skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The concept of "Ashkenazi Jewish" does not correspond as strongly as you might think to a homogenous genetic make-up. Ashkenazi Jewish people come from a wide range of European and Middle Eastern genetic make-up, and you'll find as much diversity within Ashkenazi Jews as there is between Ashkenazi Jews & Europeans / Ashkenazi Jews - eastern Mediterranean basin. The higher rate of heritable disease is due to isolated communities marrying lots of first cousins etc (historically speaking). But there were many such dispersed & distinct such communities.
I wouldn't consider the second example telling them, and I wouldn't consider the first you, but I can see how it might be interpreted that way, so fair point.

Ultimately, though, they're periodically asking you for money; if you decide to stop giving them money, then things need to work out such they don't get any more of your money.
I don't find the evidence you provide to back up your claim compelling. Nothing that you say suggests that deregulation is the reason for economic improvement, rather than other things that have also happened over the last several decades, such as the rise of superior technology, the end of the Cold War, or the invention of New Coke.

The first article you cite, about delivery companies, is from an industry publication. Naturally, they're going to advocate things they view as beneficial to the industry.

Your claim that deregulation is the cause of electricity prices plummeting, and that the regulated side produces more cost, are wholly unsubstantiated. Even if there was substantiation of the trend, that doesn't mean one caused the other.

Likewise, according to the article you cite, there's now _more_ regulation in some areas of the airline industry, like security. Maybe _that's_ why fatalities have decreased. (I don't actually believe that, but it's equally plausible.)

Objective views of numbers and long-term trends are meaningless in the absence of an effort to understand the causal relationships. Correlation does not imply causation. Compelling evidence that deregulation provides economic benefit requires an evidence-backed explanation of _how_ it has done so.

Edited to address your edit re: the Internet as an industry: Again, it's the same issue. You don't present any evidence that the Internet being unregulated is the reason it's successful - or even a contributor. And the scenario you propose about ad regulation isn't anything like the kinds of actual regulations that have been proposed, like net neutrality.
I wouldn't be surprised if there's something in there that says if you accept it you waive any and all claims against them in the future.
Genius-level heirs who aren't psychopaths would be a great thing actually. If we had this a generation ago, maybe our leaders would have been smart enough to act responsibly about climate change.
To be clear, I'm not denying that genius correlates with certain mental afflictions. I'm denying that this should be a major reason to be concerned about IQ enhancement through genetic modifications, and would add to my original point by suggesting that there are clearly also ways for people to attain exceptionally intelligent brains while not having these issues (since many examples exist), and it is not at all obvious that we couldn't purposefully aim for that space.
I'd sooner use a car for grocery shopping (10 minute walk) than retrofit my bedroom so I don't have to take another step.

However! It is exceptionally useful for people who are injured, sick, or disabled in some other way.
I don't think that will work because...

1) If the public trust doesn't reach 50% of voting shares then what difference will it make?

2) If the public trust does reach 50%, then it's no longer a for-profit company, but rather full socialist government/public control of the economy

Fines are fine -- they reduce the value of shares and therefore the bottom line. They just need to consistently outweigh the potential profits from bad behavior.

If fines are too low, the solution isn't to find another fix -- it's just to raise fines more.
i took it to be ESL author and gave some slack in that regard.
It wouldn't, so targeted ads should be de-emphasized in a human-centric model.
> Either we give up the "free" model alltogether and shift back to paid services only, or we choose the lesser evil and live with it.

This is true in a specific way, and it is sometimes useful to use this frame. But in this case, I think the frame obscures more than it focuses.

"We" aren't getting together and voting or bidding or whatever. I think the closest thing to a choke point for decision making about some of this is in Google's hands, with Chrome. At least until the browser monopoly wheel spins again.

> We have to give something in exchange for "free" services

Eh? No. The requirement is that services need resources to exist. If you immediately extrapolate to pseudo-moralistic finger-wagging at "consumers", you're ignoring a lot of ways various organizations have found to exist. It is either self-blinding or a heavy thumb on the scale.
I don't understand why you take onus with the Russian state/Fancy Bear aspect of the story. They seem to be addressed in the same spirit in both articles.
Because bandaids aren’t already painful enough to remove?
May I suggest more than one magnet per train to differentiate them.

Simplest way: number of magnets corresponds to train ID. Small space between magnets (calculated from Hall sensor refresh rate and max train speed). Count number of Hall sensor trips (maybe with debounce) within some time period (calculated from the minimum train speed during crossing and the magnet spacing).
Disadvantage: Train minimum speed must be reasonable. Requires n(n+1)/2 magnets, or 36 for 8 trains.

