day instead! Especially if you have the luxury 'need' for variety every. single. meal.

It drives me a little bit crazy.
Where do you queue: in memory? on disk? in a dedicated queue server (Redis, Kafka, ActiveMQ, etc.)? in another SQLite database?
Eh, while I’m staunchly against Apple's integrations, the App Store isn’t a relevant factor imo.

These are things inside one store, as in Spotify and Apple Music are both for sale in the one store, and while Apple takes a cut, which could force Spotify to increase their price, they do have full pricing autonomy.

I’m not entirely against the fact that Apple has a walled garden in the form of the App Store, just because they do seem to invest in keeping a certain standard of quality unlike Google, but I’d say that’s a separate issue.

And Spotify probably doesn’t want to be in the store business anyways even if Apple allowed it, Epic Games is probably the first major case I heard of a company doing similar on Android (where it’s allowed) and almost immediately they opened a security vulnerability into everyone’s phones so...
I don't think that if you picked the average person of the street that they'd know about FDIC.

First, too many people don't have a lot of 'cash' savings. Second, as long as most people's debit and credit cards continued to work, they probably would not notice bank receivership.

Most folks: don't have savings, have a chunk of money tied up in their retirement savings, and another chunk tied up in property/residence.
> A flat tax is regressive [because what matters is utility of money].

It's fine to think that, but normally when people are talking about tax progressiveness, they are thinking about the fractional tax on dollars, not "utils". Otherwise, you'd also call our existing, progressive taxation scheme "regressive," since it still probably taxes poor people's utils at a higher rate than rich people. And there would probably not anywhere in the world be a tax scheme that can properly be called progressive.

One good rule of thumb, IMO, is that when you want to change the meaning of a classifier such that all extant instances of the classified type fall into a single bucket, that's probably not a useful change. YMMV.
What did LG do? (I've got one.)
I'm talking about the linguistic construct. It has a plus sign at the end to indicate "and every other letter and symbol in the union of all known alphabets".
That's a pretty broad generalisation over a lot of countries that constitute Asia. Japan and Korea for example are consistently ranked above many west european countries in terms of freedom [1]. And many asian countries are at about the middle in these rankings.

[1] https://www.cato.org/human-freedom-index-new
> how is gender different from fashion?

In a lot of ways it isn't. Gender is often performative in nature. The idea that gender is binary is fairly reductive, and as most people know isn't a very descriptive way to view the world. You're more likely to be a mix of masculine and feminine traits than a binary one-or-the-other.

Viewing the world via binary genders puts people into categories that can be negative. This is why gender bias exists, because we view men with certain traits and women with certain traits. If society was less binary in its approach to gender we might have to make less assumptions about people.

This is similar to the old way of approaching race science. X people are good at Y, and A people are good at B. We've pushed back on categorizing people by race and it's been beneficial.
Exactly. And I do use Rust compiled to WebAssembly to do lots of the "render preparation" work (converting streamed simulation states into render buffers), which makes it pretty fast.
Software moves "slower" because hardware needs to exist 1st and needs to see a widespread adoption in order to justify the cost of development and continuous improvement, also only hardware companies have the expertise because, well, they are the ones who developed the thing.

Doing software actually costs a lot, and no one wants to spend that kind of money past the "good-enough" threshold if they don't have to.
I use something called SnapKit (available on GitHub). It's like Swing and JavaFX had a baby, except that it has an abstraction layer that lets it compile to either JVM or JavaScript.
I mean more would be certainly great, but with 20 you can at least run a x16 GPU and a x4 NVMe SSD, which is for my personal setup perfectly OK, I cannot do that with 16 lanes.
> strips people of their personalities and turns them into the most boring people ever

Harsh. As a parent, I find people my own age who don't have kids to be boring. It's probably less that your friends have lost their personalities, and more that your relationships can no longer draw from the well of shared experience. For example, I have a lot of elaborate and hilarious stories revolving around poop, but I'm not going to tell them around non-parents. I've tried, but all I get is puzzled and uncomfortable looks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhGnMbw98u8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfnldxWlOhM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnOix9TFy1A

https://pron.github.io/posts/tlaplus-curryon-talk

https://learntla.com/introduction/

https://leanprover.github.io/theorem_proving_in_lean/

https://rise4fun.com/dafny
Leaked Microsoft Email Chain Reportedly Describes Hellish Workplace for Women
- no open space,

- no domestic country manager,

- no BS meetings,

- no BS about overtimes,

- contract + good pay,

- home-office,
You’re adding an incredibly relevant layer of nuance. Dallio’s plan is vague so his true intentions are illegible. People ascribing positive AND negative sentiments to him need to actually understand the policy changes he’s proposing (I.e. higher income rate vs capital gains rate) before passing judgement — and since he specifically has left it vague, I don’t see how anyone can judge his plan either positively or negatively: he has not even presented a specific plan!
Show HN: I made a popup widget to display online revenue, traffic
It's only a matter of time before flat earth becomes illegal too. Flat earth has been around for as long as the internet, but in the past year or so the amount of unbridled anger it causes has been increasing disturbing. The "righteous anger at people being wrong on the internet" phenomena seems to be truly intoxicating; it needs to be reigned while we still can.

