skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
First of all congratulations. The great thing about being rich is that you only need to get rich once, then you need to preserve it.

I’ll focus my comment about things often overlooked:

Insurance. Medical, home, car, and umbrella insurance. KEEP GOOD MEDICAL INSURANCE.

Work hard on your privacy. People with deep pockets are juicy targets for lawsuits. Start an LLC (with a name not associated with you) and transfer things like real estate to it.

Investments: there are tax-free investments such as muni bonds. Invest in rental properties (under your llc). There’s no shame in sticking a bunch of money into an S&P 500 index fund. Capital gains are wonderful.

When you speak with an accountant, tell them specifically you’re interested in tax deferment and protection strategies.

For your children’s education: look into front-loading their 529 plans.

If your accountant doesn’t mention this type of stuff then find another.
Cornelius Vanderbilt's story is amazing. He quit school at the age of 11 to work on his father's ferry in New York Harbor. At 16 he started his own ferry moving freight and passengers between Staten Island and Manhattan. He built his fortune by investing in steamships and later railroads
It seems obvious now, but back then it wasn't obvious that "AI" required a learning system at all. Knowledge Engineering was a popular approach, and rules based systems running over knowledge bases were supposed to be the path to AI.

And don't forget Minsky's decimation of neural network research at the start of the 1970s [1], which led to major research centers like MIT ignoring them completely.

[1] https://www.edge.org/response-detail/26629
If you drive without insurance, hit someone, and kill or severely injure them, you will almost certainly lose most if not all of your assets in the subsequent lawsuit.

If you have a house and it burns down in a fire, you will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars or more replacing it.

If you get rid of health insurance, there is enormous potential downside risk.

If someone is on your property and injures themselves or you accidentally harm someone, they can sue you for millions.

Insuring against all of this and more is almost certainly under 1000 per year. That is a trivial expense for someone with that much money. Even shit ROI on a portfolio is yielding at least a hundred thousand per year in growth assuming this person no longer works. The more money you have, the more insurance you want because you have far more to lose.
Startups and other SMBs have been using third party bookkeeping providers long before Pilot.com. We provide essentially the same interface/service as those companies, but we are leveraging technology to a much greater degree, which we think allows us to provide higher quality books and better service (ask our customers for their verdict there). We can connect companies with ways of meeting their audit and GAAP/tax guidance needs (providers who we work with regularly).
Over time, a few things were identified that would require a breaking change to improve. These changes have to happen at some point, and the 2.0 milestone is that. The community agreed that a big bang major release makes migration easier than many disjointed breaking changes mixed with other bug fixes of various priorities.

Prior to this release, the Mithril team went through painstaking troubles to release RCs to help consumers prepare for the breaking changes and find issues before the official version bump. Now that the code is deemed stable, the 2.0 milestone simply formalizes that the major version bump is now official.
I'm familiar with her database. She's not doxing them but pointing out the facts of their public relationships.
I don't think the intent for ITER is to be an economically viable nuclear power plant, but rather to be a prototype, a proof-of-concept that will enable the next generation of smaller, more widespread, and above all cheaper energy-producing fusion reactors.
American companies don't always go for the lowest common denominator and the public quickly associate them with luxury. Apple is a luxury brand here and they refuse to price their products that are reachable to the masses.
They sell inferior products compared to the other products in the market currently. For ex apple thinks people will buy 2 year old iPhones at higher cost than one plus 7.

Netflix is doing the same with this 480p vids for 199rs.

Yes hotstar shows ads but they aren't a startup. They are the online branch of the massive star group
>A related question is "What actions (in minute detail) are involved as I believe/think/feel I'm conscious?"

I think we can define a generalized version of what we call a "conscious thought" as a thought that can be "consciously reflected" about. With "conscious reflection" I mean using some representation of the thought as an input for another thought in such a way that the new thought, including the usage of the original thought, can be used as an input for another thought in the same way. The representation doesn't have to correspond particularly closely to the execution. (We remember to think in natural language, but maybe the thought process is just converted into natural language after the fact for the purpose of saving and reflecting.)

Computer programs can also be conscious according to this generalized definition if the process of executing it is saved in some way and can, depending on the circumstances, be used in some way, which is saved in the same way.

That different "ways" of using a thought as an input for another thought are possible means that there can be different consciousnesses in our brain. One of them (if there are multiple), which is the one responsible for our output, at least on a higher level, or does at least significantly inform the output, is what we call "my consciousness". The reason why we don't know whether "my consciousness" is responsible for the output, despite having the appearance, is that it may be mostly a "post-hoc rationalization engine" for decisions made on another level, possibly for other reasons. But it does at least inform the output, since thoughts of "my consciousness" in the past inform our later output. For example, if we are asked about our past thoughts, we talk about the ones that are remembered in "my consciousness". This is the thing that puts it in such a special position compared to other hypothetical consciousnesses, which don't inform our output in this way, and are therefore invisible to other people, and obviously also to "my consciousness".
From the looks of it, neither of those things would've helped. I understand they became unconscious from the smoke within seconds: https://files.catbox.moe/ge9y2l.jpg https://files.catbox.moe/93y1xh.webm

An exhaust would've helped.
I don't get why this stuff is a surprise to the hacker community?

