skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I understand all this and yet even a hit of a rumour of Valve working on Half Life 3 makes my heart pump and brings butterflies to my stomach. On the other hand, "so and so company made millions selling hats on a videogame" means nothing to me.

I understand that making money is a very powerful drive for a lot of people. But what's another million when you have 100 million?

Valve can afford to implement Half Life 3 (or pay someone to do it for them). It would, at the very least, make a profit, even if it wasn't a huge success. Instead they are letting the IP die a slow death. That would make me sad. The 101 million would help, for a while, but the pain would return.
Without fossil fuels, no Haber-Bosch process.
No Haber-Bosch process, no fertilizers.
No fertilizers, no food security.
They have been: https://www.gwern.net/Zeo
Because the shape of the population pyramid is changing. From a wider base when the fertility used to be high to about everyone surviving to their 80s. It's this momentum that will keep the total population increasing a couple of decades.

Read Factfulness by Hans Roslin if you want to learn more about this phenomenon and similar questions about poverty in the world.
Official French Open Web Radio in English
Even if you have the money and are not concerned about the time to break even, nuclear seems like a terrible investment.

Let's ignore subsidies for a moment. Also lets assume I can have the plant operational in 10 years (very optimistic unless I'm about to be ready to start construction).

Onshore wind is already much cheaper than than nuclear. The wind turbines being built when I start construction will reach their end of life, be replaced by even more profitable wind turbines that will themselves reach end of life before I will start thinking about decommissioning my nuclear plant. So I'm not just competing about the current generation that already is significantly cheaper, I'm also competing against another few decades of cost reductions for wind.

So how long until wind plus storage is cheaper than my nuclear plant? Will it be in 10 years with economies of scale from EV battery demand, or 30 years until something more ambitious like storing molten salts or molten aluminium becomes serious competition? Or am I willing to bet it takes 50 years, giving my reactor 40 years of profitable operation?

It seems like a terrible bet to make. I would need a lot of subsidies to make it look like a good idea.
Location: London, UK

Remote: Prefer partial but not completely remote.

Willing to relocate: Yes, to major cities in United Kingdom / Germany / Benelux / Switzerland / Austria / Ireland / Scandinavia / Canada.

Technologies: PHP, Python, JavaScript, HTML5/CSS3, .NET (PowerShell and a bit of C#), Angular, Vue.JS, MySQL/MariaDB, PostgreSQL, and others.

Résumé/CV: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1d8-j-iotBXeJ5aUZPzh9o4VXBb...

Email: tyteen4a03@gmail.com

===

I'm looking for junior to mid-level full-stack / backend positions. I have 2 years of experience in the industry (at graduate placement) level but have worked on projects and shipped libraries inside my companies.

I require visa sponsorship in all locations. I currently hold a Tier 4 visa in the UK and will need sponsorship to transfer to Tier 2. In Germany I can work under the EU blue card scheme.
Show HN: A high-performance fractal viewer
I am surprised by how many people equal frequentist statistics with Neyman-Pearson hypothesis testing. In my opinion, the main difference between the two approaches being whether the parameters of a statistical model are considered as fixed or random, everything else follows from this.

On the subject of statistical education: The point I tried to make is that I think it is much easier to study first the likelihood, the central quantity of frequentist inference. One can then go to the Bayesian world simply by allowing the parameters to be random variables. Furthermore, as other commentors have pointed out, technical difficulties arise in the non-conjugate Bayesian setting when MCMC sampling has to be used. In my opinion, MCMC algorithms, convergence diagnostics, etc. are certainly not topics for an intro stats course.
Agreed, I just want to make it clear that by downloading and developing with the Oracle JDK you haven't irreversibly stumbled into some licensing trap.

At this point there's really no reason to consciously choose the Oracle JDK.

Even if you want a supported JDK experience you're better off getting it from a company like Azul (we've had a good experience with them so far, anyway).
The greenwashing is the anti-littering laws and bodies.

Vermont was planning to introduce laws to require reuse of drinks bottles in the 1950s. Coca Cola, Philip Morris, Budweiser and others clubbed together to form and fund "Keep America Beautiful" to advertise and lobby for the problem to be landed on the consumer instead of the businesses that created the problem.

The solution is putting blame back on the producers, where it belongs. Require them to own that externality they created. Oh, and discouraging litter.
And that's just one of the many ways that hydrocarbons are woven into critical parts of the global economy.

You can't just snap your fingers, make oil go away and expect modern civilization to keep existing as it currently does.

It took ~150yr to get the oil industry where it is today and that is with a massive financial incentive. People need lubricants, tars, fuels, plastics, everything that oil makes cheaply and well. In the absence of strong organic (not artificial, i.e. regulatory compliance) incentives to stop using oil it will almost certainly take much longer than 150yr to reduce oil usage for energy/fuel to negligible levels. We will likely never stop using oil for plastics, fertilizers and other "critical to modern civilization" things until something that's cheaper and equivalent or better comes along for every last use case.

