skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The list I provided was from 2017 and only a single anime of an entire season was mastered at 1080p. Even in 2018 and 2019 that's still typical. Maybe 1-2 series produced at 1080p with every other series being an upscale. Some seasons even have 0 series produced at 1080p. Instead of calling it a myth, try to find a season where a large number of anime were produced at 1080p as counter-evidence.

Being upscaled and released on DVD or BluRay at 1080p (which most anime have been for most of the past decade) is not the same as being produced at 1080p.

I wasn't aware of the two Gundam movies mentioned by fireattack, but I can't confirm they were mastered at 4k and aren't just upscales. So if you could name some of those 4k releases that would be helpful, especially if you can provide information as to them being mastered at 4k and not just upscaled to 4k.
Rust has evolved from something safe and simple (once you grasp the different type of pointers) to something way less accessible.

Rust source code is now full of annotations, and very hard to read and maintain.

Traits have evolved from a nice feature to something overused everywhere.

Basic crates use so many generics, impl Trait and abstractions over abstractions over abstractions that it's really difficult to follow what concrete types you need to satisfy these.

When one of the oldest and still unanswered issue in the Hyper HTTP library is "how do I read the body?", there is a conceptual problem.

And things got even more complicated with Futures. async/await don't solve much, as besides textbook examples, these are unusable without deep knowledge of how everything works internally. Pin/Unpin makes things even more complicated.

I'm an early Rust adopter and advocate. However, I wouldn't consider it any longer for new projects.

My productivity in Rust has become very low compared to other languages such as Go or even C, that let me easily express what I want to do.

With Rust, 90% of my time is spent trying to understand how to express what I want to do. Such as what types I have, what 3rd party crates expect and how to convert them.
Oh definitely -- when you can get stuff done with pure javascript it's beautiful -- but once you notice yourself doing too much, it's time to pick one of these small frameworks.

BTW, you should check out Mithril[0], it's my current favorite, it's very small and self-contained yet very complete. It's got a slow, cautious moving community, and just enough of what you need and virtually nothing you don't -- very easy to use without bundling at all.

Also, the web components spec[1] is on the horizon and once it lands (and most frameworks support some mode where they spit out web components) we're going to get interop for free.

Also pro tip if you're going to start a new project these days and you need to get in the whole bundling swamp, use parcel. It's amazing, almost always zero config or close to it, and just works[2].

[0]: https://mithril.js.org

[1]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Web_Components

[2]: https://parceljs.org/
The alternative viewport by Hempton is valuable, but I think the ad hominem against Markopolos is not. That's not how short-selling even works anyway. Could you please discuss it on merits instead?
>we should juxtapose the stock market and see how things correlate.

You shall find this relevant to your interests: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187775031... (by a former colleague of mine) they claim to get signals that lead the DJIA by 1+ days.
I give it less than 2 years before the massive fraud investigations and lawsuits start.
probably automated the selection of templates in Android Studio and xcode ,lol.
Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing. Any landing you can fly the plane away from is a great landing.
I also thought "emergency IPO before they won't be able to get a good price for years" for all of these.
While it can certainly color Bronte Capital's motivations, the author of the paper (John Hempton) has generally been forthright in his analysis of other companies and his analysis of GE doesn't seem different from his other comments.
Genuine question: given a language which has a real notion of parallelism/concurrency and can run real threads on multiple cores, what is the appeal for async/await?
Of course some young people don't know the things either. If it is discriminatory against older people, that doesn't mean younger people get a free pass.

I agree with a lot of what you have said - but the issues at hand here (at least, my interpretation) is not absolute fundamentals which are obviously important.

The issue (again, my interpretation) is taking something that is taught in school, somewhat rarely applied in practice (or, is replaced by a tool/library/whatever in practice) and putting some sort of spin on it then expecting someone to be able to answer it. Or taking a problem which already has an industry-accepted solution and asking the candidate to remake the wheel in 30 minutes.

If your fresh out of school you're more likely to remember that one obscure class you took few months ago which covered some trick situation. Or you'll remember that class which taught you about that industry-accepted solution and the why behind it.

If you've been in the field for 15 years using some tool/library to solve the problem, you're less likely to remember that one obscure class you took 15 years ago which explained the origin. Or that class which covered the trick situations.

For what its worth, I don't think this is a widespread problem and very likely not deliberate when it does happen. But, I think it happens often enough that we should at least be talking about it.
That's true of any job, though.
For all those people asking why the VCs did not catch this: what sort of diligence would you do?

I don't know the company or the details. Assume two scenarios:

1. The target company is willing to lie, fabricate code, mix in tensorflow etc.

2. The company will not outright lie, and will answer honestly. However, they are very optimistic about their chances, and about their ability to deliver some sort of AI-enabled solution.

