skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Everything you describe could exist as a paid service, and I suspect would be much higher quality that way.
Betting the OP doesn’t have kids. Until you have kids you are playing the game on easy mode

The biggest problem with the approach is large, optional purchases that effect quality of life. Things that are too big for “fun money”

Remodeling or Upgrading a house
Private school for kids
Vacations
Vacation property
Nice cars
College savings
Rainy day funds

One way to handle such is for both partners to agree on % saved out of the joint account and/or minimum balance
Nothing is ever free. Robinhood sells order flow, meaning your trades are executed by a real market maker but with slower fills, larger spreads and more restrictions on trades.
Right, this solves all my problems tack on hundreds of optional tags to every command that I have memorize and suddenly the user interface is perfection.

FYI without those options it is showing me part of the graph and implying that it is a linked list.
Thanks a lot for clarifying. What you've described is exactly a situation I thought going off-line wouldn't work in, so it's pretty educational for me that it works well for you.
... and why did TOPS-10 start using / as the option separator?
And none of them have been been CEO of anything significant since their screw-ups. Sure sounds like failure to me.
It seems the idea of Atmospheric Rivers has really solidified in the last couple of years.

It would be interesting to find out how they could plan for these.
Company valuations are based on the next 10 years rather than now.
A market maker will never buy orders without making a profit. What they pay RH is nothing compared to what they make on the spreads.
Emacs, same as for everything else.
Tesla is a car company valued like a tech company right now. Unless they solve the problem of self-driving their stock is overvalued. Let's check-in shall we? Uber - self-driving is dead, BMW self-driving is years away, Alphabet - self-driving is in its very early stages, Tesla - We'll have it by the end of the year or I'll eat my hat!
> It's hard to imagine a time before hierarchical file systems.

Have you seen how most non-technical users manage files on their desktop?
> Sirangelo’s ouster was sealed by increasing skepticism that 2024 was a realistic deadline for moon landings

This. Trump wanted a return to the Moon by the end of his second term, but it's just not possible. NASA doesn't even have a human launch vehicle capable of low-earth orbit (LEO) at the moment. It will in a few years, but getting to the Moon is significantly harder than LEO and getting people back from the Moon is 10x harder still. And we no longer have an existential cold war with Russia to motivate us.
Interactive Brokers ~23 Billion. So between the 5 companies and Robinhood the latter would take ~4% of the market cap.

It's not that much, but I feel you.
Thank you for offering pointers to effective usage of exceptions.
I've got to say, I don't find this analysis compelling. I'm not a fan of Tesla, but this analysis doesn't add much new.
At least the cop and the engineer have BS in common, apparently.

As an "engineer" myself, I don't think my peers are in general much better or wiser people than the rest of the world, and I'm not at all comfortable with implicitly handing them an ever-increasing level of power within our society.
Depends on how they sold it. Did they sell tools, or tools plus configuration services and consulting?
Yes, the long game.

It's very hard to prove that someone is doing the wrong thing when you invoke the term "the long game".
Even if that's true, what's the best strategy? I posit that learning to live on less is a pretty good one.
You might say that it's easy in general (since all but a handful of isomorphism classes are easily distinguished), but hard in full generality. :)
This was the least surprising result. I thought "combined finances, with an allowance" was basically the default for married couples who have been together a long time and/or since they were fairly young.

Currently my wife and I just contribute an equal amount to a joint account for the mortgage and car, and the rest is basically "I've got it" in a proportional sense. It basically works because we spend less than we make, so we have savings. I'm currently out a TON of money for an upcoming vacation, but I kind of have the sense that it all works out in the end, because I am not (yet) out of money, and if I have to dip into "my" savings to pay the bills from the trip, well, from a net perspective "we" still have the same amount of money as if I asked her to pony up some to pay my credit card this month.

But of course, this fails plenty of tests, and will have to be re-thought if one of us ends up out of work.
> Why am I not taught a single algorithm whose complexity is between these? is my question.

Despite the fact that there are infinitely many such algorithms, it's a very small infinity, where infinity is approximately equal to 2.

There are the algorithms for factoring large numbers, and the graph isomorphism problem. All these algorithms are a lot of work to implement with lots of fiddly bits, and it's very difficult to show precisely what their complexity is. (unless you get one of the fiddly bits wrong, in which case it's easy to show that they're either polynomial or exponential time) So they're generally bad teaching examples. If the professor give it to them as a homework assignment, they'll fail it, and if the professor goes through the algorithm and the proof in class it will be an exercise in "But I don't understand the step here where you just waved your hands and moved on to the next step."

It's like asking why we don't care about the stuff between Mars and Jupiter; it's not that there's nothing there, it's that they're less interesting than Mars or Jupiter and you can't do Useful Science on them with undergraduate time/money commitments.
Also what's the point of arbitrary numbers like "10%" and "+5"?