We deal with entropy and finding users from browsers all the time.

IRL this is why stores ask for your postcode, it narrows you down to an individual with other info like CC name or last digits. It's asked to lower entropy.

Postcode and DOB you're toast.
The physics-y way to answer this question is usually to define things in terms of the scales at which it's probed. If everything you can sense with macroscopic instruments is consistent with the liquid properties and the magnetic properties, it's a magnetic liquid. That it's "really" just solid magnets suspended in a liquid seems not much more relevant than the fact that solids are "really" fluids if you watch them on the astronomically long timescales on which they lose solid form due to tunneling.

In this case, it's a liquid magnet down to roughly the scales of the nanoparticles, which is only a bit bigger than the atomic scale on which nothing is a normal liquid.
These are all things you can (and should) do on a regular software engineer's salary, don't need to wait for a $5m windfall.
It was an order of magnitude or two less but: Stopped chasing external jobs. Started working on aggressively non-commercial personal projects while living simply. My main splurging has been that my laptop upgrade cycle got faster than every five years for a little while.

Also a couple of cross country moves, once to Seattle because I missed the west coast and it was a compromise my SOs would make, then back home to New Orleans because Seattle’s cost of living was skyrocketing and I missed the sun and wanted to live somewhere I could pay the rent with what I make off those personal projects.
"They"'re not a single individual with coherent motivation. It's a bunch of people that want a bunch of different things. I fully expect quite a few aren't terribly interested in a police state. We need to be sure our arguments make sense and we're not willfully blind to concerns that, on their face (if narrowly) make sense.

"But terrorists will just ignore the law" is a bad argument. It ignores the fact that the ban still increases the power of the government to act against terrorists. The problem with the law isn't that it's useless against terrorists. The problem is that it also increases the power of the government against the innocent, and possibly the power of some non-governmental criminals as well (depending on implementation).
Welcome to the world of high consequence tax filing! As you may already know, penalty severity for tax mistakes are pegged to the dollar amount. This includes very large fines and possible prison time for "willfully" incorrect taxes, or not disclosing a foreign bank account, for example. I read the tax code, and do my own taxes first. Then send them to an accountant for verification and filing.
I've worked on a system on the polar opposite end of the spectrum with electronic patient charts. The Doctors we worked with wanted to use one note as paper, they didn't want anything remotely like data entry, no form fields tables or anything, they just wanted to move their paper based system onto a digital canvas. There were so many opportunities for something like "Jupyter for patient charts" that went begging.
Forbidding loops in a language does make all code written in that language provably terminating. But there’s not much else it lets you prove for all code, at least not if you want to get results before the heat death of the universe. For example, you can’t determine what inputs to a program will yield a given output: even classic BPF is probably expressive enough to implement a cryptographic hash, and eBPF definitely is. You can’t enumerate all possible paths through the program: the number of paths is exponential in the size of the program.

On the other hand, forbidding loops does make some properties easier to prove for restricted classes of programs. For instance, Linux’s BPF verifier tracks, for each instruction, the minimum and maximum value of each register at that point in the program. It uses that to determine whether array accesses in the program are bounds checked, and complain if not: that way, it doesn’t have to insert its own bounds check, which might be redundant. Doing the same in the presence of loops would require a more expensive algorithm, so forbidding them is a benefit. Yet... Linux’s verifier is sound: it will forbid all programs that could possibly index out of bounds, at least barring bugs. But it is not fully precise: it does not pass all programs that have the property of never indexing out of bounds for any input. For example, you could have a program that takes a 256-bit input and indexes out of bounds only if its SHA-256 hash is a specific value. That program is safe iff there happen to be no 256-bit strings that hash to that value, something that you could theoretically verify – but only by going through all 2^256 possible strings and hashing each of them. Linux does not.

Nor would it be reasonable to, why does that hypothetical matter? Because the ability to prove arbitrary properties about all programs, at the cost of arbitrarily long analysis time, is sort of the main mathematical benefit to non-Turing-completeness. But from a practical standpoint that’s useless. And if you don’t need that – if you only care about the ability to prove things about restricted classes of programs – well, you can achieve that even with loops. After all, that’s what a type system does, and there are plenty of Turing-complete languages with type systems. As I said, disallowing loops makes the job easier in some cases. But that’s more of a matter of degree, not the kind of hard theoretical barrier that “non-Turing-complete = analyzable” makes it sound like. That makes it a less convincing rationale for disallowing them.
Some good tips about managing a windfall from the Bogleheads froum.

https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Managing_a_windfall

With that amount of money, you're set for fatFIRE as well.

https://www.reddit.com/r/fatFIRE/
At its core, tastes are subjective, and this is no exception.