Right now they have -- let's hypothesize -- some sort of funnel and they route bits of code to different developers. They think they will replace some of it. They are using various AI libraries.

Suppose you believe that even if the AI won't eventually code the whole app from scratch, it will make huge strides in certain areas that we don't even know about. These strides will dramatically reduce the cost of making an app (eventually, you believe). Suppose you think that this company is basically an exploration of those areas.

In other words, be generous to the diligence undertaker.

Now, how would you know? What steps would you take to that you suspect these people did not?

(Because this is the internet and no one knows for sure: this is a real question, and not a rhetorical attack on people asking why VCs were "tricked")
> That's the "they're Chinese, so obviously they can't be independent" argument. It not necessarily wrong, but also not terribly illuminating.

What do you mean by that? China doesn't have independent trade unions, because the Chinese Communist Party doesn't allow political organization outside of its control, which independent trade unions would be. It's worth pointing that out because western misconceptions could cloud understanding.

See https://clb.org.hk/content/labour-relations-china-some-frequ...:

> Do workers in China have freedom of association?

> No. There is only one legally-mandated trade union, namely the All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU). All enterprise trade unions have to be affiliated to the ACFTU via a hierarchical network of local and regional union federations. (See simplified organizational chart right). The ACFTU is primarily under the control and direction of the Chinese Communist Party. Any attempt to establish an independent trade union movement is seen by the Party as political threat. The only time in the history of the People’s Republic of China that an independent union was established was the short-lived Beijing Workers’ Autonomous Federation in 1989. The BWAF was declared an illegal organization and disbanded in the wake of the military crackdown in Beijing on 4 June 1989.

See https://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/chinalbr02/chinalbr0802-01....:

> At no point over the last twenty-five years, despite widespread unemployment, serious labor law violations, and appallingly dangerous working conditions, has the ACFTU attempted to distance itself from the CCP leadership or to question its policies. It has not defended the principle of independent union organizing, and it has never spoken out against laws and regulations routinely employed to justify imprisonment of labor activists who organize outside its aegis.

----

> Given the level of disunity within the Chinese government, a useful answer to that question would really need to break it down to the personal allegiances of the decision-makers.

The Communist party is united enough to make that irrelevant to the question of who controls Huawei in the contexts where it's typically posed.
Interestingly, in Norway citizens' tax forms are public, so you can see what anyone's salary etc is
> But people should analyze the risk as it exists, not shout about another Chernobyl

Well as you said, there are a lot of consequences and risks even if it's not another Chernobyl.

> And then there were multiple relatively inexpensive ways that Fukushima could have been better prepared.

And this is what it really comes down to. Can nuclear power be made safe? Yes, but typically stupidity, profits, and capitalism take precedence. Again, in the US nearly all operation nuclear power plants are operating past their designed life and have cracks larger than the allowable tolerances. Power plants are expensive to build and profitable to keep running so just like every other capitalist business/plant, you invest barely any money into fixes/repairs, you instead spend money on bending the rules to stay in business longer, and you run it into the ground, typically until failure. At the end of the day the owner of the company can declare bankruptcy, shut down the company, and go on with his life on some island away from any repercussions from the destruction caused.
Okay, I think you are now making what seems like a different argument, and I agree to an extent, but only an extent.

Top brands -- like College Humor -- are never going to be happy on YouTube forever. The cream of the crop cannot be kept happy forever. If CH decides they'd rather keep 100% of X ad revenue instead of smaller-percentage of Y ad revenue, and that the math will work out in their favor, they're gone, and there is nothing YouTube could do to keep them. After all, why should CH work as serfs on YouTube's property when they can be lords of their own?

There are very, very few people who can make the math work, given the expense of supplying streaming video (which fortunately, CH has been doing themselves for a very long time already) and building/keeping an audience, etc, but there will always be some.

And yet, to my point, YouTube doesn't seem to be suffering. There's no way for YouTube to keep 100% of all video revenue, and it's possible that enough popular YouTubers acting in concert via collective action might figure out how to extract slightly more from YouTube, but most popular YouTubers are making more money from Patreon than YouTube themselves, and YouTube is still a big enough player that they can afford to wait out quite a few high-profile defectors, most of whom will come limping back after things turn out to be harder elsewhere than they expect.

Google knows what percentage of time is spent on big high-profile YouTubers vs mid-range and lower. I suspect the long tail is very, very long indeed. A Logan Paul might want to believe he's crucial to YouTube's success, but I don't think he's more than a tiny blip.
Why the snarky comment? When you're outside or on my property you have no expectation of privacy.
How so? If the service is WORTH paying for, then it SHOULD be paid for. The world of service, if proven magnetizable, should always be monetized. #FreeMarkets
Based on what evidence? Replacing all infrastructure today is hardly worth it, but wind and solar backed up by battery or hydro storage costs less than even base load Nuclear power.