You should obviously increase lifetime customer value to the optimal value (after accounting the cost of increasing it) and likewise for churn rate.
Everybody knows the fight was fixed.

The poor stay poor, the rich get rich.

That's how it goes.
I find it odd how little they talked about testosterone. Testosterone levels have been decreasing quite significantly over the years.[0]

[0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/neilhowe/2017/10/02/youre-not-t...
That doesn't work. You're changing the setting of the problem from scalars to vectors in order to avoid breaking the uniqueness properties of fields and rings. The solution set for a system of linear equations is not unique (if it is at all) in the same sense that e.g. additive and multiplicative identity elements are unique.
>But no other system comes close to delivering the innovations and economic growth that capitalism has sparked around the world. This is worth remembering as we consider its future.

I ask great authors post this at the start and end of bash of capitalism. It is good we all acknowledge how great markets are, what kind of damage can we do fighting it?
> Until you have kids you are playing the game on easy mode

Ha. That reminds me of "If you want to learn to get up early, have kids." (altough more accurately the school district sets your wake times).
Yes it will, assuming the FLAC one makes sense to begin with. FLAC is a specialty codec tuned for compressing audio in the same way that DEFLATE is tuned for general (mostly text) files. Both of them are lossless, which means when you decompress the file you get exactly the same bits back as you started with.

So a correctly encoded FLAC file will be using CD quality audio or better. (CD audio is transparent when correctly encoded in 100% of cases.) FLAC is just a way to reduce the file size of that raw CD data by about 50%.

Lossy codecs like mp3 and AAC (the codec usually found in the m4a container) are also tuned to compress music, but they do so by throwing away a some of the original information. When this is done correctly it should still be transparent to the original the vast majority of the time. No one, not even an "audiophile", can tell the difference under any listening conditions. For mp3 (depending on encoder), the bitrate that achieves transparency is about 256 kbits/sec, though there are so-called "killer samples" that can break certain encoders at that bitrate. AAC (again, depending on encoder) is transparent closer to 192 kbits/sec. The state of the art has advanced remarkably since either were released: Opus is transparent in the vast majority of cases all the way down to 128 kbits / sec, and still sounds great at bitrates below that.

The problem is that just seeing the file extension gives you no guarantees about what the bitrate is. A 128 kbits/sec mp3 is going to sound like mush on a good system. If you convert that mp3 to FLAC it's still going to sound like mush, because you're using a lossy source. But a FLAC made from a CD will sound much better, as will a 320 kbits/sec mp3.

So if all you care about is transparency, getting 320 kbits/sec mp3s or 128 kbits/sec Opus files is probably good enough for you. The issue with "generational loss" I was referring to is when a lossy file is used as a source for another lossy encode. This is kind of like saving a file as a jpeg twice: you always lose more than just saving it once, even if the "quality" setting in the encoder is the same. Plus if you convert an AAC file to mp3, there's an even worse problem, which is that the different codecs try to compress the file in slightly different ways, which can lead to unexpected interactions and sometimes end up sounding like crap.

The point of keeping around a FLAC file is that you have a permanent archive of what was on the CD, and you have a source that you can use to make future lossy encodes from without the generational loss problem. All my albums are ripped to FLAC, but from those FLAC files I encode Opus files that are small enough to take with me on my phone.
vim/neovim with plugins. i've been using vim for so long now (from my accounts, about ten years?) that using anything else feels just wrong (including VSCode with vim mode, it's quite good but there's like 10% of my usage that it doesn't cover properly and it's super annoying).
I've always considered myself a capitalist, and 20 years ago I used to be very annoyed by what I considered insufficient appreciation for marketplace competition on the left.

But runaway inequality and the intransigent insistence of people like Gates that said inequality is not a problem has me questioning whether I need to reassess. (In my view the problem with inequality is that political power corresponds roughly to economic power, so unlimited amounts warp our political system.)

If you're losing people like me, maybe a crisis really is on the way.
Do you have a companion tool whose purpose is to convince Excel devotees that modern, domain-specific tooling exists, and that they should stop pushing Excel because it's terrible for many tasks?

My problem is less that no tools exist to manage things outside of spreadsheets, but more that older management tends to take the position of "Jira (or whatever) is complicated and I already know Excel, and I'm in charge so we're using whatever doesn't require me to learn something new".
In the absence of external energy inputs, decentralized systems tend toward centralization. I don't much like it, bit it's not really Github's fault that it happens.
I can't find any information about where such a list can be purchased. Something tells me that this is stollen data, weather from Apple or a third party, and crosscoralated to perhapes Apple info. I seriously doubt that Apple is actually selling data. The far more likely outcome is that this a bullshit extortion suit.
Well, consider a company like Amazon, with a revenue like $232.9 billion. Say the best CEO, relative to the second best, can eek an extra 1/10 of 1% of that as profit. That's $232 million.