The appearance of video is harsh and artificial. It's cold, but also at times exceptionally clean, crisp and vivid.

Music videos (as the very term suggests) often display a mastery of this style of production, which, when met with intent, can prove evocative in its own way.

If you approach movies knowing that the motion smoothing is a side effect of the monitor, it's actually an interesting way to rewatch old movies and shows. It has a surreal effect, and the movies themselves are otherwise impossible to truly change. It is unquestionably the technology introducing a new layer of distortion.

Which can only mean one thing: the preference is generational, and with time it might just so happen that a generation gap will erase all knowledge of the way things were, and there will arrive a new normal, distorted and alien to those who grew up exposed to the original norms.
buy land
get farming
secure your food & home
relax
It’ll also host Docker containers.
Why do many people use "whataboutism" to wave away double standards?
Great. Now we're one step closer to the T-1000.
This concept is called meta-cognition.
Are you aware that Github, Twitter, and Facebook also logged passwords?

https://www.zdnet.com/article/github-says-bug-exposed-accoun...

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/05/twitt...

https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/21/18275837/facebook-plain-t...
I think the controversy of consciousness arises from (and is deeply tied to) the history of Western philosophy and science: the "death of God", matter/spirit and mind/body duality. Something that's not widely acknowledged is how Indian philosophy (Hindu, Buddhist) had significant influence in the course of that history.

A major assumption of the currently dominant worldview is that there's no God, spirit, and even "mind" is questionable. Everything must be explainable as physics, and layers above like mechanics, chemistry, biology. Psychology as a field - in the "West", which is basically a global culture now - is based on that assumption.

The word "consciousness" is so ill-defined and the concept so misunderstood, mainly because it's mixed up with ideas of free will, mind, spirit - the animating principle. It's just the most modern term for categorizing and trying to understand a class of phenomena.

Seeing how "consciousness studies" is widely considered a pseudo-science, I suspect that it's actually related to some critical "flaw" in the fundamentals of the modern worldview, the assumption of a completely physical universe - "physical" meaning consistent with the science of physics.

What's fascinating for me is how quantum mechanics and its philosophical speculations about the role of the observer seems to be causing a paradigm shift, which is taking decades (almost a century) to sink in. We seem to be redefining consciousness as a fundamental property of physics, with some even theorizing that consciousness plays a role in bringing the universe into existence.

As a fan of both Indian philosophy and Western science, I'm greatly enjoying the battle of the ideas (often heated arguments and accusations of "woowoo" pseudo-scientific thinking), the struggle to understand the nature of consciousness deeply and rigorously, and the evolution of science and our worldviews.
A completely frivolous and useless note: the photo at the bottom of the article was taken at a table in the restaurant called Mediterraneo on the corner of 2nd and 66th, and behind him is the block on which one of the scenes in Annie Hall was shot.
Most people who get a lot of money all at once blow through it in 7 years. There are many broke lottery winners and NFL players.

$5M is not rich today. $5m is a lifetime of moderate income if you're really careful.

The classic advice was that you could spend 4% of your net worth per year. Today, it's probably only 3%. Yields are lower.

You don't have to do anything immediately. You can park it in T-bills, brokered CDs up to the FDIC limit, and big index funds.

Any investment where they call you is lousy. If it was any good, it wouldn't have paid marketers.

Avoid financial advisers who want you to trade a lot. Trading for individual investors is, overall, a lose.

Don't buy a restaurant.
Good Engineering
The Hidden Costs of Automated Thinking
Building Seats Booking Component with React and 2d Canvas
Idea to launched in under 48 hours.

At build time, I crawl a list of feeds, take the most recent 3 stories. Then from that list, I build a page with the most recent 100.

The site is built on the hour with an IFTTT event triggering a Netlify build against master.

Total cost to build an maintain: $0.00
> The basic idea is that it is impossible to experience anything outside of our consciousness

Often in a crowded work environment people will be taking and yet I will have no conscious awareness of what they are saying. Yet, the second they mention my name, my attention will snap to what they are saying.

