skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Oh dear no. Capitalism is a miracle for people who are on the winning side, of the equation, it's awful for people who are not and are mostly trapped on the wrong side of that divide. As environmental degradation encroaches, that latter group will gradually swallow more and more people.

It's not a matter of empathy vs rationality as you suggest, but of under what conditions empathic strategies are efficient and self-sustaining. You assume the world (including society) as objective and rewarding unempathic rationality, but many social relations are wholly arbitrary and are optimized to reward particular strategies.

Evidence from statistical mechanics points to the evolutionary stability of self-organizing decentralized peer-sensitive strategies.

You know, I was reading the other day about Jeff Bezos being worth $118 billion. What is so great about maximizing such a quantity? Jeff Bezos doesn't know what to do with his spare money besides spending it on rockets. Would be really be functionally 'poorer' if he woke up tomorrow to find himself worth 'only' $18 billion, and the other $100 billion evenly distributed across the population (everyone in the world better off by $14), the US population (everyone in the US better off by $300), or the population of Amazon employees (everyone better off by approximately $180,000).

Supposedly it's more 'efficient' for Jeff Bezos to be in charge of all this money, but Jeff Bezos' wealth depends to a large degree on his ability to keep labor prices just above those of other employers hiring from the same pool in any given market. You're maximizing the extraction of value from the combination of capital and labor, but in a parasitical fashion that leaves Jeff Bezos with an (almost) unimaginably vast surplus and many of his employees with no surplus at all. You might argue that such workers should increase their economic value so as to command a higher wage, but in reality most of them are already working near the envelope of their physical capacity while being too tired and time-poor to undertake independent or institutional study to significantly improve their earning potential.
This article is a pile of garbage. Apple is the only tech company walking the talk about privacy in both corporate policies and practical application of privacy in their platforms.

A quote like this from the article:

>Despite Apple’s public stance on privacy, a Washington Post investigation earlier this year found Apple allows iPhone apps to include tracking software that surreptitiously sends the personal data of Apple customers to outside companies.

shows the article is merely an ego boo to WaPo to pretend they have some kind of cred on the subject but they don't. More like an article from Fortune - usually inaccurate WRT Apple.

What should have followed this paragraph in an accurate article would be this:

"As Apple discovers application developers who violate their policies on data collection and privacy within applications they remove the offending applications and strengthen their internal procedures and policies to prevent a reoccurrence."
The Roman pavers you would ride on today are 2000 years old, remember. Back then they were in much better shape, right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_roads#/media/File:Pompei...
Can I use this with any intellij products like phpstorm or webstorm?
It is so sad how perfect USB C could of been, and then they had to make so many variants that aren't easy to tell apart from one another not immediately obvious. I hope they do some USB3 stuff where they start coloring cables on the end that conform entirely to a given standard.
A quick google search shows Rolex is the top advertiser in its market

https://www.watchtime.com/wristwatch-industry-news/industry/...

Perhaps you should read the magazines/papers rich people read.
Google discontinues AdSense mobile apps, will focus on web app instead
That snippet of the NYT story omits critical context: The data they captured were random wifi packets (probably for use in Skyhook-type location fixes by way of mapping out where APs are). Sounds like they were doing the equivalent of a wardrive and captured more than the AP advertisement message.

This is information that Google doesn't have any need for (noise) and didn't want in the first place.

They also self-reported the failure, where they could have just nuked it and we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Silica aerogel could make Mars habitable
If you do it by pushing wages around artificially then you artificially change the prices of certain goods relative to others.

If you do it via taxes and transfer payments then you don't distort the prices of goods.
I think the author takes for granted the amount of work involved in software engineering. I work for a startup who's product has glaringly obvious flaws. But someone has to do the work of writing code to improve upon existing features. And there are a zillion other things that a business can choose to prioritize over improving an existing feature that gets the job done.
For the intended user of a MacBook Air this isn't an issue at all, neither is the lack of peripheral ports.

Most people I know with MacBook Airs don't actually use any peripherals.

On the other hand, I need 2 dongles and a USB SD card reader just to do my job with my 2018 MBP. I also need an external keyboard, which I never used to need, because it's literally painful to use the keyboard all day.
I don't understand this article at all.

>A SmartMoney.com market analysis from 2007 cites Lorenz, then suggests that hypothetical problems at Sony could affect a string of shippers, retailers, and investors: "One butterfly, in this case a Japanese butterfly, sets off the entire chain." Even applied to society, rather than nature, such claims merit skepticism.

What's wrong with that? Is he blissfully unaware of, for example, the Maersk hack and how it "butterfly effected" the entire chain?
Workers aren't paid according to the market value of their work but rather for what they can demand in the labor market and what it costs to produce and reproduce their labor. That hasn't changed.