Keep in mind that whatever we have next will have tradeoffs too.
Are people really 'trading' these things? That seems like a bit of a stretch.

I'm having a hard time imagining somebody justifying flying more/further because they aren't using plastic straws in their day-to-day life.

Surely we can work to improve the world on multiple fronts at a time, and if single-use plastics present themselves as both unsustainable long-term and a low-hanging fruit (compared with air travel) in terms of sourcing replacements, then it's reasonable that people would seek to make that small change independent of what is happening in the rest of their lives.

I find this trend of slapping "virtue signalling" on all but the most lofty goals to be a bit disingenuous. It must assume that there is one section of society that is empowered to make all of these changes and that by choosing to pursue single use plastics they suffer the opportunity cost of not developing an alternative means of rapid transport or improved environmental law enforcement.

A single-use-plastic tax which truly takes into consideration the cost of enforcement / cost to the environment and landfill / depletion of a finite resource would have the same effect, sure.
I'm not convinced it would escape the "virtue signalling" label, though.
And one tests that revert by running it with a no-op change.

And one tests that the no-op change really is no-op by running it on a test system.
Hopefully, in the timescale of 10,000 years, we'll have refined plastic eating bacteria and the like to get rid of microplastics. It makes more sense to worry about a 20-100 years timescale.
Yes. That's not theoretical requirement for tailplane.

But as the source you provides say: "indeed most aircraft operate with negative tail lift most of the time."

In practice all commercial aircraft have the center of mass so much forward that require negative lift for stability. If you look at the cross section of the horizontal stabilizer, it's like wing upside down.
Byju's and the art of the deal: Inside a one hour pitch
As said, it was about removing risk and ensuring a return that made the investment worthwhile.

That's just a direct consequence of the government policy of not financing the construction and operation with public money.

The alternative was to directly spend public money, which makes the complaint about this guaranteed price being a public subsidy rather moot.
Your neighbors would hit the Wikipedia list of people with the most children?

Children per woman is a more relevant metric.
And they are probably mining it for data. I use Keep as a synchronised shopping list with my wife, among other things. I'd really like a self-hostable replacement.
Right, it's a balance. A small decrease may not impact quality of life but a larger one would. Imagine Steve Jobs living in a world of population 1000. He'd be living like a homeless person foraging for berries in bushes in the forest, no matter how good his entrepreneurial skills may be. We need people to innovate, build, grow, trade with each other to achieve high quality of life.
In 2018, Germany imported 10TWh of electricity from France, while it produced 545TWh. That's not even 2% - how are you supposed to cover baseload with that?
>> Isn't this the goal of every business and employee ever? To make money with the least effort.

Uh, not mine. Otherwise I would have stayed in finance.
I can assure you we run AWS instances at 100% with no problem at all. (Well, no problem from AWS; sometimes it's caused by a software bug.)
Only if productivity have not increased.
> How do we keep economic growth going if our main driver (human capital) is disappearing?

The majority of the population does low or unskilled labor. This can be replaced by machines. Reduced focus on low skill work will also give more time to the individual which could foster more innovation. The future may have less people, but if technology removes the need for basic work, then it could end up that in absolute numbers the relatively small future population could have more advanced human workers than today's population.
Here's another one: if I run some website that's backed by Cockroach and has its own source code available publicly for pull requests (think Reddit until a few years ago, etc.), and one of my customer sends me a pull request that changes a schema in order to implement a feature they care about, does that count?
I am speaking about PC gamers, not everyone is in love with Steam.
I make the My PlayHome series of apps, in case you want to try them out.

Not enough people are willing to actually pay for apps. Piracy, especially on Android, is extremely high. The few kids who don't pirate apps are constantly emailing me asking for the app to be free because they have a device but their parents don't let them buy anything.

Apple and Google are recently getting very tough and starting to regulate all apps that have children as their target audience, which is obviously a good thing. However, it seems they still haven't made much progress in actually promoting apps for kids.

To give you an idea of how few people are actually paying up front for kids apps: My PlayHome is currently ranking at 20 in the USA Paid iPad kids category. That means only 19 apps in the entire app store are selling specifically to kids using the upfront paid model on iPad are more successful than this. How many USA daily sales is My PlayHome getting on iPad? Around 50.