Clearly there is some unconscious (and yet intelligent and aware) part of me that is experiencing reality, just waiting for the right trigger to alert my consciousness to some important development.
There is easily almost a second of lag when navigating the UI (selecting and deleting emails) using the keyboard on a MBP. :(
I really wish go code didn’t have so much reliance on interface{}. I know it’s not the fault of this library, but even once generics make it in, it’s going to be a nightmare to unwind all the piles of interface{} scattered around.
It's funny how Google is perceived in the public as an all-knowing organism, gobbling up petabytes of data public and private to fuel a superior intelligence... Actually it can't even get clean data about its own internal operation...
It's just a simple collapse thread feature.
About epistemic negation and world views in Epistemic Logic Programs
Anthropomorphizing Earth does not do anyone any good. It's not a living creature, nor does it contain a single "immune system."
There was no "war" until you called attention to it and ostensibly took the other side of it. Your comment creates the exact thing you're supposedly wary of and I'm not sure what else it possibly adds.
Unless you're in the US in which case just your health insurance could cost you $1000+ per MONTH.
Db.E? Isn't that a but too extreme?
> The first was at most in anti-govt groups, which were clearly not left.

You don't need to be associated with a group to be an individual extremist deciding to advance a movement. The shooter's photographed doing a black power salute. The black power movement isn't right wing.

https://heavy.com/news/2016/07/micah-xavier-x-johnson-dallas...

While there may certainly be more extremists on the right the idea that someone on the left can't be an extremist, or that there are no leftist extremists, doesn't make much sense.
[-] just hides that branch of the comment tree so that you can ignore it if you want to focus on reading other branches.
I don't know that learning more about the brains operation will satisfy people who resist the notion that their consciousness is a property of a physical system. Since it is an emergent property of a complex system, even if we understood the functioning of each independent piece, we would still be left with the question of why all of those pieces in concert have the property of consciousness. While we gather more and more data on the brain, we barely even have a beginning notion of how emergent properties actually work. If we had to take everything we know about atoms and their interactions and explain where phase transitions and states of matter come from, we would be stymied. We know from experimentation that very large groups of many atoms do experience distinct phase transitions. We know every way individual atoms can interact. But bridging that gap from components to being able to predict large-scale complex nonlinear dynamics... we have more proofs of our inability to do such things (with conventional tools) than hints of how we might tackle it.
I would love to better understand how much borrowing that puts people in financial hot water is for luxuries/optional stuff vs. borrowing for the fundamentals like housing, transportation, food, healthcare. Ie. how much consumer debt is because people put themselves in a bad position vs. they really had no choice to begin with.

If anyone has any data, links, I'd appreciate it.
I just came back from an oil and gas conference, and this dog running after missing/wrong data is painfully accurate. Datasets are often partially or completely suspect. Two geologists might have contradictory opinions regarding the interpretation of logging data. Even when you have good data, it might not be useful six feet into a formation.
Once a penal colony, always a penal colony.
Yeah but hotstar targets mobile phones and latest web browsers. If you can run any latest browser in your Pi then you should be fine
Do not underestimate the value of umbrella coverage. Cheap to get. Expensive to ignore.
I can say as a person who tried to find a startup with good conditions but eventually accepted offer from one of the FANG companies.

Most of startups I contacted pay peanuts, and they don't compensate for this with equity. The equity is really stingy. I don't know why the think that their ideas are so valuable, but people they hire to implement them cost so little.

Don't behave like this.
> Insuring against all of this is almost certainly under 1000 per year.

Um, no.

Average auto insurance premium is $1,470/yr. [0]

Average homeowners insurance is $1,130/yr. [1]

Average health insurance (in 2018, probably more now), was $440/mo., Or $5,280/yr. [2] (And average health insurance will leave a lot of exposure to costs, so you still have a lot of downside risk at that price.)

The idea that you could almost certainly insure against all of that for under $1,000/yr is...wildly inaccurate.

[0] https://www.thezebra.com/auto-insurance/average-auto-insuran...

[1] https://www.creditdonkey.com/average-cost-homeowners-insuran...

[2] https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/resources/affordable-care-a...
Related, I was at a talk about Type 1 Diabetes. They mentioned that we know how to cure the disease in mice with over 300 different methods. None of which seems to work in humans. Thats why they had to work with very hard to obtain live tissue samples from patients with different stages of T1 Diabetes.
I don’t think I’ll be surprised at all. I’ll be dead.

The ones of people who I care about are aware of what I want. I have a chronic and incurable disease where sudden death isn’t that unlikely. I’ve come close once and I don’t remember being scared and it didn’t hurt. Just a thing that happened.

Nobody should be surprised by it at this point. Accept that it might happen and if it doesn’t something else will get me in the end.
5x5 is an amazing starting program. Highly recommend. Just make sure you have good form.
You personally determine what 'boring' and 'pointless' are and how important they are.
Think about it like this: What would have to change to call an conscious thought unconscious or an unconscious thought conscious? The ability of "my consciousness" to reflect about it.

(Answer since edit doesn't seem to work.)