Also, if anything, per capita demand for classical music is less now that it was a century or two ago.

Baumol's cost disease is a powerful explanation for why people like doctors, musicians, and nanny's seem to be paid more now than they were before. Don't dismiss it out of hand.
Seriously. They also ignore the fact that the productivity of classical music performance has increased.

Four musicians and their instruments can perform a string quartet for a crowd the same today as they could in 1850.

Four musicians and an engineer with instruments and recording gear can record that track today and make it available to the masses via one of a number of media vehicles-- and that recording and those mechanisms are different today than they were in 1995, than they were in 1965, and it's something that was entirely impossible in 1850.
VSC isn't a well-behaving Mac-app.

As I said in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20440258, coherent UI is a very important point to users since they can assume that some feature from App X will also work on App Y.

This is very prevalent in the macOS Cocoa ecosystem unlike Windows(every app reinvents notifications) or Linux(GTK/Qt/... fragmentation).

Hence the importance of Cocoa in macOS apps. (and VSC is electron :-()
Thanks, I totally agree with you. Never heard about Shorthand before but it makes Medium looks great compared to it.
Welcome to China. These listings are all fake.

Real "bottom" for non-shared apartment in Shanghai is ~3000 rmb (~$500) for a smallish place with a 1+ hour commute. Rents in the downtown are around 10000+ rmb.
Google is definitely better, but DDG is good enough most of the time, and it has !g for when it isn't.
I don't think anyone wants to completely get rid of 230, but it should be narrowed. I think an ideal compromise would be that ubiquitous mega-platforms should be held somewhat responsible for what their users post, under certain circumstances.

If a platform is already protectively policing and curating content, then they are not really a platform, they are more of a publisher.

Companies like Facebook and YouTube should absolutely be open to lawsuits for what users post. They are already investing significant resources in regulating what users post anyway, so they are taking responsibility for it.

I think even large websites should still get full 230 protection, if they only have minimal moderation to remove spam or blatantly illegal content, like Craigslist. Craigslist is much more of a neutral platform than Facebook.
Since rewinding time is entirely theoretical, and assuming physicalism, I guess that entirely depends on whether, in your thought experiment, you allow quantum interactions (those which are posited to be truly random) to play out the same way or not. If yes, yes, if not, not. 8)
I'm not sure there's "a" distinction, but there's a couple I tend to think about. This isn't necessarily anything formal or official.

One is just, could this be Turing complete if we gave it infinite resources in the obvious manner? e.g., in Life, an infinite grid, for a modern computer, hypothetically infinite RAM and disk and time, etc. I think this is the one most people are using.

Another one I tend to think about is, since the system is theoretically modeled by a finite state automaton, you can ask the question "how large would the manifested finite state automaton be?" For these toy models such as Cities, or the CSS Turing machine [1], or some small chunk of a Rule 110 encoding, often the answer is still something that might fit in a real computer as a table. There's a sense in which that's so small that using Turing Machine tools to understand the system may still not be the best way to look at it.

By contrast, the FSM for something like the computer you're using to read this would be so staggeringly large that it could never fit into our universe by any encoding that doesn't somehow "cheat" and cease to be an FSM model. (That is, we can "compress" the FSM model right back down by encoding it as a Turing machine, but that defeats the purpose, no?) Even though it is theoretically a correct model of your computer, it's not useful for us humans to understand the behavior of the system. The tools of computer science for Turing-complete systems are far more applicable to understanding what it does than the FSM-based tools, even if, technically, they don't fully apply.

Often they still do de facto; while theoretically it is possible to create a program that can examine the real state of any real computer and determine whether it's going to halt [2], the result would (without proof) again be so large that it couldn't possibly be manifested in the real universe, so in reality the results of the Halting Problem and similar TM-based analyses are still generally "correct" for us in practice, even if they aren't in principle. Symantec isn't going to be selling a 10^100^100^100-byte-sized anti-virus program to us any time soon.

So there's also a sort of line you can draw based on the size difference between the TM-based model and the FSM-based model. It's fuzzy, although, since the FSM-based model grows exponentially (super-exponentially?), it's less fuzzy than you may think since it doesn't take much for the FSM model to go to plaid.

[1]: https://notlaura.com/is-css-turing-complete/

[2]: I'm not 100% sure this is true, but I'm pretty sure it is; I suspect we can prove that the only way this machine can run is to simply execute the computer internally and record every single state it passes through; eventually it'll either repeat a previous state or halt. You can't even assume you can compress the past history very well since for any compression scheme there are programs that will pass through the states in an order that will pessimize your compression (I'm pretty sure), so we rapidly exceed the universe's storage capacity trying to store all the previous states even with such cleverness as we might still be able to muster.
Out of curiosity, do you put a competitive salary range on your posts? I suspect that if you put a range that is above the median for your locale you might have more bites. Only other reason I can think is if your technology stack is outdated or you are located in an area where no one wants to live.
The weather patterns, infrastructure, and economic constants are going to be nearly identical. Roll back the clock 2,000 years and you would still see major cities mostly at the same rivers and ports.

