skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As an end user, am I happy that Apple took your idea and built it in the OS, stripped of ads, premium features, tracking and analytics, etc? Yes, yes I am.
I’m not sure exactly what situation you’re imagining. But as an illustrative example, if the central node has eight neighbors that are connected to each other in a cycle, the graph can be coloured with three colours like this:

2 -- 3 -- 2
| \ | / |
| \ | / |
3 -- 1 -- 3
| / | \ |
| / | \|
2 -- 3 -- 2
I think that's a mischaracterization of the argument here, though. The point is that riders of these things are causing novel hazards to the people around them without any sort of mitigating factors like licensure or taxation. I know I feel pretty mad when someone zips by me on the sidewalk while I'm walking my (small) dog, and that anger goes mostly to the scooter company that is enabling an idiot. If, in the end, this is a stepping stone to lower pollution, great, but that doesn't mean there aren't any problems with it because it is the lesser of two evils. This is all to say that I, a real genuine person, am not upset with the Advent of scooters because they are competing with cars; it's for completely different reasons.
Thanks for the recommendations, and for saving me some time/money picking up Klein's book.

I'll check out the reports you've linked, and Gates' blog post.
> Your viewing history is worthless. The aggregate viewing history and patterns of 50 million viewers though? Seems to be a pretty valuable

there's plenty of value in a single users data. Aggregate stats are fine, but there's good money if you can drill down to specifics and build robust dossiers on individuals. It lets you offer the most targeted data. This isn't just valuable for ads, insurance companies use that kind of data to set rates and politicians use it so they know which houses to carve out of their carefully gerrymandered districts or flood with attacks against their opposition.
WhatsApp has made significant inroads in the US but it isn't universal. If you have a phone, you can almost 100% get texts.

I'm guessing the only thing that comes close to texting in terms of marketshare is iMessage. And that's simply because it is on every iOS device AND enabled by default.
Whenever it comes to issues of environmental concern there is always an 'authoritative' comment hand waving away objections and pretending to be on the side of 'science' but offering no scientific evidence, rationale or reasoning.

The entire comment essentially says 'nothing to see here' and positions any concern as 'unscientific' and overreaction.

You see this on HN every time in cases of nuclear power and the environment externalities. This may benefit people who make money from it but no one else and actively derails discussion and environmental concerns.
> Experience increases the perception of safety at a rate faster than actual safety.

I learned to drive nine months ago, and I've been watching myself do this every time I get on the highway in the past few months. Even knowing that I'm doing it, it's hard to avoid.
I'm wondering, even if everything had gone right and the dome had not been dropped to cause the core to go critical -- surely being in close contact with even a non-critical nuclear weapon core is not safe??

What's the amount of radiation that thing gave off simply from decay, in a non-critical state?
>not the scooter rider that made an illegal turn in front of an SUV which tried but failed to break in time to avoid hitting him

I rented a Lime S scooter in Louisville, Kentucky this weekend. It became apparent after about a block that the brake was completely non-functional. I parked the scooter, ended the ride, and reported that it had a defective brake...but yet it remained available for rent in the Lime app anyway. Seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen.

The more I think about it, the more I regret not tossing the scooter into the nearest dumpster after the ride was over and the parking photo was submitted.
I'd like to see reusable silicone packaging. Bonus points if the containers are standardised like shipping containers and fit together in a way that maximises internal volume, like the cells of a honeycomb. Who wouldn't like a container that is hydrophobic, making it easy to get every last bit of yoghurt out.
From the article:

> Was this a hijacking? A hijacking is the “third party” solution favored in the official report. It is the least painful explanation for anyone in authority that night. It has immense problems, however. The main one is that the cockpit door was fortified, electrically bolted, and surveilled by a video feed that the pilots could see. Also, less than two minutes passed between Zaharie’s casual “good night” to the Kuala Lumpur controller and the start of the diversion, with the attendant loss of the transponder signal. How would hijackers have known to make their move precisely during the handoff to Vietnamese air traffic control, and then gained access so quickly and smoothly that neither of the pilots had a chance to transmit a distress call? It is possible of course that the hijackers were known to the pilots—that they were invited into the cockpit—but even that does not explain the lack of a radio transmission, particularly during the hand-flown turn away from Beijing. Both of the control yokes had transmitter switches, within the merest finger reach, and some signal could have been sent in the moments before an attempted takeover. Furthermore, every one of the passengers and cabin-crew members has been investigated and cleared of suspicion by teams of Malaysian and Chinese investigators aided by the FBI. The quality of that police work is open to question, but it was thorough enough to have uncovered the identities of two Iranians who were traveling under false names with stolen passports—seeking, however, nothing more nefarious than political asylum in Germany. It is possible that stowaways—by definition unrecorded on the airplane’s manifest—had hidden in the equipment bay. If so, they would have had access to two circuit breakers that, if pulled, would have unbolted the cockpit door. But that scenario has problems, too. The bolts click loudly when they open—an unambiguous sound that would have been familiar to the pilots. The hijackers would then have had to open a galley-floor hatch from below, climb a short ladder, evade notice by the cabin crew, evade the surveillance video, and enter the cockpit before either of the pilots transmitted a distress call. It is unlikely that this could have happened, just as it is unlikely that a flight attendant held hostage could have used the door keypad to allow sudden entry without firing off a warning. Furthermore, what would the purpose be of a hijacking? Money? Politics? Publicity? An act of war? A terrorist attack? The intricate seven-hour profile of MH370’s deviation into oblivion fits none of these scenarios. And no one has claimed responsibility for the act. Anonymity is not consistent with any of these motives.
In my case, it's because I'm busy at work, and the time I'd spend walking from the office to some restaurant is time that could be spent actually working.