Until something changes, and it probably won't, even though the demand for quality, non-exploitative kids apps is out there, the big money somehow isn't.
I'm Australian and my parents "retired" at 58. They're not quite on cruises and golf days but they're perfectly capable of work even now at 63 if they really wanted. They just don't want. Is it their fault or the governments?
What are you hoping to get out of this app? In my experience with my kids I'm better off just exposing them to real-world stuff - they'll get their online education soon enough either way.
Once we shift to electric cars, people of the future will be wondering in amazement how did we ever tolerate combustion engines! Same way we now wonder in amazement how people in the past tolerated horse manure on the street or steam trains in subways...
How does kinesio tape help with weak muscles? Just correcting your posture occasionally won't do any good in the long run, either. This might "pull you into place" but no muscular strength is gained. If someone picks up a good routine to strengthen their weak spots, an improved posture will appear soon enough.
This comment means that you don't completely understand the full scope of what the oil industry does. I say that as someone who wants to see less dependence on the oil industry.
It's great to see a nice open source example of work in this area. It would be helpful if there were also some examples of where the model fails either by not being able to produce a query or producing an incorrect query.
US immigration policy is now somewhat akin to charity rather than intended to maximize the highly skilled talent pool. This isn't intended as a criticism, but by and large most of our immigration pool comes from poor countries and does not have specialized skills. And we're pretty lenient on illegal immigration which is largely low skilled labor as well. There's a movement right now to change it to be more like the Canada system, more closely based on skill. Whether that's better or worse is subjective I suppose.
New York State Is Pushing ‘One of the Strictest’ Privacy Bills in the Nation
Chromium-based browser Vivaldi responds to webRequest API changes
'$179,702,427 have been given out in prize money (mostly from Valve) thus far'

Come now, this part of your response is totally misleading. Valve contribute a base $1.6M for TIs, $3M for the old majors, $150k for the current minors and $500k for the current majors. The vast majority of the $179M is crowd-funded money: money which Valve facilitated the collection of but which many people only gave to boost the prize pool of The Internationals.
I have a feeling that suggesting castration to solve the problem of male homo sapiens spraying on walls and trees near pubs could be met with some opposition...
And that is why you should switch certain classes of traffic down and eventually entirely off from time to time, to verify that everything you expect to keep working really does.
The top-secret meeting that helped win D-Day
If they're waking you up to take blood samples when you're sleeping, it's probably for good reason. Maybe the patient is at risk for some kind of kidney complications and maybe not dying from renal failure is more important than getting a good night's sleep. There could be any number of reasons for this. Maybe another patient had some kind of emergency that had to be dealt with first, and your sleep schedule is less important than someone else's life.

Generally speaking, doctors and nurses care about patients (some more than others, sure). They're also aware of the importance of sleep. If you're a nurse on a night shift, and you have to take care of a ward of 20 patients, you'll quickly find yourself too busy to be terribly considerate. Especially when something unexpected happens.
Google certainly has classes of traffic that see throttling all the time, and are blocked entirely quite a lot of the time.
And also for handover between shifts - information going missing is a risk here
> This could be a really tough problem to solve. How do we keep economic growth going if our main driver (human capital) is disappearing?

Our current economic system will need to adapt or change entirely. It can't remain as is.

The hard part is figuring out how and convince the 1% to cooperate.
Indonesian logistics startup Waresix secures $1.6m funding
The communication regarding denial of access to the account creates a sense of helplessness; the finality without explanation requires correcting.

Lots of big companies who deal with small partners (developers, sellers, etc.) could learn from this, including Apple, Amazon, and Google. Lack of explanations, vague explanations, or confusing explanations for account shutdowns or other penalizations are the norm. And for some of these companies it's nearly impossible to talk with someone who can clarify what's wrong.
>The best thing about these bans is they are very visible and raise awareness, giving you the critical mass you need to solve other issues too.

I think it's more likely to reduce the chance of solving other issues because it uses up people's mental charity budget. Humans are not naturally utilitarian, and good causes compete with each other based on emotion. There's a huge risk of scenarios like this:

>Save the poor orphan puppies!

"Sure, they're cute. Take all the money."

>Repair the historic building!

"Eh, I guess it's important. Here's a small donation."

>Feed the starving children in Africa!

"Didn't we do that already? Not my problem."

>Prevent the death of billions through climate change!

"I'm sick of all these demands. I'm going to start rolling coal just to spite you."

We need to focus on numbers, not emotion, and the numbers don't justify the backlash.
Ironically, it's actually chemical fertilizers that destroy our food security long term.
Meanwhile Boeing's mechanical rudder actuator in the 737 caused two verified and possibly many more crashes during passenger-carrying flights.
Given all the dark patterns used by airlines, I wonder why airlines haven't made a business out of it yet: pay $X extra, and be assured that your luggage actually arrives at your destination.
Good. We need more earth ocean friendly ways of bagging our groceries and keeping six packs of beer together.

Exxon knew of climate change in the 70s and hid it.