(And just so we're clear, the earth is round. It's a shame I have to state that, lest the rabid opponents of harmless flat earth nutters get the wrong idea, jump down my throat, and accuse me of all manner of outlandish offenses.)
Apple's branding power can really provide solid leverage as they bolster services. I'm a Spotify subscriber but when Apple Music came out I considered getting an iPhone for the first time that year, ultimately I did not get an iPhone but I'm sure millions of users converted to be more integrated with the Apple environment.
Yes. I see this a lot. There's a testing facility for one of the major studios nearby. Lots of people try to get jobs there and say they work at "X".

But it's all QA. So I'm like "Cool, so you make minimum wage running tests".

I mean, you may never see my name in lights, but I ain't hurting to pay the bills if you know what I mean.
You have everything from the requests to process here: https://www.codementor.io/howitworks/mentorship. Did you see that already?

If yes, in simple terms, you set your budget and you try to bid yourself for the work. Then the customer chooses you, if you are convincing enough for them to take you.

You gotta start a timer and let the customer know that you are charging. Once you have done with your work, and the customer is happy, you may stop the timer and the timer works in steps of 15 minutes.

Then the customer leaves you a feedback and you will be credited with the amount agreed. I guess the payout duration will be about three to five days later in order to curb fraudulent accounts and you can request your pay once you reach a certain threshold.
When you look at the bigger picture financials it does take money out of the economy because money invested in public services drives more jobs. Money hoarded by an individual only creates wealth for that individual. Sure they might reinvest that wealth but often not in a way that directly nor indirectly grows the economy - or at least not in worthwhile way for those who it matters the most to.

This is part of the reason (albeit just a small part) why the rich and poor divide grows wider year on year. If it were as simple as you described, that wouldn’t happen.
In scenario when an attacker can see encrypted message (e.g. monitoring network traffic) and can affect part of the message that is being encrypted, he can use the compression to his advantage. He can for example try different inputs and observe the length of encrypted message, if with the certain input the length drops that means the given input contains string that's similar to another part of the decrypted message and the compressing algorithm did its job and used that to reduce the size.

This was mentioned in 2012 when CRIME[1] (also included BEAST[2] exploit) and later BREACH[2] vulnerability (when it was considered cool to come up with cool sounding name, creating a logo and a website for specific vulnerabilities)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRIME

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_Layer_Security#BEAST...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BREACH
Yes, this will work of course :-)

I was thinking of something more "graphical", similar to pgAdmin or SequelPro, when you need to navigate in a dataset.
Assuming what's revealed so far is reasonably accurate and the decisions were not taken for some yet to be revealed completely unexpected reason (unlikely) here's who to blame.

This was a business decision to remove re-certification/re-training for some 60B sales. So yes the CEO is responsible. If you can float on money for the success you can spend the lifetime in jail for the deaths too.

But that might be a little extreme. So here's a better one for after Lion Air crash there is no reason to believe that Boeing including the CEO didn't go over this, didn't realize they made a risky plan and even then they didn't go through with their temporary mitigation with a fine tooth comb. So yes it seems the CEO and some big shots and maybe some down the line should go to jail.

No one is sent to jail for complicated to reason or never before seen problem that they didn't know about or didn't think about and it happened. This wasn't an accident, they implemented absolutely critical safety feature by design without triple redundancy as well understood to be required then they lied about it (if I understood the max change from earlier to later version), tried to downplay it and when a crash happened due to this didn't own up to it. So for sure this helps safely culture. If you hide safety problem knowingly for greed/money, because your boss asked and you didn't care you shouldn't be working in safety critical system.

> Boeing & Airbus are largely responsible for the massive improvements in flight safety over the last 40 years. It’s incredible that flying is as safe as it. Yes the deaths are a tragedy, but every time I get in a plane I accept the fact that the physics of flying could ultimately kill me, and I trade that off against the convenience of getting somewhere quickly.

I don't even know what to say to this. So I drove safely for 40 years and today I decided to see if I can safely drunk drive if I play the music really loud and killed a family of four.