More reliable way: two columns of magnets, slightly offset, spaced as above. Two Hall sensors in a row under the track. Col 1 is clock. Col 2 is data. Whenever Hall 1 (clock) goes high, read Hall 2 (data) (maybe for a short period for debounce). To keep things simple and stay away from speed assumptions, put the same number of clock magnets on all trains: log2(train count), rounded up, for example 4 for 16 trains.
Disadvantage: Requires twice as many Hall sensors. Requires about log2(N)1.5 magnets per train, so 96 magnets for 16 trains, as opposed to 16 for the original method. Those tiny neodymium magnet bars are cheap, though.
BONUS: Train speed measurement. Speed is the clock magnet spacing divided by time between clock Hall trips. Now you can run a Pi algorithm (e.g. PID) to move trains at a target speed regardless of load, at least in the regions with Hall sensors.

If you are willing to assume the train speed is constant while passing the sensors and do more complex signal analysis on the Pi, the intermediate clock magnets can be removed, reducing the magnet count to N(2 + log2(N)0.5)=64.
It is not without a maintainer. But you make a good point that the companies that use it should sponsor it. I still have to maintain it for free in my spare time, and spare time gets less and less each year.

In fact it woudn't surprise me if the parent commenter is one of the people working for a multi-billion dollar company that got offended when I told them I wouldn't do some work for them, for free. Hence the suspicion there is an axe to grind.
You do not pay for conversion. Transforming API specs from one format to another is totally free. But APIMatic does offer other services, like SDK Code Generation and creating API Docs Portal from any API spec format, which is what the paid tiers are for.

In fact, API Transformer is free service with support included, which I have not seen other SaaS providers doing.

Disclaimer: I work at APIMatic. :)
Why would you bother to belittle a person for simply offhandedly sharing an idea?

Is it lack of concern for people generally, or just this specific case?
At first I thought that looked pretty bad, then I saw the price. ~740USD per month, and it’s enabling young single people who only earn $1800-2400/mo to live in the city near their jobs.

Beyond just enabling lower income people a place to live, if you had dorms like that available in SF for $740/mo I think you’d have a long, long line of young tech workers signing up to move in.

In the US, trading a very long commute for lower housing costs is widely understood and socially acceptable, I wonder why trading a tiny space for low rent and a short commute isn’t.
Some doctors are idiots. Some doctors are only in it for the money. Only a small proportion of the people who qualify have any genuine deep-seated urge to help fix human suffering.

When doctors get it wrong, people die. Anyone who genuinely does care about human suffering is going to find that difficult.

But a lot of patients are idiots too. For every educated more-or-less self-aware middle class professional a doctor sees, there are tens of patients who are old, confused, angry, hostile, lonely, unable to look after their own welfare in more or less obvious ways, or just plain dumb - and barely able to understand what their problem is, never mind explain it.

So it's not an easy profession - not because doctors have to be unusually competent to do it, but because they deal with all kinds of people with all kinds of problems in all kinds of situations, and it's normal for many of those people to be very bad at being able to explain why they're there.
There definitely are places in Tokyo (on/inside the Yamanote line) for way under 80000 with more space.

Yup, they will be older but often you can find ones that have been fully renovated.

Sure, there's the earthquake issue but something tells me those cardboard boxes aren't much better at safety.

This is only anecdotal but my impression is that everybody wants to live in a newly built house and then after a few years move again into another flat in a newly built house. So, there's at any point a whole lot of empty and just fine places in Tokyo. I just wish their rents would drop further.
They are welcome to try. But it seems unlikely to work on China. If I was trying to maximize Chinese future influence I would do my best to support the unscientific Lysenkoism of the mind that is so fashionable in the west and so completely out of fashion in China.
If deregulation were to remove barriers to market entry for small competitors, it could. But big businesses are among the first to demand regulations: a. so they can say they were fully compliant, as a kind of certification and absolution by their sovereign; and b. so they can erect barriers to competitors.

The vast majority of law and regulations in the U.S. are written by industry trade groups, lobbyists. A huge part of the media depends on the massive advertising component of lobbying, both direct and what lawmakers end up spending to reach constituents.

We're way past time to take this seriously, but alas most conservatives had exactly zero problem with Citizens United, actively arguing in favor of the idea that corporations are persons, that money is speech, and corporations have free speech too and therefore can spend essentially unlimited money in the political system via advertising their positions totally disproportionately to the intent behind individual free speech. What we have now is an aristocratic concept, more money more speech. More money, more say. More money, wider broadcast of opinions and propaganda.

Individuals should be having these conversations and debates using critical thinking rather than inundated with corporate talking points delivered into our lives via devices that we pay for.

