skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>So if a potential buyer sees something 70% discounted, that implies that originally, the market determined that higher price as a fair price: a price that at least some buyers would pay for this item. The buyer trusts the market that that is apparently a fair price, but today the buyer is in luck, because it's been discounted to below the usual market price!

This whole paragraph is wrong in my opinion. A 70% discount does NOT imply anything other than it's 70% off of some number that the seller is free to decide, since they own the product they are selling and I'm not aware of any laws dictating what they have to sell at.

The second part I don't agree with is a seller selling at "below" market price. There is no such thing, unless the seller is doing charity work. When a sale happens, that is at the market price, unless of course there is some collusion where the buyer and seller agree to do some other trade-off to avoid paying taxes, but that's neither here nor there in this conversation.

On popular sale days, such as Black Friday, the sellers aren't selling below market price. They are selling at the price that they think they need to in order to get the publicity/feet in the door that they think will lead to other sales. In effect, the seller is buying the buyer's time and attention and whatever probability the buyer has of spending more money on other things with the "discount" they offered.
I started when one of my teachers allowed us to take said A5 sheet of paper into my A-Level mock exams. All the class did well, as we had this lifeline. Next exam we were given the same instruction but this time, unbeknownst to us until we walked in, our paper was taken away from us at the door. We were absolutely furious; until the teacher later showed us that not only were our marks all but identical to that of the exam where we had the paper, they were significantly higher than the exams we had before the whole cheat sheet debacle. Basically he tricked us into revising effectively. It's a technique that's stayed with me to this day.
>They do actually inspect paperwork and sometimes contents.

I'm well aware, this has been my livelihood for 13 years. That doesn't change the fact that Customs inspects a fraction of shipments and that for a considerable chunk of shipments a human being is never even involved on Customs end, just a computer.

> They also have mobile x Ray trucks that scan full semi trailers.

Mobile x-ray doesn't magically reveal the manufacturer of a given product though, or tap into the akashic record and verify the given country of origin, it goes "yup, there doesn't appear to be missiles, people or hidden compartments in that container".

>And if they find out you've lied on the paperwork, you've earned yourself a shit list that's going to extend to any travel you do to/from the U.S. for life, on top of penalties and possibly arrest warrants.

Do you really think random people in China are concerned about this? Also the paperwork used for Customs clearance, the vast majority of the time, is supplied by the shipper and the importer of record is only contacted if something is missing or clarification is needed by the broker.

Have you ever ordered something form eBay or AliExpress that shipped from China? The Customs declarations NEVER have accurate information on them, they consistently flat out lie about the contents, value, will often indicate gift or not sold, they'll even lie about the country of origin frequently. While these items are often usually a few bucks and are often sectionable anyway, you can bet this happens are formal shipments too without carriers and/or brokers knowing and Customs probably only catches this a small fraction of the time.

Until we get AGI and much better imaging equipment OR Customs increases the number of people doing inspection at least one order of magnitude, this will remain true. The volume is simply too high to catch even half of the funny business/lies/contraband.

This is also one of the countless reasons I lose sleep at night, we are far far far far far too dependent on be able to order this piece from that country, that piece from this country, those widgets from 2 other countries, and having everything show up at our home/place of business 1-3 days later to replace something that broke. All it takes is a natural disaster, a war, a trade war, and BAM.

This trade war with China for example had companies like Regal Beloit scrambling to move their manufacturing to Mexico, then it was announced we'd be starting a trade war with Mexico and these companies began to panic even more, fortunately that one seems to have been resolved.
The "For once you have tasted flight" quote is well-known tob be mis-attributed to da Vinci:

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2019/01/07/flight/
As a Clojure user, I've only fairly recently moved from "the JVM is a boat-anchor on this design" to "the JVM is not an advantage, but it's not so terrible, either". So I'll answer.

> a runtime with gazillions of man-hours invested into making it better,

"Man-hours" are such a non-measure of productivity that the classic software engineering book in our industry has a title that declares them a "myth".

The JVM turns out to work fine for functional languages like Clojure, but from my perspective, there's no inherent reason it necessarily should. There's a huge impedance mismatch, as Clojure is not much like Java, and the priorities are completely different.

Bragging that some C program has had a gazillion people work on it means either it has a gazillion special cases (not an advantage), or it has a gazillion bugs fixed (most of which were probably caused by using a low-level unsafe language like C in the first place). Yay but ouch.

(Implementing a new programming language is also typically a vast and complex task, but Clojure has an impressively small number of contributors. When you think through the design first and focus on simplicity, you don't need a gazillion special cases.)

Coming from the Common Lisp world, there's gobs of pure-Lisp programs and libraries I've used which are absolutely a joy to work with, at every level. They don't need many contributors because the code is drastically shorter and simpler. There's lots of Lisp libraries with only a dozen commits, which haven't been touched in years, and a version number way less than 1.0, which work great. That's all they need.