That, and the places from which I order sometimes ain't even readily walkable in the first place unless my employer's okay with me taking a multiple-hour lunch break to walk from the office (near The Embarcadero) to, say, MAC'D (near Van Ness, so a 30+ minute walk each way even assuming I'm of at least average fitness, which I am very much not).

Re: grocery shopping, I've never done it (aside from a couple tries with Amazon Fresh), but I can understand and appreciate the time savings.
>Buy a dumb screen and hook it up

where do we find these 65inch 4K "dumb screens" for purchase?
Yes, but that's covered by the 110%-80% sale spread and the onerous interest, fees, and repossession costs, not the car's market value.
I never really understood this argument, maybe I have something else in mind when talking about abstractions.

For example, even though passing a function to an SQS listener is many abstractions away from handling internet traffic from SQS, I'd much rather the parsing of bytes be hidden in a place where I never have to see it and I can focus on business logic that actually provides value.
It is hard to type MB anymore, because I have caught myself doing it and fixed it so many times.
you don't read them -- they're read to you.
You mean 6K?

The thing is, that monitor is actually compared to Reference Monitor, and as far as the initial preview from those who have seen it, most can't believe a LCD could be as good if not even better than the OLED. And if the spec is actually as good as they say ( Apple has always been very conservative in Spec listing ) may be they are really targeting Reference Monitor?

If so, then a normal monitor / tv would not cannibalise it, since they are completely different segment.
It's probably worthwhile to think about scale in this context: There are only 85000 H-1B visas issued each year by the US; 20k of those are reserved for people with advanced degrees [1]. Given that there are an estimated 3.87 million software developers working in the USA [2], this seems unlikely to be the root cause of the inability of some graduates to find entry level software jobs.

1. https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/temporary-worker...
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_engineering_demograph...
> Having for example apt-get on top of the NT kernel is better than Homebrew on Darwin

Can you go into more detail about why that's the case — package selection, versioning policies, etc.? The main thing I've typically found is testing version-matched deployments and Docker has made me care about that a lot less.
In my country, you return glass bottles for re-use for about 15 euro cents. We don't see a lot of shattered glass bottles lying around...
"Back in the day?" Check out your system's log file for a scary collection of horror shows. Or compile most packages these days.

In defense: configuring a package that is compiled by lots of people on lots of machines with lots of versions of various compilers requires a lot of attention to warning flags and such. If you aren't starting out a package from a blank buffer it's very hard to get this right.

But I am frequently shocked by the number of compiler warnings I get from code downloaded from public repos and compiled in precisely the environments it's been documented to have been tested on.
This story has been repeated time and again. There is even a term, 'getting Sherlocked'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherlock_(software)#Sherlocked...
"The beauty of Arm is that it is open. You can you can add all sorts of interesting technologies that will be beneficial to supercomputing, such as being tightly integrated. By marrying an Arm CPU with a Tesla GPU...".

The essence of it. NVidia is so close that it makes development very painful. At the moment it's the required path for deep learning, but hopefully it'll change a bit.
I should have clarified. Middle class Americans cannot afford to have kids if they want the type of lifestyle they grew up with. Someone who grew up in Boston will need to move further out; someone who grew up with a single mom in Austin can no longer afford to raise a kid there without a spouse.
It's not just supercomputing.

There's a push for networking chips (ones with built-in multi-gigabit NICs): Mellanox Bluefield, NXP Layerscape [the one that's in the new SolidRun workstation!]..

And for regular old server chips (or "cloud" in marketing speak): Ampere eMAG, Amazon Graviton..
TDD Training Cube (papercraft)
Microplastics are all plastics, since that's what it all turns into after getting ground up through environmental processes.
What the author calls "objects" (or "classes") is really often just "interfaces".

