skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I had a thread on twitter about this problem of "musicians nerding over gear." In our metaphor it was about mountain climbers. The programming language and its paradigms chosen may have some effect on how you scale the mountain but the real problem is the mountain. Whether you use functional programming or dynamic typing it only affects small, local problems in the practice of climbing mountains.

The problem of efficiently scaling mountains requires a broader scope. This is why I think formal methods are starting to break into the mainstream: they give us tools to use to simulate and verify designs (model checking, system design validation), validate implementations (verification, proof), and generate provably correct code from high level specifications (synthesis).

Grumpy programmers who think maths is for academics are going to miss out I think. It's an exciting field and the cost for something that used to be only used for extreme circumstances has been coming down so rapidly that it can be effectively used in small businesses as well.

It all comes down to clarity: in communication, in thought, and in practice.
The graphic on that article reminds me of something a multi-millionaire once told me about his stock market high-frequency trading: It's like picking up pennies in front of a steam roller.
We did an entire show on this with Ozan Onay back in 2017 ~> https://changelog.com/podcast/260

You can read through the transcript too ~> https://changelog.com/podcast/260#transcript
Anonymous SMS with Bitcoin
You sound like an idea guy.
Thanks for posting this, I hadn't given that thought much time and it was interesting to hear it put so succinctly. In my opinion it's a pretty valid perspective, however, it does create a very narrow definition of genius. I'd suggest that the loud stomps unsavory genius in their sensibilities may very well create a lack of space for the quite, introverted, polite, snowflake philosophical or artistic genius, and that this to me would be equally disappointing. I think a good underlying lens is meeting people where they are, whoever they are.
When I met with a financial planner, he stressed the importance of setting aside enough money to spend on myself every month that I would feel confident to start investing.

The latte scare is a great way to make sure people who are apprehensive about investing never even consider it. Starting incrementally is way better than criticizing people for just trying to live their lives.
Can you explain, how does this apply to the article, though? These people structured transactions that violated both the spirit (definitely) and the letter (quite likely), but the complexity of the transactions let them survive challenges by the IRS because the IRS wasn't set up to deal with them. I don't see what "We can't have it both ways" refers to here, among other things you said.

I think people do sometimes overstate the amount of legal and ethical complexity in all this.
Entirely dependent on when you get in and out of the market.

http://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/... (archive.nytimes.com: In Investing, It’s When You Start
And When You Finish)

"Investors often have expectations of real annual returns greater than 7 percent — the areas in green. But over 20 years or longer, rates that high are rare."

"After accounting for dividends, inflation, taxes and fees, $10,000 invested at the end of 1961 would have shrunk to $6,600 by 1981. From the end of 1979 to 1999, $10,000 would have grown to $48,000."

“Market returns are more volatile than most people realize,” Mr. Easterling said, “even over periods as long as 20 years.”
To be clear, what you are saying is incredibly disingenuous. The link you give shows that individuals and PACs associated with Bridgewater Associates gave $5,400 to Tom Cotton. That's not in millions or thousands. That's literally $5,400. Tom Cotton raised $17,454,785 in that election cycle.

And keep in mind that isn't even his firm giving the money. Also, giving more than $2,700 to a candidate is illegal anyway, so "financially backing a candidate" is kind of a nonsense standard to hold a person to.

Money in politics is a problem, to be sure, but one that is commonly overstated in this sort of light, and what you are saying here is that he should be giving more money, which is kind of the opposite of what we should be thinking of things.
It's the same story in all new tech breakthroughs: the rich and powerful are already leveraging AI and the complete lack of regulation to geometrically explode their hoardes and power, everyone else not so much. Acting like this is some far off future event is absurd, people are already making trillions of dollars off of AI and personal data.
Either she committed perjury earlier or she didn't.

That's a thing in the past.

If she has perjured herself she certainly has no legal right not to be punished for it. Immunity agreements come in the form "come clean and tell us all". If she didn't, well, that was a stupid decision.

If she did not perjure herself there is no trap to be laid.
Artist who painted Trump nude demands Michael Cohen 'fess up' about threats
Laws against lies: Asian governments are trying to curb fake news
Living on a country where unions are horizontal to the industry, with a couple of them supporting people on the computing world, regardless of the company, this US point of view keeps surprising me.
The "gig work" jobs crowd out other, better-paying and/or better-benefited jobs because the companies brokering them (Uber, Lyft, etc) are able to operate without turning a profit.