> and get easy access to bazillions of native libraries,

I can see why these can be important when bootstrapping a new language environment, but in practice, beyond version 1.0, I really don't care about them at all. The interfaces I use from Clojure tend to be "return a function", or even "return a function which returns a function". No Java library is designed like this. They're designed around mutable classes, which makes them pretty awkward to use from a functional language. I'll go find a 100-line native Clojure library instead, and by now, there's 100-line native Clojure libraries for almost everything I need.

For another example, the numeric tower is part of the core of Common Lisp, so it's usable from anywhere. BigInteger is a library in Java, and Java still doesn't seem to have rational or complex types, so Clojure does the best it can, but anything beyond fixnum arithmetic is basically opt-in, and almost no libraries use it.

Debugging is even worse, because while there are a million google hits for "java library X", and a thousand hits for "lisp library Y", there's often almost no hits for "java library X with clojure". I have to mentally translate the Java X solutions into Clojure, and figure out any JVM/Clojure interop issues myself from first principles.

That said, Clojure overall works great in practice, and for the most part you can ignore the JVM and its issues. But any time I'm forced to become aware that the JVM exists, my life ends up being worse than the equivalent scenario in the turtles-all-the-way-down world of other Lisps.
> ... monopolize their territories by either eliminating or merging with ...

The elimination part of that is important though. If companies were allowed to round up a group of the boys and go break some kneecaps when the boss didn't like something then it is true there won't be a lot of competition.

But in civilised country that isn't an option. Nobody wants that level of deregulation - basic policing of physical safety is something of a given. People are somewhat protected by law in their attempts to compete.
Saying as someone that also detests medium:

- would you mind sharing how much you actually you expect in revenue from this article?

- Have you considered any other ways of monetizing it? Just an idea: if you had your own blog and registered on Brave as a content creator, you could be getting a few cents from me already.
And the only one that allows prescription drug ads.
-betterC removes the druntime features, but pointer safety is gained with the -dip1000 flag (with @safe) regardless of whether you use betterC or not.

@safe will also stop you doing obviously unsafe pointer arithmetic unless you abstract it into a @trusted function.
It starts off pretty strong but it gets to the point where there will be a giant city and 1 or 2 missions in the entire city. It makes the scenery feel like set dressing rather than a place designed to be played with.
>million dollar mistake

echo "million dollar mistake" | sed 's/mil/bil' # :)
I use VS Code and it never felt sluggish. But it’s probably one of the best Electron apps out there.

Honestly, if I had to develop a Desktop app today and wanted it to be cross-platform, I’d probably use Electron. No need for hacky workarounds like in a web app to make it run on every major browser.
The problem here isn't Everest, it's poverty. Nepal is a very poor country. As much as everyone likes to hate on the rich people climbing mountains, they miss the fact that without the mountain, the people would be even worse off.

Yes, of course when a western luxury income collides with third world poverty, of course there is ugliness. It's just here that it's visible.

And it's easy to make fun of the ego-driven climbers, despite the fact that it's no less meaningful a pursuit as pretty much any other hobby.
Blackplanet.com perhaps? If not the original social network, then certainly one of the first.
Things were worse 20 years ago for the general internet , with few "trustable" brand names anyway. Piracy, viruses and scams were all over the place. If anything it's cleaner today, thanks to investments in security/antispam, but the mode of operation for scammers has changed.
AT&T dealt with that by acquiring CarrierIQ. The product doesn't even have a public name any more AFAIK.
Thanks for the additional detail; you know more about Minnesota healthcare than I do. Looks like I'm wrong about the prices there. I guess maybe I'm reacting more to the idea that Alec's decision wasn't rational. I agree with you about how extra sad that decision was, if it was avoidable. But I might also give him some benefit of the doubt, especially since this exact same story isn't that uncommon, of people choosing against insurance because they don't feel like they can afford it, and then paying a much greater price.
thanks for sharing this. sorry for your loss.
A short list off the top of my head:

It is very easy to get over eager and use more abstraction than you need or can handle. This is perhaps the worst of them.

Strings shouldn't be [Char]. OverloadedStrings should be the default.

There are partial functions in base. head for example

It is easy to spring space leaks due to laziness.

Relatedly, choosing between foldr foldl foldl'

Incomplete pattern matching (which will be a warning) or sometimes default _ casing. If you add to the type, the compiler won't save you.

It is not necessarily so obvious to a beginner when you are doing tail call recursion.

Maybe overuse of typeclasses when records work better?

Over use of Template Haskell can raise an eyebrow.

A minority of extensions are ill advised.