> An Object is a set of functions that operate upon implied data elements

If this is replaced with:

> An Interface is a set of functions, often operate upon implied some implied data elements (but not necessary).

Everything in the article will probably be less confusing.
Exactly. All of these "pay banding" methods are used to enforce a culture of no one asking for more pay regardless of the value of their contributions, because "sorry, even though I think you deserve a raise, you're at the top of the pay band for your role/title, there's nothing I can do". If your manager has to convince their manager to fight with their own manager to get you an out-of-band pay increase, it's almost never going to happen.

It seems to me that now title inflation is countering this somewhat. I'm the newest hire in my organization and my title is "Analyst". I'm the only person at this level in the entire group, because I've been here less than a year. Everyone else, who have each been here 3 years or more, is "Manager" or higher (about 2/3rds are "Director" or higher) even if they are really just individual contributors with no direct reports or management duties, because they have to increase people's pay to keep from losing them, but they can't do it without bumping them up a pay band, which is only allowed with a "promotion". But while this is true in my group, there are groups where there are 200+ individual contributer-level people, and maybe 10 managers, and those people are never getting pay raises.

It reminds me of how "VP" is an inflated title in investment banking roles.

> In brokerage firms, investment banks and other financial companies, "vice president" is a seniority rank rather than denoting an actual managerial position within the company. It is a relatively junior position, usually does not denote managerial responsibilities and companies have a large number of vice presidents, perhaps as an inexpensive way for a company to recognize employees, or perhaps because of delayering when an employee can't be moved higher in the organization but still deserves recognition. In most cases, the title merely implies that someone is in a medium-seniority individual contributor role

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_president#Use_in_financia...
How well does the Waymo approach hold up to a GPS failure?
Sounds like it. I'm interested to see how this plays out ... from the sidelines. I haven't had a Facebook account in years. I deleted it a while ago and haven't looked back.
Here's the series of patches - looks like applied few hours ago.

https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20190617.104121.1475407136257...
Here are the security tracker links for Debian

https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2019-11477

https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2019-11478

https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2019-11479
Any recommendations for what vendor and what line to go with?
I'm not sure that was the point? I imagine given that you know enough to be able to make that claim that you've followed coverage of this incident pretty closely. As someone who hasn't, and mostly came at it from an "oh yeah, that thing, whatever ended up happening there?" perspective, I found this article to be an engaging and informative summary of what has happened in the years since and what we now know.
The difference is what happens after the bytecode files are loaded.
That is fine but the scam started by reassigning the SIM; something not related to Apple. I am not having enough criminal fantasy but in your Apple World you live in a monoculture...usually this makes it just easier for intruders to make problems.
And while the discussion takes place and the debate rages between classes vs. data structures, there's some poor analyst or data scientist who just needs access to the damned data to load it into a pandas data frame to do things that those designing the objects and data structures never dreamed of in the first place...
Seems like anybody with an open TCP port and SACK enabled (the default) is vulnerable.
"It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration." -- Edsger W. Dijkstra
Addendum:

I really have no words for how stupid this ruling is. It establishes that any physician that has an opinion on a case, whether or not they've officially been consulted and accepted the patient as one of theirs, whether or not they've actually got formal power over the patient's care is now liable for the course of care.

Picture this scenario:
NP stops a doc in the hallway and asks, "Can I give this patient amoxicillin for their UTI?" Simple question, simple answer.

The physician cannot answer, because simply having been unofficially asked a question about the proper course of care has now made them liable. Saying "I can't speak to you" actually does not alleviate them of that liability, it's just withholding care. And any answer creates liability, so they need to go do a full consult on this patient, to at least offer a defensible response.

Who has the time to do a full evaluation of every patient someone is asked about indirectly? And does a patient have to pay for a consult created by someone asking a minor question?

So either the docs are twice as harried as they are now - which they don't have the capacity for, so this is a false choice - or medical staff are no longer allowed to ask doctors questions. Bonus points for all the involuntary increase in healthcare spending.

My lawyer wife asks, what if it's couched as a hypothetical?
Well, I ask, if this went to trial would any jury believe that the physician really believed they were being asked a hypothetical? No, she says. Well then that doesn't help.

Congratulations, Minnesota. Once this makes its rounds among physicians, you're going to have docs getting pissy and telling people not to ask them questions, because just the act of asking is creating liability. Never mind just how much day-to-day care is lubricated by curbside consults and hallway questions. Turning all of those into official consults... jeez.

I can't imagine anything more liable to slow down care and inflate costs without meaningfully improving outcomes. That judge had no idea what they were doing.
Think of a hypothetical earth:

1.The poles was each their own country with a color on the map

2. Every country stretch all the way from south to north

Every country in 2. then only need two colors. Because the “same” color can never meet in any point.

