skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Great games..... I really feel that peak gaming was in 90s/early 2000s.

It's always in the eye of the beholder, but I think a statement that would remain very much true would "the peak of a certain kind of gaming was in the 90s/early 2000s". There is certainly something that changed in the audience and the market as gaming became largely mainstream vs when it was very much still a niche market in the entertainment realm.
Eh, evolution is a pretty nifty mix of oo class extensions, recursion, brute-force and bias weightings.

I'd wager Gawsh made the best system S/He could given product constraints (completely unfocused if you ask me [which I know no one did]) and the real need to deliver (take it easy over there Leibniz, the world is still crap as evidenced everywhere).

Anyway, can't knock it 'til you've built it.

This is an interesting article:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-do-most-speci...
> I'm not sure if someplace like Lancaster, PA (totally random example; it's a city I enjoy visiting) even needs a service like Uber

I dive in Dutch Springs (near Bethlehem, Pennsylvania) from time to time. Bus out of New York and Uber for the last mile. Without Uber, those are hotel, restaurant, equipment, facilities and bus expenses I would not be spending there.
You can blame the players for not helping other players, and not wanting infrastructure that takes excess resources from the winners to help all players.
I think it all comes down to Lyft being a smaller company, last I checked Lyft only had operations in the US and Canada. They are not a player in the delivery market either.
It's FUD.
That was the result of a one time cost, their IPO, not a continuing operating expenditure. So, that $5b figure doesn't fairly represent how they will perform as a business in the long term.
It's not really a strawman, it's just what people call it when they want to make fun of what people claim to be supply side economics. Whether or not the people who practice it or came up with it call it trickle down is completely irrelevant to discussing "trickle down" economics.
I don't think you can compare full-time employment with an hourly contract directly.

The rule of thumb I've heard a few people use to convert from employment to contract is to multiply your hourly employment earnings by 2.5 to arrive at your contract rate. By that math, you're still under-earning outside of the downtown core.

Mind you, I'm not sure that conversion has ever fully rung true to me, but the general point of not being able to directly compare still stands.
> thanks to the indie scene there is still great games being released today in any genre and subgenre you can possibly think of.

Problem is that the indies production values pale vs what AAA studios did even 20 years ago in terms of how polished the games could be. Like, you won't find any indie game that's as good as Starcraft 1. So in reality you get a lot of half-assed games in many genres (of course sometimes you get lucky and get true gems).
In my experience they do not take it into consideration at all. I’ve been told far too many times by silver-spoon identity-politic progressives that I don’t get a say because of racial and gender privilege, with no regard for any economic struggle.

You’ll have to forgive me for daring to ask if renaming buildings of alumni who held what are now regressive views is the hill to die on. Of course it’s a black-and-white right or wrong, so if you ask a question you’re just excommunicado.
aliens are real
Why doesn't page up / page down work on some sites anymore? Surely academic readers haven't all transitioned to consume-only touchscreen devices?
For a while, in NYC at least, they tried the courier model, but that was a few years ago. Not really sure why it did not continue.
>The uncertainty principle If it happens on a sufficiently large scale, the practice of tweaking quality in lieu of price could play havoc with essential economic data. Statistical agencies do their best to account for changing product quality, but if adjustments are unexpectedly common or subtle then muted inflation figures could easily be concealing a more turbulent economic picture. Central banks watching for big swings in inflation or wage growth as a sign of trouble could be reacting to figures that bear far less relation to business conditions than they used to.

>What’s more, the substitution of quality for price as firms’ main way of responding to changing market conditions weakens the case for keeping inflation low and stable. Inflation makes relative prices less informative, economists reckon, making it harder to decide what to buy and how to spend. Rather than clarity, low inflation has brought a different sort of confusion: one of shrinking chocolate bars and lost holidays.

What has long been suspected by those outside the field, and rarely acknowledged by economists and statisticians inside the field. Consumer Price Index (CPI), a standard methodology of nearly every national bureau of statistics and economic measurement is susceptible to manipulation and gaming by producers and retailers because the statistical agencies employ limited resources to perform quality adjustments to the item price data.

The adjustment methodology is quite limited in what adjustments are made and the resources dedicated to comparing items and differences—there is no lab testing being performed and the most extensive research performed on some items is using product brochure data to make adjustments based on listed features at face value only (the brochure says this is better or comes with better features).

Often product data is limited so no adjustments are made, only assumptions like “we believe this product has the same quality or content” or “we will impute the missing price or data based on similarly available data or some kind of modeling abstraction.”

This standard methodology led by the U.S. BLS and other agencies has done a complete disservice to the reputability of economics as a hard science instead of a bureaucratic ideology.
> also your ability to recognise something genuinely new.