Electric cars aren’t any better for the environment given all the mining that goes into the batteries right?
How many wife's produced over 30 children? That aint gonna be one.
But that ship has sailed. Population changes are notorious in how extremely predictable they are. If we wanted a slow decline we needed to act 20 years ago.

Right now the numbers look suspiciously quiet, hiding the fact that there are a number of countries growing ridiculously fast (sub-Saharan Africa), and a lot of countries (all of "the West", except the US) in accelerating decline.

So there will be increasing immigration despite low (global) population growth.

And this is over and done with. It's a fact at this point. Policy today can only determine if in 20 years we want to cause +0.2% in kids or -0.2% in kids. I mean anything short of a meteor strike or new spanish flu won't really influence anything sooner.
In theory, machines should make the everyday man work less.

In practice, the one who holds the capital captures the value. The everyday man ends up working the same or even more.
Sounds like their algo has reached youtube recommender/ranking algo level of "we don't know what the black box does, we just try to fix it when it fucks up"
Without artificial fertilizers, soil depletion can stop and we can start using various permaculture farming techniques instead that can be sustained long term.
Do you think less people make progress faster? What's your target level of depriving life of existence? How do you plan to keep mankind robust from extinction events on a single planet? You might just need more people. What do you think our technology would look like if we had 10x less people for the last 100 years?

More people make more progress faster. Aren’t you glad your parents didn't decide the world would be prettier or work better without you in it? If great minds like Einstein, Bell, Tesla, Da Vinci etc., were still alive and productive today, the world would be a better place. You're literally asking for others to die out of your fear. The burden should be higher. Have courage.
A lot of technology comes from population increase too. Necessity is the mother of invention, and more brains and resources means you can do more interesting things and things which increase the quality of life and production of everyone else. If you want technological advancement, innovation, and better life for everyone-- we need more people. And if you want space exploration and expansion, we need more people with more ideas and resources.
Germany decided to focus on cutting nuclear instead of cutting coal.

This is not an example to follow, really.

In the current situation, getting rid of coal and fossil fuels should have higher priority than getting rid of nuclear purely for ideological reasons...

Your argument is also misleading: Of course use of nuclear power can be reduced by increasing use of renewables. But the important point is that renewables cannot replace nuclear.
A lot of technology comes from population increase. Necessity is the mother of invention, and more brains and resources means you can do more interesting things and things which increase the quality of life and production of everyone else. If you want technological advancement, innovation, and better life for everyone-- we need more people. And if you want space exploration and expansion, we need more people with more ideas and resources.
Something the author didn't address in the article is opportunity cost. It might be that the employee supply at Valve is limited, and that as a for profit company, it has to allocate this limited resource the most profitable way. Making 50 employees work on HL3 might get you $100M in profit, but why would you do that if you can make $150M more on hats with the very same team?
Oh Apple. Just include the stand in the price. Seriously.
I see your second and third points being issues locally as well – if you work for the government.

However, you might be interested to know that the most successful business in my neighbourhood actually operates an online high school. A friend of mine in another city also operates an online high school and seems to be doing quite well for himself. There appears to be a large market for such services.

Especially if you also have web development skills, the internet provides a platform to be a teacher independently, resolving the second and third points. The first point probably depends on your business skills. However, seeing how well that aforementioned business in my neighbourhood is doing, the potential upside is huge.
I tried to register for this and after fixing multiple CSS bugs that prevented the form from being rendered correctly I was able to actually trigger the submission which kicked off a wave of javascript errors.

Good old IBM, still the exact same company they were 20 years ago.
Google Maps is a travel powerhouse. Makes sense to have things in one place.

I’m traveling Europe right now and I live out of Google Maps.
Another way to look at this is:

25M out of 4.3B is a success rate of 99.4%.
So it'll cost $100k minus $10k tax incentive minus $10k gas savings over it's lifetime of 100 years and minus $30k of productive time behind the wheel because it drives itself.
Entering late 20s and I’m basically hoping for a next life similar to my parents generation. This generation has so many requirements thrown upon us that made living a modern day prison and only unless born into an upper class family that would pay for what have become necessary requirements to succeed past the apartment life. Sure, some people are anomalies and had events making the contrary but it just hinders the truth of the majority who didn’t necessarily get worthless degrees but still struggle to pay of student loans in an crippling economy for people without much money. I’m not sure if this is all the product of student loans, not enough homes being built, the all sexes need to equally work, and or people controlling capitalism getting even more greedy. Something is making it where having a kid would make a financial disaster even worse.
> 4. Human productivity is becoming decreasingly dependent on human capital over time

From what I observed, increased human productivity doesn't translate to less working time.

You work the same time but you just produce more.
People without children become financially saturated very quickly. Those will dampen growth again.