Major inventions often have several people making the same basic discovery at the same time. You can’t build heavier than air controlled flight without efficient engines. You can’t build efficient engines without high precision manufacturing. Which requires it’s own constraints etc.

Replay the last 30 years and Dell might not have been the mail/phone then internet order PC vender to become a household name. But, one of them would because several where trying and efficiency of scale is a major advantage.

PS: One if my favorite examples is in a high school science class I was messing around with a power supply and mechanical pencil lead. It ended up making a rather bright light, in a moment of wonder I realized I had become possibly the millionth person to discover a precursor light bulb. Well over a hundred years late by on measure but in terms of the 100,000’s of years history of humanity fairly close.
It's not a simple mechanical invention at all, I agree with you, this is a silly/absurd statement.

I recall in my freshman physics classes asking my professor "why are all the modules using inclined planes and pulleys? wouldn't we be able to learn better if the problems involved something we're actually familiar with in everyday life like a bicycle?" (I attended the university with the most bicyclists in the world)

I only needed to see his reaction to realize that a bicycle is pretty damn complex.
The Ashcroft Decision Revisited Through the Lens of Opioid Hysteria
That article isn't particularly relevant. It argues that reality is not fundamentally digital.

The article seems to argue that since a digital system can simulate an analog system (through a DAC), reality cannot be either digital nor analog. But that doesn't matter, since as long a reality can simulate digital or analog phenomena, it can simulate the digital phenomena and create Turing machines.

The link to "A Defence of Informational Structural Realism" is broken.
i'd never. i'd get a separate bank account for the kid instead. i even got a separate account for my own online payments.

banks need to make that easier. essentially, if we even want to allow children sto spend money online, we need to start handling allowances online too. automatically transfer $10 every week to my sons account, for example.
If Amazon pays their workers more but keeps prices the same, how does that create an opportunity for a competitor?
I see Rolex and Tudor ads everywhere. Magazines (Economist, Monocle, etc), sport(F1, St Moritz), airports, etc.

Similar, but not nearly as pronounced is Rolls-Royce.

It's just that these companies only advertise where their buyers are.
As someone on reddit pointed out:

"The following metals have been found to be incompatible with nitrogen tetroxide and must not be used: Aluminum 2024, Zinc, Aluminum 7075, Silver, K-Monel, Titanium, Brass Cadmium, Bronze Hastelloy, Copper, EZ Flow 45 Braze."[0]

[0]: Materials Compatibility with Liquid Rocket Propellants, https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/866010.pdf
I get a lot more seo spam than I used to, but the results are still quite good. I think we should give google some credit for that at least.

Like, a lot more seo spam though.
George Orwell: Lear, Tolstoy and the Fool (1947)
I think all that resolves to is that average temperature, mass/energy ratio, and other macroscopic values will be (roughly) the same. It says nothing about whether the same people will exist or not. Consider that simply one person not existing, or simply not procreating, means that the entire tree of descendants below them won't exist.
I’m pretty sure this author is trolling the reader.
You say they had horses for those types of traveling, except they most likely didn’t. Only a successful farmer...

We can't make a universal rule like this. Everyone has a particular mental image of how farming worked long ago, but circumstances varied. Horses can eat a wide variety of plants, including something that is growing wild right outside your door. The density of farmers probably had more to do with whether they could afford a horse than anything else had. In locations that hadn't been farmed relentlessly for centuries, there was spare pasture for a horse or two to feed themselves. For an example, just look at traditional herders. Those people are poor as dirt even today, yet they all have horses. Or look at swiddeners. They didn't move every year, but they moved often enough that not every square meter of land had been converted to intensive agriculture. Many of them, both today (when swiddening is rare) and millennia ago (much more common!) had all sorts of livestock including horses.

Many ancient farmers couldn't have owned horses because they didn't have a way to feed them. Many other ancient farmers did own horses and could feed them.
IMHO a simpler and probably the only viable way to force competition is to legally force Google to not respond to any query on certain periodic time periods.

For instance, if you were to forbid Google from operating on every odd-numbered day, then 50% of the search engine market and revenues would immediately be distributed among competitors and furthermore users would be forced to test multiple engines and they could find a better one to use even when Google is allowed to operate.