I think a company can issue unlimited press releases saying whatever the company wants to say. But the amount of money they get to spend on political, policy, and perhaps even social advertising, should be limited.
I did once abuse the self-checkout myself, but I felt justified:

The tag on the shelf said the crackers were buy-one-get-one-free. But when I rang them both up, it charged for both. Instead of calling an attendant, I just voided one of them but walked out with it. I'm basically a criminal mastermind.
Please. It's not hard to look back and see how immoral plenty of things were in the good old churchgoing days.
So did he even fix the original issue?
Try using the SQUASHFS_4K_DEVBLK_SIZE config option next time

By default Squashfs sets the dev block size (sb_min_blocksize) to 1K or the smallest block size supported by the block device (if larger). This, because blocks are packed together and unaligned in Squashfs, should reduce latency.

This, however, gives poor performance on MTD NAND devices where the optimal I/O size is 4K (even though the devices can support smaller block sizes).

Using a 4K device block size may also improve overall I/O performance for some file access patterns (e.g. sequential accesses of files in filesystem order) on all media.

Setting this option will force Squashfs to use a 4K device block size by default.

If unsure, say N.
But they can afford LibreOffice, Wikipedia, and Vimeo.

The current allocation of human productivity enablement is not the only one possible (and an "is" is not an "ought to be" as per Hume).
you can encode it into a normally working mode - say by slightly varying timings of head movements during legit disk ops, kind of frequency coding.
In such cases I tell people that computers do what they are told. Especially when your code does something you didn’t expect.
> The US is not going to lift these restrictions. Why would they? If you live in these terrible places

"these terrible places" == "The US"?

> armed rebellion

Armed. Definitely, the US was meant.
If only there was some way to calculate the potential bandwidth of a channel.
Because the rich are no more evil than the rest of us and, all things being equal, would rather their fellow man be as happy, healthy and fulfilled as they are?
I am not a expert in this, but I believe the snowpack is 130% above average for the Colorado River: https://www.cpr.org/2019/04/19/healthy-snowpack-in-the-color...
Did GitHub try to fight this in courts? As with Slack, why does it just happen out of the blue? Sanctions on Iran have been there for at least a year, sanctions on Crimea since 2014 - so why now?
Your citation is quite critical of IES as a profitable enterprise along the lines of traditional tech companies. Concretely there are enormous challenges before it is applicable to humans and could be sold as a service. Instead it seems likely that large groups would federate to share process etc, eg at the level of EU to ensure that broad economic community benefits and not just the 1%.
You're right about next-day air freight (which is a thing that exists now that is insanely expensive), but you're wrong about Amazon using it. Amazon has warehouses all over the country. When you buy something that arrives the next day, it's not going in the air at all; it's coming in a truck from a nearby warehouse to your local package distribution center, and then going out for local deliveries.

True cross-country air freight can easily cost >$100 to ship a small package weighing a single pound. Nothing you buy online is using this service unless you're paying out the wazoo for it.
Quarterly IPFS snapshots for Wikipedia and quarterly data dumps for SE are available.
Possibly the best feature of the Brave browser is having that be one tap away, remembered per-site. I really wish Firefox would copy it since I’m not optimistic about Brave’s longevity.
Yes, it sucks, but they do have to doubly suffer. Do you think that giving them access to GitHub is going to make them suffer less?

BTW you're literally advocating against freedom.
Honestly, I don’t care. It worked in print, it can work in digital. Adverts would bother me less if advertisers hadn’t proven again and again that they can’t be trusted and that they don’t care about my privacy. I also believe that advertisement is a cop out for a real business model and the lowest form of business. Besides, as Banksy said: “You owe the companies nothing. Less than nothing, you especially don’t owe them any courtesy. They owe you. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don’t even start asking for theirs.”

And before you say that the content creators need to get paid, just looks at the situation on Youtube, where Google makes a fortune and the content creators make fuck all, and big companies can take what little ad revenue the creators would have got for copyright claiming over 5 seconds of audio that falls under fair use. Many content creators now rely either on sponsorship or direct support through things like Patreon. Sorry, but Google can go suck it.

(I’ve also started just not consuming content from hostile sites. It’s mostly trash anyway.)
What's the point of life if the things you want can only be bought with money?
It's not untrue. It depends on the industry and circumstances. But to make a blanket statement either way ends up in a misrepresentation of whether deregulation is good or bad.

For example there have been numerous financial crisis over the years, generally in the wake of the financial industry deregulation.

The deregulation of carriers in 1996 (Telecomm Act) helped spur some competition within known telecommunication products (mainly wireline) but was unknowing of the new and emerging markets. Which is part of the problem with deregulation of moving markets.

I think, however, many have a perspective that deregulated industry often creates monopoly. Healthcare, telecommunication, search, retail, etc are all monopolized by a select few. Is there still small, heel-biter competition? Sure. But DigitalOcean isn't a worry for AWS, GCP or Azure. It's a facade of competition in the "open" market.

As stated:

> There is a reason anti-deregulation screeds focus on isolated incidents and are heavy on narrative. Objective views of numbers and long term trends make the situation look far more rosey.