This was not physics, this was not a complicated software bug (at the core) but it was cutting corners for profit.
I think the overreliance/overfocus on any given individual technology (especially computer vision) is a major issue

It should be a blended, combined approach: FLIR, LIDAR, RADAR, USONAR, CV, etc

There doesn't need to be The One True Technology To Rule Them All™
Cats Might Not Act Like It, but They Know Their Names as Well as Dogs
Neo-Colonialism and Reproductive Health
But won't these algorithms be based upon the whatever the meatspace traders were feeling? We've added indirection, but I don't know if it's in any way better.
Thanks for sharing!

This is generally a good way to immerse yourself in a language with content that actually interests you - now you don't have to maintain a separate window/notes/etc.

I really like the idea, and it looks well executed.
Automated offensive security tool for reconnaissance and vulnerability scanning
> I believe it's better to accept that the Web platform won

The "Web platform" is not a single thing. It is a bunch of things that are constantly evolving, that are also implemented differently by different browser vendors that have their own issues.

Just because the web purports to have a (sometimes) working UI that is accessible to some percentage of users on some percentage of devices doesn't mean that we should stop there and not experiment anymore in other directions (even if those new directions could, initially, not support all a11y functionality that 'the Web' already provides, for screen readers or what else have you).

There is no "the Web won, accept it"- many things are terribly broken, before even taking a11y into account. Just note how many dysfunctional UI paradigms exist that don't support what we call 'responsive web design', often from the biggest companies in the world!

A11y isn't anywhere close to a solved problem on the Web any more than responsive layout is -> it should not be the target specification to work towards just because.

As a final thought experiment: what if we are going about a11y all wrong? What if screen readers and tree hierarchies of components aren't the right way to approach building these things and instead the better solution is to completely do away with that approach and instead make new screen "readers" that use AI to better visually determine elements on screens after the fact. AI is definitely at a point where it can classify buttons from text and images, as well as read out text in several kinds of fonts. If this becomes the future, it'll render all of our current web 'standards' to look like an unnecessary hassle of working with the more disingenuous and restricted (in the sense of, you can only use such and such component in such and such way) methods of today.

What I'm saying is, encourage people to experiment with new UIs that don't yet conform to standards. By all means, mention that you wonder about a11y and ask what the plan might be going forward. But don't dismiss these experiments too early cause they're not built in the "right way".
I assume you talk in terms of what constitutes an actor in the actor system: because cars on one strip of road interact highly locally, so processing them in one batch makes a lot of sense performance wise, vs. every car sending messages to every other car and having to maintain references to close-by cars.
OOP is great if all you are doing is OO and if your solution to a problem is running a simulation (what OOP was invented for).

But you are not staying in your pure OO-world nowadays.
There's always the boundary issue where you are giving up your careful encapsulation and where state needs to be transferred instead of being hidden away in some object (like exporting to JSON). Poof, your encapsulation is gone.

Furthermore, may OOP languages don't deal with ownership at all. If I'm a constructor and someone passes me an object A or worse, a list of As.
Can I hold onto that list? Should I make a shallow copy? Should I make a deep copy, because I need the A objects in the state they are currently in?

What if I have to work with 3rd party libraries? What assumptions do they make about that?

Can I call methods on objects from multiple threads? I need to rely on the documentation to figure that out or provide synchronization myself just to make sure I'm not breaking things.

Also, it is no accident that refactoring tools have become so popular in the OO world. If you need to design OO with 'change' in mind, you need to employ lots and lots patterns that make your code looks like new FactoryBuilderPatternVisitorImpl().

But with refactoring, hey, I can easily change my classes thanks to my IDE, yay!
Too bad if someone then passes me data that only fits the old classes and too bad if consumers of my library are getting nasty surprises.

It is with everything in software: use the appropriate tool for the job.
Yes, but the government can. The 2008 crisis didn't happen in deposit banking, but it was effectively a "bank run" in the same sense you're talking about -- all the assets banks could normally use to draw on to meet obligations froze up, and they ran out of money.

And the government stepped in, becoming a lender of last resort. And it worked (not well, maybe, but it worked).

Saying "the economy is powered by belief" isn't quite right. Finance is powered by belief and trust. But at the end of the day the "economy" is all the people out there able to work, and they aren't susceptible to bank runs.
I have stumbled upon a number of these types of texts recently and while I think it is generally a good thing I can't help noticing that they are quite... basic. Most of his concerns have been solved by mixed market economies, that overall deliver superior results. But even that discussion is probably a couple of decades too late.
I don't think there would be inflation.

Inflation begins (IMHO) when there's a lot of money in circulation: too much cash chasing too few resources, bidding up prices.

In a bank run, people are taking home bills because they want them to be "safe" in case the bank goes under (never mind FDIC, which most people probably do not understand).

Money sitting under the proverbial or literal mattress is not in circulation, and not going to cause the bidding-up of prices.