All in all, I think the level of footguns in Haskell is in a different universe than C++, but I am trying to see it from the other perspective.

http://dev.stephendiehl.com/hask/#what-to-avoid
http://dev.stephendiehl.com/hask/#the-dangerous
Accurate simulation of flight physics is quite CPU taxing.
>(just) good enough GUI bindings

Which one(s) do you use?
Prepar3d is literally just a licensed version of FSX with UI tweaks. It's not even at the level of X-Plane these days.
This is not that helpful. We marketers have aged accounts to post from. Reddit is highly manipulated but in a fashion that looks like genuine curiosity and being helpful.
Same here, Outlook has been open from 9am > 4pm and it's using 64MB.
It's both. The availability of both grants and loans has been a huge factor, to be sure, but so have the direct subsidies to schools, and the special rules that make such loans more appealing to lenders, and all the "little ways" that regulation drives up either demand or cost for a college education. But it doesn't even matter, really. Whether they were made in the front room or the back room, many of the deals contributing to the debt crisis were made to benefit a few at the expense of the public. Decrying one kind of pandering while denying another never leads to good policy.
Malaysia’s Deep Islamic State – Analysis
I can second (or third) this thought: these articles taught me a whole lot a long time ago.
my standard response to this is the one i learned from william macaskill at oxford, and is an extension to a line of reasoning from peter singer.

peter singer believes that if you could save a child's life for two dollars, and you instead spend that money on a coffee, you're in effect killing the child. if you extrapolate this reasoning to it's logical conclusion, it follows that you should be living at the same level as the poorest person in the world so you can donate as much money as possible and still survive.

however, if you start living in a refrigerator box and not doing laundry because you don't want to spend money on detergent, you're likely to lose your cushy tech job for being weird, and then you'll be able to save way fewer children.

so, while it's true that you can go be a hermit in the mountains who only eats berries extracted from bear poop, that might not actually be the most effective way to help the environment. it would preclude you, for instance, from trying to convince someone on hacker news to live a more modest lifestyle, thereby doubling your contribution.
The 230MB (not 300MB) is from my real app Actual. The example project uses much less because it does nothing except start electron, which looks like it uses about 80MB baseline.
I see! I was hoping it would have meant realistic auto generated air traffic :)
So if there are Jewish people who agree with her, and Jewish people who do not ... what does that mean?

If there are Japanese people, who lived in "detention facilities" during WWII who agree with her definition ... what does that mean?

If Ben Ferencz, who prosecuted Nazis in Nuremberg, 'describes these policies of separating children from their parents and putting those children in cages as “crimes against humanity.”' (quoting https://www.politicususa.com/2019/06/20/opinion-a-concentrat... ) ... what does that mean?

Maybe it means we need to stop what we're doing to those tens of thousands of children.

'Cause, you know, that's not doing anyone any good.

And as for "actively broken the law" - last I checked, crossing the border illegally was a misdemeanor offense. Is this really just? Because I think it's much closer to an administration policy of "fuck the immigrants" than anything else.
This is one model of free-market economies I hadn’t considered. Thank you for the mind shift!
It has been years so youre probably right. Bummer. That explains the ram usage.

I do prefer the webview approach because I don’t need/want my chat app to bundle a browser :-/ Ive been a web and native app dev for a decade and do not agree that developer convenience could ever justify these sorts of choices. My webview backed native apps are all sub 1mb and I have no trouble developing them. I guess I just dont get it.
No, I just think that if the national alert system is activated that it should work as advertised, deliver each alert once and that everybody should receive it.

As it was some people got no alerts, others got nine and the information dispensed through it was faulty. That's pretty fucked up.
The thing is, a lot of the necessary changes will have no impact on ordinary people’s lives. The UK is now up to more than 50% clean electricity for instance, and most people are not aware it has happened. And the UK is not even using the cheapest forms of electricity production much (hydro because it doesn’t have the right topology, solar because of the high latitude, onshore wind because of population density and political decisions).

Those renewable sources of electricity - solar, onshore wind and hydro - are now the cheapest way to produce electricity full stop, even ignoring the pollution externalities of the alternatives, and countries that have access to those resources do not need to sacrifice anything except a bit of technocratic hassle to get to a high level of renewable electricity.

Getting to net zero carbon in total (including heating and transportation) would be expensive with current technology, but probably won’t be very expensive given the technological progress which can happen over the next 30 years, if we do the basic things right, follow a reasonable pathway, and give companies plenty of time to make investments and incremental progress. It’s highly likely electric vehicles will be cheaper over that timeframe, for instance.