Load following nuclear power costs even more per kWh than base load nuclear power. Which is why France imported and exported so much electricity while being theoretically 100% nuclear.

PS: Even battery backed up nuclear seems to be much cheaper than peaking nuclear power based on current market prices.
Incredible scam pulled off by Adam and Rebekah Neuman. Color me impressed.
That's an interesting fantasy, but, Twitter's "design" originates from being nothing more than a simplistic broadcast SMS tool where every message had to fit in an SMS including the username/command part as originally SMS was the primary way people used Twitter.

After that, nearly every single aspect of Twitter was actually invented by its users including @ replies, and mechanisms for "threading." All that Twitter has done is ride that user behavior by slightly conforming to it through actions like UI trying to follow threads via text relationships, or eventually adding actual reply metadata to tweets.

And the increase in messages size? That came with a huge backlash from many of its users.

To imply that Twitter has somehow cleverly engineered the dumpster fire that burns everlasting there is giving them FAR, FAR more credit than they deserve.
I'm going through this right now, with 26 years of professional experience and an undergrad degree in CompSci.

There are many problems with hiring. Many. And as with standardized testing in public schools, one problem is how to judge the capability of many people (applicants, in this case) in a reasonable time, ESPECIALLY when the judges may not be experts in all relevant topics. The popular answer is to test against standards that are easy to measure. In the end, the companies may end up with fewer false positives (hiring an idiot), but will accept the likelihood of having more false negatives (missing out on a good employee).

I don't agree with this approach, but mainly because of more a fundamental reason. The #1 reason that most hiring is broken nowadays is that it focuses on specific skills (often an unlikely/unrealistic laundry-list of technologies) rather than focusing on the candidate's ability to learn, think, and communicate.

Regarding filtering out older candidates, this is more a side effect of testing on topics that would be more familiar to more recent grads. Likewise, if interviews included demonstrating how a candidate would choose between C#, Python, Ruby, Go, C++, Java, or Javascript for a given fantasy scenario, or when to choose between bare metal servers onsite or virtualized hardware onsite or managed or unmanaged cloud resources, younger and less experienced candidates would fail more than older ones. They just don't have enough experiences in different situations to know how to make these decisions (with an reasoning to back them up).

The practical reality that I see is that older developers just may not be worth the extra cost compared to younger, less experienced ones. This will be especially true in many corporate environments where the more experienced, more senior dev will have higher expectations, want more authority and autonomy, and otherwise feel stymied by corporate drag. If the older worker hasn't ascended into management, they have little road left to travel.

What many of us older devs didn't realize is the situation we would now be in. At this point, we must forge our own paths - by starting a consulting business, forming a startup, building a SaaS or other income-generating product, etc. It does little good to be angry at the system (since our complaints will absolutely not change anything).
>Isn’t a better question, why are you interviewing for the same positions in your 40s that a fresh grad could do?

Do you generally look down on everyone who needs a job, or just the ones who need a job and are old?

If you can't find work as a senior, and your options are junior or not working, which would you choose?

>In your 40s, you should have a trusted network of former managers, coworkers, and external recruiters that help you bypass a lot of the BS.

Shame on those not as lucky, extroverted, or with the same opportunities as you, eh?
what part of it is a scam?

Imagine if I had a car that was falling apart, and I sold it for much more than it was worth to some chump who didn't spot the many faults I knew it had. Maybe I put a floor mat over the rust and use thicker oil so they don't hear the rattle in the engine.

100% legal, and by some people's standards not even a scam. Caveat emptor, nothing personal it's just business.

Other people would say I was a rip-off merchant for not being upfront about the faults, and that people shouldn't do business with me until I mend my ways. I wouldn't have sold that car to a friend or family member - unless perhaps they had a car repair shop, and even then I'd point out every fault - and shouldn't an honest businessman treat every customer that way?

situational87 is the second type of person, and thinks WeWork is the IPO equivalent of a car that's falling apart.

What makes tech a unique
sector that makes this
possible?

It's not unique to tech - just tech has lots of IPOs of companies that are losing money.
It seems like a whiteboard is more akin to the paper drivers test, which is a significant, non-driving part of getting a license. While whiteboard interviews can easily descend into gotcha-type puzzles with the wrong interviewer, that in itself is a solid sign you don't want to work for that company - they've failed your test, and they've done it in a nice, easy to comprehend way. Thank them and move on.