It doesn't help that these jobs often have an attractive shine to them up front—fast, easy money! all you have to do is drive around!—but hide lots of costs—like massively increased wear and tear on your car—that there's no advertisement about, and no help in covering. If you have to keep driving to keep food on the table, it's also that much harder to take the time required to find a better job (though admittedly, that's not really qualitatively different from most low-end hourly-paid jobs, though it may be quantitatively, if your expenses end up wiping out enough of the income that you're effectively getting less than minimum wage).
No, that's cutting off the supply. The johns demand sex even if they're being prevented from buying any because it's been made too risky to approach the areas where there's supply.
I won’t be surprised if he very quickly gets “accidentallied.” He’s outlived his use to his masters and is a liability now.
lobste.rs would probably welcome you if you're not already there. It's the cycle I guess.

edit: I just noticed that he said he won't be reading or responding. I feel like I've lost one of my own now.
> So the “practical” solution is to change human nature?

We could at least stop giving young people terrible advice like, "you can do anything, live your dream!"

"Get a practical job to pay the bills, and do your dream as a side gig," is a pretty reasonable compromise.

Most people are have a low tolerance for risk and it's a problem when they get into a field that requires being a risk taker. That tolerance for risk is a strong unconscious bias, so they go into hyper-competitive fields and wind up being the 99% who go nowhere.

Putting out advice, "don't do risky stuff" also doesn't harm real risk-takers because they won't take that advice anyway.

> It’d be like saying that the practical solution to human trafficking is for people to stop visiting prostitutes; or that the solution to gangs’ drug income is for people to stop buying drugs.

No, it's like saying not getting into prostitution or gangs is a good way to avoid those problems in your life.
Domestic cats discriminate their names from other words
there's already a tax on wealth/savers, its called inflation.
Are you sure about that? Well... for Dalio, he's an investor that is always looking both forward and backwards. He's looking backwards to see what's happend in the past and how economy/society has reacted. He's looking in the future to see how he could best take advantage of signals he sees.
You are overlooking a simple fact: Rich dont want to pay taxes.

You will always have problems when taking from the rich. 800 years ago It was barron rebellion (Magna Carta). Now its army of lawyers and gutted IRS. IMO War between taxman and rich is not entirely off table in future.
I don’t like it. Who gets to decide what tax rate each thing gets? There are just so many things.

Make it flat at 20% for any time money is traded for something. This would be for toilet paper to a house to a political donation and include capital gains profits. Everything is taxed at 20%.

Then eliminate income and corporate taxes. States can define other taxes like local income tax, property tax etc.

Then every adult gets a check for 20% of the agreed upon poverty level in January.

Now taxes are not tied to income, to only those that work or capitalize, etc.
You're looking at the tree, and he's looking at the forest. Hence his quote: 'Either we have a "the rules are the rules" approach or we have a principled approach.' The worlds tax systems are very related when you are dealing with the ultra-rich.
I'm honestly having a hard time figuring out what the take-away from this article is. It claims to to lay out a paradigm but it doesn't really seem to lay it out all that clearly.
I'll reply to the most salient point:

> This tweet says nothing of the sort, nor would I expect it to, as no one in the history of the world has ever suggested the contrary.

This is actually a primary claim of transactivists: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2S0e-i117vY

This video contains at least one lawyer from the ACLU, Chase Strangio, claiming that there is no such thing as a "male body" or "female body". They absolutely are against the idea of sexual dimorphism. This video is accompanied by many other articles all arguing that transwomen are "female" because they say so, and therefore should be allowed in women's sex segregated spaces, sports etc.

Since "respecting the identities of trans people" is a euphemism for "deny the existence of biological sex", I'm happy to be called a bigot.
What? With ruby, there are at least 4 ways to find out how big something is (.size, .length, et al). You want to loop over something? You can use python style for in loops, .each, and several other ways. Your block could be a block, or it could be a symbol with an & in front. Want a bit of code without a name? You have blocks, procs, and lambda. Want a string? You have string and symbol, and ne'er the two shall cross paths.

Ruby is specifically designed as a replacement for perl, and keeps a lot of the same warts ($igils, and globals like $?, $1, etc). While I agree it's better than perl for readability, it's not because there's only one way to do any given thing.
The way it usually works is that I say it will take 12 months and the response is "we need it in 6". So I say "fine, we'll give it a go but I am not making any promises" and off we go.
Rich people spend less of a percentage of their money to live a life with higher consumption rates than a poorer person.
Jamie Dimon: US 'absolutely' right to enter trade war, despite economic toll
I guess in that case it would come as a bigger surprise that I'm from the EU, and from a country where unions are quite well established, and have never been to, studied, or worked in the US.
That’s the authors point. Unless you are an extreme outlier and buying a LOT of small purchase (like to the point you don’t have time to work), they really are meaningless. The big fixed items in your budget really drive everything, housing, medical, education, which have all far outstripped inflation. And the income has remained flat for most people (save tech workers who get great coffee for free).
I'm thinking randomness more in the sense of getting a big break which may be pretty much the result of a dice roll rather than getting on the list for bit parts.