Your point is true, and it excuses a lack of pressure from the public, but it doesn’t excuse the media lying to their audience to gratify them. Nor representative politicians who are meant to use their own judgement remaining ignorant, and avoiding the boring technocratic steps necessary to help, or even just allow, the transition to take place.
I'm stunned. Imagine all this tech was open-source. The projects people would make.
This looks like a great addition to Ableton's own "Learning Music". Wonder if it's still written with Elm and Tone.js!
Sure, backprop is fairly simple, but the thing it produces is somewhat complex, and we seem to find it hard to explain “why” the weights it finds work (even though we understand clearly how it finds weights that do work), right?

That seems sufficiently “black-box-ish” to me?
Which VR Headsets Get Used Most?
These things are not free, you know. Especially thermal mass which requires thick walls or essentially heat exchangers.

And solar is kind of hard to put on walls of a building you do not own.
Ask HN: Experiences with Therapy?
I've been attending psychodynamic therapy for about 9 months. I'm finding that it's a very insightful process and I think I'm slowly moving my life into a direction I like. That being said, I'm wary of this being an illusion or placebo.

Can anyone share their experiences with therapy? Has it helped? What kind have you tried?
> Asteroid mining can be a revolutionary source of resources.

FWIW

"...analysed how soon humans might use up the solar system’s most accessible resources should space mining take off. They found that an annual growth rate of 3.5% would use up an eighth of the solar system’s realistic resources in 400 years. At that point, humanity would have only 60 years to apply the brakes and avoid exhausting the supply completely."

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/may/12/protect-sola...
Unused RAM is good. It lets the OS do things like pre-fetching and caching disc reads. That is, it speeds everything up to not be using all of your RAM.

Plus, when you do fill your RAM, you have to start contending with swapping, which slows everything down significantly.
in your opinion, what makes someone part of the solution?
Five years ago there was a similar situation with the transportation of prescription medications. FedEx put out a public statement that they intended to fight the Department of Justice order:

"We want to be clear what’s at stake here: the government is suggesting that FedEx assume criminal responsibility for the legality of the contents of the millions of packages that we pick up and deliver every day. We are a transportation company – we are not law enforcement. We have no interest in violating the privacy of our customers. We continue to stand ready and willing to support and assist law enforcement. We cannot, however, do the job of law enforcement ourselves." [1]

Ultimately two years later the DOJ dropped the charges against Fedex.

"In court on Friday, [U.S. District Court Judge Charles] Breyer said FedEx was 'factually innocent.' He said the company repeatedly asked the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration to give it the name of a customer that was shipping illegal drugs so it could stop working with the person, but the agency was either unwilling or unable to do so." [2]

If this plays out similarly, FedEx will use a similar blacklist mechanism to comply with the law, but is suing right now to prevent any backlash that will inevitably occur when the blacklist doesn't contain an illegal entity and it's discovered there was a shipment that slipped through the cracks.

"Export restriction rules “essentially deputize FedEx to police the contents of the millions of packages it ships daily even though doing so is a virtually impossible task, logistically, economically, and in many cases, legally,” it said in a filing. ... FedEx responded by saying publicly that it would deliver all products made by Huawei to addresses other than those of Huawei and affiliates placed on the U.S. national security blacklist." (from the main article in this thread)

[1] - https://about.van.fedex.com/newsroom/fedex-response-to-depar...
[2] - https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/06/17/482537913...
"the Toronto team sold their patent rights to the university for $1 apiece in an effort to protect its integrity from greedy commercial enterprises"

"Eventually, Banting and his team reluctantly agreed: Lilly was granted exclusive rights to manufacture and distribute insulin in the United States for one year"

This makes no sense to me! If they were not interested in making money, as to donate their patent rights, why not letting it be public? Why selling it to a university? Then why get shocked that an academic organization does a poor job on scaling up production and on other non-academic related things? Oh, and the cherry on top, why did it have to be manufacturing exclusive rights?!
>Especially macros are a very, very bad idea.

Why? Is it because the code you see is not the code that runs?
> This looks more like people new to the internet discovering what everyone else already knew: You can't trust strangers on the internet. You never could.

Like everything, this isn't absolutely true. People meet others they met through online means all the time, be it for clubs, dating, or commerce (e.g. craigslist). There is a certain societal expectation for how strangers are treated and that requires a bit of trust in someone you've never met.
Ditto. Liberal arts grad (Political Science) and work in InfoSec now. This is how I went through uni and taught myself classes I didn't attend. It has also workd in infosec and getting some entry level certs.
I don't think so, because people should stop treating the internet as a private place. It really isnt, and the whole "we are real people with real names" is an illusion created by for-profit companies. I know that people desire safety by default, but they also have a very long history of trusting the wrong tyrants.
> The nature of simulator is not that CPU/GPU taxing.

I think you're underestimating just how much simulation is being done in a proper flight simulator. The really good ones are literally simulating air flow around the aircraft, in realtime, to determine how it should respond.
It's a very valid assumption. Cruise and takeoff throttle positions are usually quite different.