This isn't the the case of regulation strawman argument. Financial markets were plundered by greed in 2008 due to deregulation. That isn't an "isolated incident". Almost nobody spent time behind bars for the actions of those who abused it. And we know that it wouldn't have taken place with proper regulation and oversight.

Regulation of safety is paramount. Auto manufacturers didn't buy into providing the 3 point seat belt as standard equipment until they were forced. Deregulation isn't a silver bullet, but in many cases it plays out as a zero sum game. Many people lose and many people gain. It's often a vehicle to shift power and wealth as history so directly has shown us.
I block ads because I don't want my computers to be hijacked, and sites that sell ads do not do proper due diligence in protecting the public from hostile advertisers.
> We know that Alcohol has a detrimental effect on your coordination just like we know Psilocybin has a detrimental effect on your perception of reality

Incorrect. We do not in fact know that "Psilocybin has a detrimental effect on your perception of reality", as an absolute. This could be said about many scenarios, maybe even most, but the statement at face value implies there are no beneficial effects on perception of reality, in any scenario. Any such claim is flawed both logically and epistemically.
> Google and other ad businesses need to create "AMP for ads".

Is that not what Google Ads is?
From what data are you deriving this theory of inevitable entropy? The safety record of the airline industry overall does not appear to be declining or regressing. On the metric of commercial jet fatalities, 2017 was the safest year ever [0]. Or are you suggesting that the 737 MAX is the canary in the coal mine of an imminent era of airline disasters caused by complacency? Why is that more likely than the lobbying and bureaucratic changes documented in the article?

[0] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-aviation-safety/2017-safe...
> Given the gulf between Safari vs Chrome battery performance, I'm not all that convinced that the declarative api is pure downside like HN cynicism and Twitter outrage might suggest.

Safari was already beating Chrome on battery life before its extension API was neutered. This is post hoc revisionist rationalization.
Some issues:

IQ tests have problems, but aren't completely useless. But it means there's always some legitimacy to the argument that "Them that has, gets" aka that it's cultural, it's "who you know, not what you know" etc.

People with "very high IQs" fundamentally approach problems differently from others. They aren't trying to build a better metaphorical apple. They show up with an orange instead.

Your idea of "better" doesn't really parse for me. A bird flies better than a fish. A fish swims better than a bird. But a (gilled) fish out of water will soon die from lack of oxygen.

When you modify genes, there is one certainty: You are changing things. There is much less certainty that you are changing them for the better and my understanding of life, the universe and everything suggests it's probably deluded to believe you can change things for the better with zero downside.
I think you're placing far too much faith in genetic determinism. Intelligence is a highly fluid concept with no widely accepted defining characteristics. To think that geneticists can just "pick and choose" genes to add to an embryo that will reliably result in genius level intellects is absurd. The human mind is not a tomato plant or a wheat kernel. It's a highly complex system that requires a multitude of biological and environmental factors to flourish into an above average intelligence.
You put your finger on the pulse of it. Ads give little net positive to society in general, because their sole value add is to inform. But with information acquisition cost drastically reduced due to good search engines, the value add becomes nil. So advertisers create company value by other modes. This is not a net good.
I think one big difference with DRM for PC games, is that piracy of PC games is normally not a money making activity for the pirates. It might prevent companies from selling a game to certain people, but there is no clear cut evidence that person would have otherwise bought it.

For advertising however, you can first of all incur a cost to an advertiser (since costs are calculated per click, view, etc), but furthermore, pirates can even profit from it by having a website and generating fake clicks for that website. If you would not try to prevent this ad fraud you would have bad actors siphoning off complete company advertising budgets to their accounts.
I have changed setcfg to setup and make setcfg an alias of setup. Not that I agree with you, but I do want people like you take a closer look.
We must not judge something by its name or look, rather must judge on its merits.
Wow... Just wow. My girlfriend is a internal medicine specialist student and she was blown away. As she read she basically went through a ll possible explanations that the other doctors had. However she actually knew about this condition, it is extremely rare but not unheard of. Possibly because of cases like this she learned about them, but she said she would never connect that to something looking so neural, it is expected for it to induce cardiological issues.
Don't be tedious. You know what I meant.
This may be true in US aviation industry (regulation is too weak) but certainly not applicable for supporting a blanket statement like "Deregulation never seems to result in more competition" above.

Deregulation is often a key to more competition. The change in telecom industry in Western countries between approximately 1985 and now is a great example. The evolution of Internet and mobile communications could not have happened with the regulatory framework, institutions and practices of 1985.

There can be too little regulation. There can be too much regulation. There can be wrong kind of regulation.
> unscientific Lysenkoism of the mind that is so fashionable in the west

I hadn't heard of this guy before,

https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/the-imprinted-brai...

but I still don't understand the relevance