I mean, I don't think "deserve" has anything to do with it. The leverage of the decisions and the market do. A company won't leave profit on the table because of the notion that one guy doesn't "deserve" to get paid some percentage of the value generated by his decisions. They'll want the best CEO possible at "any price", and market dynamics and rational self-interest will drive compensation into the hundreds of millions, with no notion of not incidentally disproportionately awarding one random person on the planet.
Product-Market-Fit: Why I Created the ZIZO Product Ideation Online Course
I loved using Screenhero to pair program with my buddy in SF. I'm in Hawaii. Screenhero was fantastic for taking control of the keyboard and mouse (which is not possible with Google Hangouts). Please bring it back!
On the contrary I don't agree that capitalism is responsible for environmental decline.

If anything environmental decline can be attributed to the form of democracy in which companies control government policy via donations and lobbyists.

The government policy thus serves the interests not of the people but of the companies.

Companies have no interest in anything but furthering their own goals, typically to make money without any attribution of the collateral costs such as environmental vandalism.

This is not about capitalism - it's about broken democracy, subverted to become some weird system of government that serves companies and vested interest above those of the citizens.

Nor are billionaires the cause of poverty. There's plenty of money to go around and plenty of resources to go around with room to spare for billionaires. Poverty exists because governments expend the resources to the betterment of companies rather than the citizens. If we suddenly took all the money from all the billionaires this would make zero difference to poverty because the reasons for poverty have little or no relationship to the existence of billionaires.
I'm not entirely sure but I think there are no theoretical obstructions to maintaining a ridiculously high pressure indefinitely.

Although I suppose there aren't any theoretical obstructions to indefinitely maintaining low temperatures either.
"Can't fail" was said before every possible failure.
It's hilarious that someone can look at the data about man-made CO2 emissions and still be a believer. WTF
Is not most of android open-source enough to fork? Sure you'd lose all the google integration and the binary blobs of the play store, but if you were 'going alone' you'd not care that much about the play store anyway as you'd diverge from android prime over time.
Very impressive that you have chatted with Bill Gates, and you seem very proud of that (congrats, by the way), but he's still a capital hoarder sitting atop a mountain of ill-gotten gains, and no I don't feel that I should thank him for that
libturd spotted
This company is dealing in financial transaction data. Someone needs to hold it, and it can be deleted (especially when someone asks for it). I don't see how this particular situation advances your position.
Emacs, when it's just part of a larger application using a different language, or when the whole environment is even more effed up than usual for JS (eg. ExtJS) and you could parse the code as well as Perl anyway.

VSCode as a stop-gap solution for more substantial JS code. The gap being until I either can configure Emacs properly (language server or something similar), or preferably when I can get rid of JS (and no, not with MS JS++).
But you can potentially help the no show rate.

- Send an email to the person 2 days before their appointment

- Text them the morning of their appointment

- Build something into the CRM of the front desk that reminds them to call people the day before an appointment

- send a pre-generated google directions result to the patient N minutes before the appointment

I could go on for hours here. The job of a developer, at least in the startup world, is to understand the objective of their team and contribute to figuring out ways to reach their objective. It is not just to code up tickets that are put in front of them.
Spotify decided to stop using OKRs for individuals for these same reasons. They wrote about their experience here: https://hrblog.spotify.com/2016/08/15/our-beliefs/
Not in San Diego
I use code folding in Xcode to quickly check if a method is being used in the code base. Code folding allows me to shrink down the amount of scrolling I need to do. Code folding allows me to access the methods I'm checking on that might be "below the fold."
It may not be workable, but when big businesses have invested millions in tools and services I can't help feeling there should be some vendor accountability.
Introduction to Stateful Serverless: Key-Value Database W Azure Durable Entities
I am reminded of the statistics on lottery winners...
Not sure. I'd expect the "foo\bar" created on that NTFS volume while mounfed from Linux to be effectively unreachable when accessed from windows (at least while the command line?).
Or not. Surprise me.
I thought normies considered \ to be the "computer slash". (Which basically explains all the verbal misuse)
It's also a robust distinction because polymomials are closed under addition, multiplication and composition.

Converting an algorithm from a Turing machine to a random-access model will often give you a polynomial speedup, but not an exponential one, so "polynomial time" means the same for both.

If you have a problem A, and a polynomial reduction from A to B, and a polynomial algorithm for B, you have a polynomial algorithm for A.

Sometimes algorithms can be polynomial but intractable (or even exponential but practical for some real cases), but it's less "neat" or clean to reason about those things. (Very useful, though, just more done outside the academy.)