Obviously this has a short-term economic cost if other search engines aren't good enough as well as imposing an arbitrary restriction on business, so it's debatable whether this would be a reasonable course of action
Global Production Transistors
Before and After ‘The B-52’s’
And yet some retailers make tons of profit. If it were so easy to swoop in and defeat the top dog with lower prices, how is Amazon still dominating?
It’s simply not true that everything sucks on mobile. A lot of sites are much more usable than that one.
Robot can forge handwritten signatures (2015)
Windows CE was not functional with an easy to lose stylus, the touch screens were horrible and it was mostly a miniature Windows desktop. The apps were not exactly touch friendly.

The version of IE was unusable for most of the web. But you don’t think “extreme ease of use” made the iPhone more functional?

The devices we use to deploy were $1000-$2000 (ruggedized devices) so they definitely weren’t cheap devices for the time.
How are taxes not artificial? How do taxes not distort the prices of goods?
yeah, well, I didn't want to be managed by this person.
Rotating wheels generate a self balancing moment that resists falling over... which has nothing to do with balancing on a thin blade.
As I said before: "This competition has pushed profit margins into the single digits"

This is not tons of profit. Your assertion is incorrect.
In what way can statements about a multiverse not be ontological? Are you committing to modal realism, Platonic realism, or are you just pulling my leg?

If you commit to the multiverse being physical, by extension you're making claims about ontological concerns, since all physical claims require there to be a notion of something existing, even if you're wanting to claim that something counterfactually exists. Then that gets into modal realism etc etc.

Likewise you can't be fully confident in multiversal theories since no physicist endorses a multiversal theory without also accepting it as interpretative, as no experiment has been performed to anoint multiversal theories as being correct. So you're still postulating something worthy of criticism even if there was nothing ontological involved.
> e.g. if an animation/datablock was not assign to an object, you would lose it when you restart Blender

Really? Did not know about it. Thanks! The number of users of a certain entity has always confused to me. I've used Maya a lot, and I can't but wonder why Blender just don't copy the got bits of other software when it comes to usability improvement.
Similar recent thread

"My first 15 compilers"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20408011
Seems to me that main problem here is that consumers have insufficient control about their payment card transactions. Why card transactions can be initiated by merchant without explicit authorization of each transaction by the customer?

If merchant-initiated transactions are desirable (e.g. for periodic payments), why there is no explicit confirmation for number and size of allowed transactions per time period for given merchant, like it is standard for regular direct debit bank transactions?
by outlawing it outright. the law should then provide that they can ask for all money spent to be returned. this should apply to all games targeted at children, even if an adult plays it.
As a protest, I always draw a figure in the signature box. There's no authorization, authentication or non-repudiation provided by a handwritten signature; it's antiquated, historical business/social theater.
Agreed. Vulcanized rubber tires appear to be the major missing component. Vulcanization wasn't discovered until 1839 [1] and the need to further improve ride comfort (from solid rubber tires) helped spur the creation of the pneumatic tire in 1888 [2].

[1] https://www.britannica.com/technology/vulcanization
[2] https://www.britannica.com/technology/tire#ref117797
Because the taxes fall on everyone and not just the buyers of low paid labor.
The Western Constellations
I was at a graduate careers fair in a city where Amazon had just opened offices. Naturally, Amazon had a stall at this careers fair. The person running their stall was telling an audience of maybe six or seven other people that Amazon was the kind of company where if you could find a path around their warehouse that would shave even a single second off a warehouse worker's journey, they'd make them walk it. The audience were quite impressed by this.

I suddenly found myself the other side of having said "what an awful place to work," and receiving a mix of bewildered and hostile looks from every other person around that stall.

I'm pretty sure the claim was hyperbole – the practical side of getting people to walk a particular path would have been my follow-up question, if I'd thought of it in time. Even so, the claim revealed a mentality of workers as robots that I think helped explain some of the news stories of extraordinary conditions of their warehouse workers.
Have you ever gotten into a fight? Did you know someone who did? Were you ever hit by an adult? Was anything you owned ever stolen?

Remember that perfect means perfect.
When you reach that size, you are not looking for investments in the millions, you are looking for the billions.
Open Web != Free software.

I like & try to support Free software (I'm writing this in a Linux laptop with Firefox & I try to donate to the GNU regularly), but the fact that some apps are the so-called 'closed-source, proprietary' apps doesn't disqualify them to contribute to the Open Web.

Open Web (if I understood correctly) is more about lowering the barrier (skills & time) to participate to the web.
Most of the apps qualify IMO. Things like Postgres.app or Pixelmator are the apps that directly match the category.

I just don't understand why some 'Free software proponents' see proprietary apps as 'evil'. :-(
Do all indie-programmers have to select between starving to death or working in a company that one can't enjoy?
Can't s?he monetize the app/service s?he made?
Did you dismiss physics for the same reason? A perfectly elastic ball rolling down a frictionless plane, how absurd!
A Wall at the Border Will Not Stem Refugees from Northern Triangle Countries