Of course, luck plays a role pretty much everywhere and those who really strike it big in tech and other professionals should chalk that up to luck to at least some degree. But, for the most part, if someone with a modicum of talent and educational background doesn't get a job at $TECH_COMPANY_A because the interviewer was having a bad day, they didn't have the right keyword for HR, or they choked on an interview question, they probably haven't blown their one and only chance to get a decent professional job.
It would also likely be deemed unconstitutional in the US unless apportioned between the states, as was the case of similar taxes in the 19th century. This would make it politically inviable, as the poorer states (where the land is less valuable) would need to have a higher rate.
But the company was there first. If the company sucks, than those devs could also found a better company instead of trying to change the bad company.

So fighting, yes, but maybe for something solid.
But this is replacing something with good a11y guidelines, with poorer support. That’s worth warning about, and nothing at all like trying to make downhill skiing for paraplegics.

Imagine using this for a new B2B app and then losing sales because prospective customers have ADA requirements or blind employees who use other web apps just fine. It’s extra engineering work sure, but it’s hardly a crazy ask, and it’s the right thing to do for large to medium size companies who can afford it IMO.
True, but the amount of available (and often identical) lists is incredible. Are people really using these lists long-term or are they enthusiastically bookmarked and then forgotten for ever? Genuinely interested
California is overdue for an earthquake, seismologists say
Plus people rarely back a candidate for single issues.

It's entirely possible that Ray Dalio has some views on the tax code reform that may not align with mainstream republicans, but that doesn't mean the other 90% of policies the other politician supports align with his views. Or even that the other camp has the same tax reform policies in mind as he does.

I've seen many people who want to reform the tax code, which would involve a greater relative share of taxes for the top end, who wouldn't identify as democrats.
To add to your list, aerospace is a big one. For senior stuff they usually pay ok but especially entry level jobs, even in software, they know that everyone wants to build jets, rockets, and satellites.
And the type of software people make for free is not the same software people get paid to create.

I bet few people would be eager to develop banking software on their free time for instance.
I'd like to understand the priority order I guess? By all metrics the homeless population is in far more need of attention than the trans community for example.

I'm totally okay with that particular poster continuing to focus on the trans community because of their own personal agenda, but pretending that they represent inclusion or fairness is an outright lie at that point.
CC 078: Using Ubersuggest for Content Marketing with Neil Patel
He literally says that we should not suppress them so long as we can counter them by rational argument. Do you know what cannot be suppressed by rational argument? Violence, and nothing else.
UK police outside Ecuador embassy amid WikiLeaks tweets
Also switched to Bitwarden the other day and it's far superior. None of the irritating bugs Lastpass extensions/integrations had, works perfectly on Firefox, Android, 'web' etc. In general it feels a lot less clunky and it's Firefox addon for instance has many more quality of life features.
So yay? I can write Java again instead of JavaScript? Yuck...
How do you ensure your fuzzed data has statistical signal that approximates those present in the true data?
Sorry, "atomic" was not the best term here.

I don't know if there is a word for it — it comes up in a lot of situations — but given a set of resources, Helm will diff against Kubernetes and wipe out anything superfluous. So if I've deployed a chart that has (A, B, C) and then do a new deploy of (A, B), then C will be deleted. "Destructive diffing"? I don't know.

Kubernetes itself is not atomic right now. I believe Etcd supports multi-key transactions now, so it could be done.
If you're entrepreneurial, I fully believe it's a better use of your time and mental energy to make an additional $5k/yr than to scrimp to save an extra $5k/yr. For the HN crowd, this could mean building a side project that generates income, negotiating a higher salary, etc.

That being said, the type of people who have the luxury to focus on those types of things are in the minority. For those who aren't entrepreneurial, don't work in tech, etc. sticking to a strict budget can be the difference between having money for retirement and not having it.
the process uses energy to create the fuel out of carbon in the atmosphere. the process does not release any carbon. the plane burns the fuel, releasing the same amount of carbon in the fuel back in to the atmosphere.

What part needs to be 100% efficient to make flying carbon neutral?
Youtube drama is just that, drama. Despite the end of the "golden age", there's still a lot of quality content on YouTube. However, you won't find it on the Trending page, and most of it is funded through platforms like Patreon, not ads, or is not funded at all (like hobbyists).

Here are my rules for YouTube:

1. Disable search and watch history. This restricts the factors that drive your video suggestions to videos you've explicitly selected.

2. Never go to the Trending page. Most stuff there is clickbaity garbage.

3. Actively curate your suggestions. If there are videos in your suggestions you don't care about, click "Not Interested" in the flyout menu. If you watch a video you like and you'd like to see more, subscribe to the channel, upvote the video, or add it to a private playlist.