As for things that aren't polynomial, I guess exponential things just happen to be the most common kind? Not sure myself why "pseudo-polynomial" bounds aren't more common.
> The hard part is dealing with live APIs, but fortunately these can be recorded while online and replayed when offline, which seems like a good practice anyway during development.

Cool. How do you do this?
Just an FYI - The R+D and govt approval process is expensive. The actual treatments are - I'd wager - relatively easy to produce. So this Novartis treatment is delivering DNA fragments via AAV. Its not attempting CRISPR or anything like that, its just gets extra copies of the unmutated gene into the nuclei so the right proteins can get made. I think they call that upregulation. So its basically AAV plus DNA fragments.

So for example you can buy engineered AAV viruses online. They sell this stuff for research. Looks like its about $350 a pop

https://www.addgene.org/viral-service/aav-prep/

Novartis aren't using CRISPR here but as another example these guys sell CRISPR for your research experiments:

https://www.addgene.org/crispr/guide/

Here's some Crispr for plant experiments for about $400

https://www.addgene.org/kits/stuttmann-dicot-genome-editing/

So I'm sure there a lot more to it than that, but even so, it seems to me that the nuts and bolts of this stuff - once known - are going to be easy to produce. How long till we get a generic?
Facebook Removed Over 2 Billion Fake Accounts, But The Problem Is Getting Worse
Oops, it does. They suggest hydrophobic surface treatment. It is interesting that it would naturally accumulate condensation in ambient light.
It's pretty much the same across all of the properties, though. I quit using them; they're run poorly and, especially in system administration or programming areas, the quality is uselessly low
I'm in SF and interested in who you used - would you mind posting your doctor's name, or else posting a way to DM you (maybe twitter handle?). Thanks!
Pity the guys at WSB can't buy calls on this. https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/
KaiOS Technologies Secures $50M Series B to Connect the Next Billion People
I'm sure your few hours conversation with him overturns the evidence the DoJ managed to collect about their plans for Netscape laid out in emails and memos. Stuff signed by Gates saying “take away their oxygen supply”, “crush them” and “knife the baby” in regard to killing Netscape while they were up and coming.

Bill Gates is a bully, and no matter how much money he throws at malaria research to redeem it, the sad bit is that he set the bar for Bezos, Zuck, Kalanick et al to reach and they've largely reached similar heights because over the years the US government has successfully been defanged.

And regarding the Gates Foundation:

> ...there’s clearly a conflict of interest that Gates does have that’s at stake here. And that’s this, you know, look, if you look at one of the main problems that the Global South faces right now is that they have a lot of difficulty paying the patent licensing fees that they need on sort of basic medicines and technology including for renewable energy access. And one of the reasons for that is because of the TRIPS agreements, the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, which is an agreement that came into force under the World Trade Organization in 1994, which basically massively extends corporate patents law around the world. And Gates has benefited singularly from that because that’s where the vast majority of his profits come from and what funds the Gates Foundation is rent effectively on intellectual property.

https://medium.com/@CitationsPodcst/episode-58-the-neolibera...
How can we know since he forced his vision on the world for so many years in technology?

At the very least, the fact BeOS isn't giving Windows and Apple a run for their money is a travesty.

The idea that super-rich people need to be super rich to do great things and society can't just come together to do them (Do you have the same reverence for the NIH? An entity that actually pays for indirect costs, unlike the Gates' Foundation.) is such a farce.
> I wonder why Andy didn't chose to write the JIT in Guile itself, with a binding to Lightening, rather than in C. Guile is designed to be embedded and have bindings written for it.

OP states "eventually I should be migrating this code over to Scheme anyway. And, of course, simple can mean fast, and I needed fast code generation.". That does not anwer you actual question (and neither does the article), but I gather this was to make the project finite (solve one and only one problem only at a time), not because the author was not aware.
> Honestly, I've never seen an OKR that was relevant by the end of a quarter... We finish them or not, but the objectives are always wildly different every few months and priorities change.

I think there are two types of priorities, "fires" and "nice to haves".

Fires are high priority, unpredictable, and often need to be solved quickly. This is things like "our databases crash every morning" or "our AWS bill is too high and going to put us out of business".

Nice to haves can still be needed, but they tend to take a back seat when a fire happens. Additionally, their priority tends to be much more subjective. This is things like "Our build process takes too long" or "our deploy process has too many manual step which leads to human error".

OKRs tend not to last a full quarter because any tasks/priorities that you can schedule and make fit nicely into a 3 month period are "nice to have"s. I'm not saying they don't matter, but the timeline to get them done doesn't really matter so things get delayed or moved around.

On the flip side, you can't schedule fires and you usually can't delay them either. The things that actually important enough that they can't get delayed tend not to fit the OKR framework.
Kraken out to raise millions, Circle cutting staff, Bitfinex scores tiny victory