The fourth color comes into play if you have a new country that bridge the south (or north) and both of the countries in step 2. at the same time.
The constraint is not on the number of neighbors directly. If there is just one node (say, A) with 4 neighbors (say B1, B2, B3, B4), we can color A red and B1, B2, B3, B4 blue. It only becomes a problem when all nodes are interconnected (i.e. the graph is complete). So, the result does imply that graphs which are not colorable with 4 colors are not planar. In particular, the complete graph (where all nodes of the graph are connected) with 4 nodes is not planar.
GCC should understand the expression grammars of no fewer than a dozen other languages and warn you when something could syntactically be an expression from another language, but with a different meaning.

GCC should also change your diaper, burp you, and issue random diagnostics like

foo.c:32: warning: did you test this yet?
In Haskell this can be pushed further, by making existential types, i.e. opaque type that's only known to implement some type class. This doesn't seem to be that useful in Haskell (I think it's because of the immutability), but trait objects in Rust are pretty much the same and are used more often.

As a side note, I hope that the situation with pre- and postcondition checking improves (runtime verficiation like in Racket seems too heavyweight for me, dependent types alone are kind of clunky, type refinements are either bolted onto existing languages (LiquidHaskell, F7) and don't always fit, or exist in very obscure ones (F*)), and we can drop information hiding for the sake of safety alone. I don't like how today the "safe" option is to severly limit what you can do with a data type (want to safely index an array? just use an iterator! oh, you wanted to index two arrays at once? just zip them and hope the compiler makes the tuples go away! you wanted O(1) indexing? too bad, no can do).
The market is rather efficient in these vehicles, so depreciation isn't a way to save money. Dealers beg 3-yr-old car owners to sell their cars back so they can flip them. Like real estate, cars are cheap to buy. The expense comes when you sell them, losingthe residual becase you won't get a good price. The most important factor in auto afforidability is how long you own the car, not how good a deal you get at purchase time. And buying a "reliable" used car is a risk, because you don't know what damage this particular used car has suffered. Unless you have good intel on why the previous owner gave it up, and how they treated it, you're taking a gamble.
You sound like a pleasant person.
SLES info is here already: https://www.suse.com/de-de/support/kb/doc/?id=7023928

Disclaimer: I work for SUSE
I'm fed up of sorting and "recycling" plastic, it's such bullshit, it's a feel good activity for individuals or a check box exercise for governments. If anything it's damaging to continue pretending to recycle plastics, it makes it seem ok to continue producing them.

One day in the future it will be banned at the source, packaging will be replaced with something non-hazardous and efficient to recycle or biodegrade, and our children will look back at us in disbelief - just like we look back and scoff at advertisements for healthy smoking, yet it will have longer lasting effects on the food chain.
Honestly so am I, this sounds like a privacy nightmare. Sending all traffic through their servers specifically for the purpose of tracking what you're doing.

Isn't this one of the things Apple was upset at Facebook over (including the fact that they went around the App Store) since they don't allow this sort of tracking?

So maybe them building the feature is not the only reason they removed your app?
"The decentralized design that Bitcoin uses needs people to do lots of processing work"

You should try reading Satoshi's white paper which explains what that processing work is. (hint: there's not really any processing outside of generating a bunch of random worthless nonces in the hope that one nonce will be accepted as a winning lottery number)

The Proof of Work "algorithm" is completely unnecessary for processing transactions, and it's actually quite simple. To the point, PoW simply asks for a random number for the purpose of creating a lottery. If you want Bitcoins, you need to waste more real world energy and capital on hardware to print more lottery tickets (nonces).

The Bitcoin network and all the transactions on the network could easily be run on cheap hardware, a raspberry pi even. The PoW filter is a psychological tool for "governance" (write access) to the database, granted now exclusively to wealthy capital holders. Effectively granting the Bitcoin / PoW network to the wealthiest speculators who can devote resources to be sacrificed in return for digital lottery printers, which in turn give a chance to generate numbers in the cryptocoin database.

Curious why someone would design a currency system in objection to the financial plutocracy, when the design inevitably restricts control of the entire network only to existing capital?

It's no mistake Satoshi owns at least 1,148,800 BTC.
I've never worked for a public company (such as Facebook, Netflix, Google), when it says $120,000 in stock is that essentially free shares at a given price? I.E. you are open to sell them whenever?

I worked at a small series B level startup, and when I left I had the option to buy my shares at the last valuation price, but at just over $20,000 total I declined. I decided I could use that capital better than waiting around hoping they explode and get acquired. I don't think stock options work the same with public companies though.