My home page suggestions are limited to videos directly related to videos I've upvoted or channels I've subscribed to, except for the occasional time Google adds a "Popular music" or whatever section that is easily dismissed. Suggestions below videos are also pretty relevant.

One of my favourite channels is a New Zealander called Geoffrey Croker who is restoring his classic Land Rover, with dry humour, excellent lighting and cinematography, and good pacing. He just posted a video about the LR's engine that I haven't watched yet, but I'm sure will be great[0]. Rather than using YouTube's algorithm to discover new channels, I rely on comments like this one that I see around the Web, as well as when channels I watch call out other channels, the way This Old Tony[1] frequently does.

[0] https://youtu.be/KSjA3KJPwro

[1] https://youtu.be/qMrlyEreba8
Principles aren’t principles if you only have them when they’re easy.

The US government shoved her in isolation for years. Even with immunity why should she help them now?
The term has existed, but was popularized and brought into the common discourse immediately after the 2016 election: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=f...
Unfortunately, there are increasingly important areas where correctness isn't even well-defined, including social networks, machine learning, performance, and UI design. Things can go very wrong without violating a traditional algorithmic correctness constraint.

But it helps to eliminate large classes of bugs where you can, so you can concentrate on other things.
> I do blame the youngster's generation.

When you're young the older generations complain about you.
When you're old you complain about the younger.

https://mentalfloss.com/article/52209/15-historical-complain...
I don't see why that matters.

It's legal to go find another job. It's also legal to unionize. Who are you to tell other people what to do? It's fine if you would just leave, but maybe others don't want to. Maybe they've poured their heart and soul into that company, or it's the best job around and if they leave it they'd have to move. There's plenty of reasons why people who are not you would choose to fight instead of give up and leave.

It doesn't make sense to criticize others for doing something that's perfectly acceptable just because you wouldn't do it.
This is a very backend/algorithm-centric view of correctness.

What about user interfaces? What is a "correct" user interface? If a bug is "unexpected" behavior, and my user interface has several thousand users, how do I manage to not produce unexpected behavior to anybody?

Many software supports workflows and processes in some enterprise, and those workflows shift subtly over time. How does Haskell help me write "correct" software in such a context, whatever that means?

How do I deal with low quality of input data, when I can't ask my product owner to create a matrix of each case of missing data and behavior, because that would be exponential in size?

Phrased another way, the problems with correctness that seem to trouble the author are not the problems with correctness that I tend to encounter often in my work.

The case where there is a clear-cut bug in an algorithm tend to be easier to debug and fix than a bug that stems from several department having subtly different ideas of what certain pieces of data and action mean.
Well, if you don't follow spaceflight / LVs it sure doesn't make much sense. From my PoV (very casual fan of the above) it actually is pretty spot on to value ULA at 1/10th value of SpaceX.

However reasons for that are too long to go into in one comment ... Mainly origin of & current owner structure of ULA, their current LVs cost & future and dynamics of SX launch business.
Don't know if it is still true but almost everyone at Boeing is part of the union, my college co-op student peers in the 1980's said they had to join the union even as electrical or aerospace engineers to work for a semester.
The silver lining is he's probably going to be rich as hell after it launches on Steam.
As with anything, it depends on what you want to do. One of my SQLite databases has a text column that's 500 million rows (it's an 80GB file). Even with a standard COLLATE NOCASE b-tree index, searching out a word in the middle of a tuple takes a ridiculously long time (although finding that word at the beginning of the tuple is amazingly quick).

A solution like Elasticsearch, while indeed heavier, is designed to deal with that kind of issue so, in my humble opinion, makes sense when you actually need a broad search capability.

As for the solution in https://github.com/brandonros/log-indexer, it seems like a tidy little solution to the problem of having to parse log files later. Not only does it provide a rapid way of looking up information when you're trying to solve a problem, but SQLite also acts as a compression archive of sorts as well.

I didn't look all that closely at the internals of the index.js script in that repo, but if it's still storing any of the records as JSON you can still access the internal data held inside the log record with SQLite's own JSON1 extension (https://www.sqlite.org/json1.html). That would save a pile of time compared to a broad-based directory search for text file contents. A few lines for a SQL query and instantly you'd have every occurrence of that error since the program started logging. I'd think that's a very useful tool!
Police protect assets, fire services protect assets, schools are better in wealthy districts, The IRS targets poor and middle class because it's easier. Courts give better outcomes to the wealthy. Businesses are generally started by those with money. Pretty sure that the wealthy use significantly more resources because they have more to protect.
Taxes or loop holes don't take money out of the economy. It just changes who directs the money, either the government or the individual. (Don't need to get into which is better here)
The scope must then be cut, or the project careens into Fantasyland. That happens at some places understood, a sign of incompetent management.