Humans are pattern recognition machines and someone who has a much larger training set than a younger person would have a much better sense in spotting what is new or not.
This trend of borrowing money to buy your own stock reeks of market manipulation.

Corporate debt to gdp is at a record high, and they're funneling the money into stock buybacks and dividends. I don't know why this isn't of interest to the other commentors here.

The stock market has been eerily predictable and calm for the last few years, and I think this is why. The game is to lull investors into a false sense of confidence that the market never falls beyond the scope of a few weeks or so.

To the low information investor, everything looks great, and also when there are a lot of low information investors in the market, stock buybacks tend to increase the price.
It's not very polished, many issues with balancing, etc... It cannot compare well with the best games in the genre.
> For a while, in NYC at least, they tried the courier model, but that was a few years ago

Courier services are high-risk operations sensitive to reliability.

My guess is Uber's network wasn't optimized for reliability then. Food delivery has similar reliability requirements, but the stakes are lower. (Failed food deliveries produce complaints. Failed courier runs produce litigation.)
So am I understanding you're saying that even in their best performing division where they drastically underpay they are losing $22m a quarter and this is good news? I am honestly asking, as I'm not super familiar with their finances.
The degree of reasonableness heavily depends on context.

In my personal experience as a patient, I have found doctors to be largely reasonable too. I am a young male, I am in good health...what could possibly be the issue? I wouldn't report total satisfaction but within the bounds of reasonableness...and why would I even care? If someone is rude to me on the bus, I think "wow, that person is hurting"...and move on with my life.

When you are an elderly, vulnerable woman suffering from chronic pain, and your lifespan is affected by these decisions...the situation takes on significance.

It is the kind of casually ignorant view of other people's lives that Brits seem to specialise in. Oh, you are poor? Well, my dad once forgot to transfer money into my bank account for a few days when I was at uni...it can't be that bad. Oh, you are black? Well, I haven't experienced any racism...it can't be that bad.

Skin in the game. If you want to find out about something, you don't learn from the sidelines.
I don’t know, has HN commenters solved demonization of outgroups?

You can’t explain it in one sentence, you have to explain cultures, subcultures, how each subculture interacts, etc.

It won’t matter anyway, it impacts the average person in the most indirect way imaginable.
Which history are we seeing all over again? Amazon in 1997 losing money selling $5 books for $4, or pets.com losing money selling $50 bags of kibble for $40?
Mid 160’s actually
Dollar vans, NYC’s other transit system
I don't understand how they're losing so much money. Their product is a mobile app and their risk is nearly zero since they don't pay out until they get paid.

Does it really cost that much to do marketing for a brand that pretty much everyone is familiar with? Because that seems like the main expense other than lawsuits and lobbying to get access to more markets, and they already seen to be available in most places.

I must be missing something but because I cannot understand how they could possibly be losing money. My guess is that they're spending a ton on research that doesn't really need to be done by them. Let other companies figure out self driving cars and help drivers leverage that in regions that allow it.
But it really occurs to me, the rich aren't acting poor to fool the poor. The rich don't care about the poor and don't encounter them that much. The rich act "poor" to fool themselves or just flatter themselves, to tell themselves they face challenges or just because their idea of the poor is romantic. Back in college X, lots of folks dressed vaguely dock workers, with lots of plaid and such, but no one trying to actually seem a dock worker. It was just a starting off point for a pose.

No, the rich are ashamed but aren't ashamed to you, they're ashamed to themselves.
This article strikes me as extraploating a select few experiences to make far reaching conclusions. 99% of the people at yale are not children of billionaires or statesmen. They are children of doctors, lawyers, programmers, etc. who are wealthy but not wealthy enough to live off their inheritance indefinitely. People attend classes, do research, play sports, or put up performances - in short what's been going on for decades at virtually every college. Maybe there's a larger structural inequality problem in society, but it seems far fetched to point to her anecdotal experiences with rich kids as the cause.
> I'd also like to see a law passed that requires

So your "contribution" would be to use the threat of force to make producers spend even more money to redesign more complex labels which, all other things being equal, would result in even an smaller quantity of a product for the same price?

Congratulations, you're qualified to work for government (or The Economist)!
What other books would you recommend to study about programming High Reliability/Robust/Fault-Tolerant systems?
What makes you think Lyft is doing better than Uber?

The biggest chunk of Uber's non-stock losses came from Uber Eats. They're sacrificing profits for growth right now in food delivery.