If, on the other hand, the problem with whiteboard interviews is that they're asking someone to come up with 'trivial recursive solutions' and 'know things somebody who just graduated might about data structures and algorithms'... While I agree that many positions do not require a solid, able-to-apply-at-a-moment's-notice knowledge of the above, I can't think of a single one that wouldn't have severely benefitted from having that knowledge.

If someone is unable to use basic recursion, recognize patterns in their problems and refactor them using higher abstractions (or just know of the existence of the higher abstractions in the first place and solve the problem more easily because of it), figure out how to put together basic data structures and algorithms, or even attempt to think through out loud how they would solve a problem they don't know the solution to, it isn't ageism - it's discovering that someone isn't the right fit for how you imagine the engineering culture at your company should be.
I didn’t make it that far. The obviously oversold attack depleted my interest.
You agree to terms before connecting to free Wi-Fi.
I don't know how nest camera is built like, but can't you cover the light with a bit of tape and be done with it?
> While Adam hasn’t taken a salary for his We Company work — neither has Rebekah — the company issued him a $7 million loan in June 2016. (It is repaid, with interest.)

> There are a few reasons to launch an IPO: a big one is to take on new investment. IPOs also let insiders cash out. Before 2019, Adam had not received any equity awards, the documents say. But as The We Company got larger, the board of directors decided to give Adam reason to do an IPO, so Adam received options to purchase more than 42 million shares.

I'm confused. No salary, no equity awards, yet this guy is rich as hell?

I guess cause he still owns what he got as a founder?
But tinbucket, I’m pretty sure you just loudly proclaimed you would be happy to pay at least $5/month!
I'm sure it's just in my head, but it feels like the first tech IPO in several years where there actually seems to be a viable business model.
this is cool, overall kind of amazing to see how a whole ecosystem feels even if it's pretty generalized!
Anybody can claim a trademark (TM symbol), but only those who have registered it with USPTO can claim the (R) for registered trademark.

This is not true. It might be the legal position in the United States, but other jurisdictions have their own rules and registration processes for trademarks.
I do this, and I actually had to use it for the first time yesterday when calling a credit card company. The rep said "I'll need your security question answer... is this right? It looks like it's just a bunch of numbers and letters?"

Then I confirmed and started reading it out to her, and she hung up on me. I think I should move to correct-horse-battery-staple style in the future.
Or last resort because private money has dried up.
Search google for `site:sec.gov and we expect we will continue to incur net losses for the foreseeable future` - a nearly identical phrase is a frequent occurrence
Any sufficiently advanced statistical model is indistinguishable from AI, at least for the purpose of VC dollars.
Activities of our paying and free customers or the content of their websites or other Internet properties, as well as our response to those activities, could cause us to experience significant adverse political, business, and reputational consequences with customers, employees, suppliers, government entities, and others.

... We also received negative publicity in connection with the use of our network by 8chan, a forum website that served as inspiration for the recent attacks in El Paso, Texas and Christchurch, New Zealand. We are aware of some potential customers that have indicated their decision to not subscribe to our products was impacted, at least in part, by the actions of certain of our paying and free customers. We may also experience other adverse political, business and reputational consequences with prospective and current customers, employees, suppliers, and others related to the activities of our paying and free customers, especially if such hostile, offensive, or inappropriate use is high profile.
Already posted yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20696525
Makani’s airborne wind power system takes flight offshore
> We have applied to list the Class A common stock on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “NET.”

Pardon?
"Takes flight" and crashes:

To demonstrate our offshore flight capability, we completed two flights from the floating platform. The first quick flight included launch, hover away from the perch, and an autonomous landing. The second, longer-duration test, demonstrated robust crosswind flight. The kite flew beautifully, accurately following commands from the flight controller, and affirming that its motion and that of the floating platform matched our pre-test simulations. In preparation for landing, the kite smoothly transitioned out of crosswind into a stable hover. However, it did not successfully land on the platform, and the flight ended with the loss of the energy kite. Both offshore flights gave us a wealth of new information that the team is now busy analyzing and applying to making system improvements.
All your examples are marketing ideas and promotions. Nothing at all to do with financial engineering. As much as you seem to enjoy complaining, surely your favorite companies engage in the practice -- hedging currency risk, locking in stable fuel prices, avoiding interest rate shocks.
How State Politics Is Playing a Role in Artificial Intelligence
Probably a good one to hop into for a quick gain due to hype and usage, but long-term the price will fall.

Will continue to monitor, but looking like it will be the standard 7/11 IPO strategy - get in and immediately start the sell off if price drops 7% day-to-day or 11% consecutively, then short to price where losses are matched.
I'm not sure how a trade war on legal goods with one current producer of an untracked import addresses the demand for the drug or the domestic dealers. Buyers change suppliers all the time. And you're not putting a tariff on what's shipped clandestinely from clandestine labs.