The ridesharing business is more stable than food delivery. So both Uber and Lyft have better ridesharing profits. Uber theoretically has more potential value than Lyft (food delivery/freight). To capture that extra value, they're spending more money.

Joel Spolsky has a great blog post about "Land Grab" companies: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/05/12/strategy-letter-i-...
I know of people waiting on offers that got the call about frozen hires in Backend Engineering, Data Engineer and Data Science.
> My guess: Lyft let Uber make all the mistakes, learned from them and only spent money on things that avoided the worst mistakes that Uber made.

If Uber is serious then they should learn from that and become Uber 2.0
霊関連書籍「スピリチュアル・ストーリーズ」をWordPress固定ページに追加しました。これは全て実話なのです（祈）†
IBM is fully aware of this trend, and they're presumably banking on the RHAT enterprise focused k8s distro at least as much as the legacy enterprise Linux distro.

It's questionable whether this can save them this late in the game, but there's solid seasoning behind it. IBM had few other ways to remain relevant as even crufty enterprise customers will eventually start move forward with containerization of workloads.
Clinton and Trump never visited the island. This man was a bullshitter and no doubt he exaggerated the scale of powerful friendships he had.
I came from a rich family. My parents let me flounder on my own in college. Never gave me a dime and I had earn everything I ever had. When I was 25 and my GF got pregnant, my parents said, “Well, you’re a responsible adult, you’ll figure it out.”

For me? There was no safety net. A year on food stamps, paying child support, working three jobs and being clinically depressed was me “figuring it out.”

At no time did they ever step in to help me financially. When I moved out for my freshman year was their idea of kicking me out of the nest.
I suggest reading the book October Surprise by Gary Sick. Intelligence agencies don’t use competent people.

Your understanding of the situation is incorrect, and is leading you to incorrect conclusions.
And every one of them has been getting paid less and less each year Uber has existed to there point that some of them can't take care of their own families. I don't think anyone has a problem with the service, consumers are just getting tired of subsidizing the wealthy through taxation policies that advantage people who already have money and low wages across numerous verticals.
Lyft is interested in developing Self Driving, but not directly, only as investors/partners.
It's like the Pulp song Common People. The moral is that you will never have the same experience as common people because you dont have the same existential dread.
> 1. Lower Expenses, they seem to be just interested in being a Car Service, not developing Self Driving Tech

Sorry, that's not true. Please check - https://level5.lyft.com
Location Field Descriptors: Single Image 3D Model Retrieval in the Wild
I taught myself BASIC programming on a ZX81 to create Star Raiders clone back in the early 1980s. My version was terrible, but it was games that brought me into the world of computers. And it is games that keep me interested today.
> rarely acknowledged by economists and statisticians inside the field.

This is complete false. If you ever took an Econ 101 course, you'd know the fallibility of economic stats are covered at length.
Looking for an Account Executive for Iris – Computer Vision for Drones
In your mid-20s, putting excess savings in a bank is probably not the ideal asset allocation.
Corporate raiders have been doing this for years. They have also forced companies to increase the dividend. It's an easy way to make it seem like profits are rising so the stock goes up. They don't care because they will exit the stock as soon as they can make a profit.

The problem is that the companies never progress and eventually they lose their ability to compete. If it's a tech company it will eventually get beaten by another more nimble company. We have seen this over and over again. A good example is IBM. They've lost their ability to compete and have had to settle on servicing the customers that are still using older technologies like mainframes. Their niche is still profitable but don't expect IBM to be a powerhouse again.

Buying stock is financial engineering that's used to goose the stock price short term but does nothing to keep the company competitive over time.
Any given increase in average investment yields translates into a much smaller percentage increase in total income for most workers with 401Ks than it provides to people whose primary income stream is investment income.
They are paying a percentage of EACH trip, I think it's in the ~30% range so they are more affordable.

And then yeah, they have a BIG team and also spend a lot in the autonomous technology which is their future... I don't Think at this level Marketing is really a big percentage of the overall...
Have you tried Natural Selection 2? It's a RTS-FPS hybrid that was produced a few years ago by the same developers of Subnautica.

It's a small hardcore group of people that still play it but I find that stands out as the most innovating RTS that I have ever played.

There's nothing quite like having to negotiate with your peons to chop wood in exchange for better weapons later in the game.
>Do we have any reason to think that's not working?

Interesting way of shifting the burden of proof and reversing the null hypothesis but I will bite.

How about the non-partisan federal Congressional Research Service report?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/05/31/trump-tax...

Also from: http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/07/gdp-report-trump-tax-...

>In May, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) found no sign that the Trump tax cuts made any discernible contribution to growth, wages, or business investment. Corporations did not plow their windfalls into exceptionally productive and innovative ventures. Instead, they mostly threw their handouts onto the giant pile of cash they were already sitting on, and/or returned it to their (predominantly rich) shareholders.

>Now, it appears that the CRS analysis may have actually been a bit too kind to Trump’s signature legislation. The federal government’s latest report on economic growth suggests that business investment has been even weaker than previously thought. Initially, the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) estimated that America’s gross domestic product expanded by 3 percent in 2018 (on a fourth-quarter-over-fourth-quarter basis). This week, the BEA revised that figure down to 2.5 percent — due, in part, to decelerating growth in business investment.

>Meanwhile, in its initial estimate for the second quarter of this year, the BEA found that GDP grew by 2.1 percent, while business investment declined. Corporations haven’t been growing the economy by ramping up investments in its productive capacity (a.k.a. growing the economy’s “supply side”).

>Consumers and the federal government have been doing so by spending more money on goods and services (a.k.a. increasing aggregate demand)

>Bottom line on Q2 GDP: Business investment was terrible. It came in at -0.6%, the worst since early 2016.
Or the definition of "good" is so stringent that it's hard to satisfy so you just give it back.
I think you misunderstood the main point of @whatshisface.

If a company buys back shares from an existing investor (EI), EI now has cash and is likely to either spend that money (if they're a retiree selling shares for income) or reinvest that cash into some other investment. It's very unlikely that they're going to keep that new money in cash or a savings account.
Lyft develops self driving tech.
On the other hand a lot of candy gets bigger and bigger. I am pretty sure the candy bars and ice cream scoops I got when I was a kid were half of the current size. Or even less.
This doesn't account for low information investors, though.

To buyback stock the company has to make an offer that enough investors are willing to sell. Once investors start to do so at these higher prices, the stock price goes up.

To the low information investor, this looks to them like the stock is worth even more than it was before, because it made money for them (on paper, at least).

And what about index funds? Regardless of the number of buybacks, the index fund isn't going to sell. This would also cause the stock price to rise.

This idea that a stock buyback doesn't affect price only works in a market where everyone has perfect information. In real life this isn't the case.
It should be said up-front the threat such as it is, would be a threat to "American exceptionalism" and to anyone else not a threat as such, but an opportunity.
there is also a term called bleeding the pig... where you load up a company with a lot of debt and eventually the company goes bankrupt... guess who doesn't lose out though. buybacks are taxed at a capital gains tax rate, whereas dividends are subject to ordinary income tax.
Huh, I see most of the time in US price/oz is mentioned along with price of item. This greatly helps me decide if buying larger package could save me some money with having to do calculation myself, which I would have to do in my country.
The [1] paper contains a reference to PHAST https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/phast-h...
The three bursts 1ms apart don't appear to be natural (or at least, we don't currently understand how they may occur naturally). The signal may be extraterrestrial.
I have the same experience with Dvorak. Haven't got any pain issue anymore since i switched from qwerty to dvorak. My typing speed really suffer for the first week though. Also, now i can't type on qwerty anymore except on a phone on-screen keyboard.
44% of people already don't pay any federal income tax. I wouldn't call it a tax cut to give someone already paying zero (or less) an even greater share of the treasury.
1) Note that 80%+ of IPOs last year were for companies that were unprofitable - why does the market tolerate this? Shorthand - because many companies IPO to raise capital to build towards profit via scale, capital investment, etc.

2) A way to start understanding this is to understand the benchmark comparison for public market equities is Price to Earnings (PE) ratio.

3) Trying to judge an unprofitable company and develop a P/E that you can then resolve against other similar profitable companies requires one to look at trends, not absolutes. Uber substantially improved that single metric - $22m - YOY while still scaling. If you believe that trend will continue over time, they have a going concern in their core business. Do that for every line item and you can fudge a forward P/E.

4) incidentally the IPO “roadshow” is where the company goes around to institutional investors and bankers (who then communicate w their high net worth retail investors) and tell the story of the trend and roadmap to building a high value sustainable biz.

5) A decent article primer about the current market, why investors are ok w/low or no profit, etc is here -> https://theweek.com/articles/835726/reason-many-unprofitable...

- - - -
The D ads right now are all about fundraising and email list building.

Trump is doing some persuasion, and also they have a goal of building contact and social info for a huge swatch of low propensity voters; and they seem to be doing a great job at it.
You mean like people who saved in their 401(k) for 30 years and are now living off it?
And, just to guess, he's also pointing out that security is not a feature that can be "bolted on" to a chat app later. Secure messaging is an incredible deep space, and any attempts to add security to a chat application will have far reaching implications on features and usability.