skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This might sound too radical, but how about abolishing the concept of corporate personhood? Companies are more dictatorships than democracies, so the people calling the shots should be directly responsible for knowingly breaking the law.

Granted, this will make forming companies a riskier proposition, but it would also contain the unethical traits of capitalism, as you can't order illegal actions and be shielded against the consequences.
This is awful journalism. Just awful.
It depends on the topic of discussion. If we are discussing the viability of a company, and trying to project long term success, then this is all good news.

If you are discussing whats best for society and how these businesses impact those things, then this could be alarming news.
A lot of teams at FAANG companies don't use those algorithms either.

However, if you want to hire generalist programmers who are good at solving problems and can work on a variety of projects, it's perfectly reasonable to want to see how they think.
Bernie Madoff whistleblower says GE is a bigger fraud than Enron
Oh no, I'm not young. I just find this particular argument makes less sense than all the other types of arguments like this. Bracket placement in some languages is necessary to not have unintended effect. Tabs vs spaces can cause problems with certain ides/editors. I can somewhat understand most justifications as to why people have a certain reason for formatting code in their particular way. You want me to indent 3 spaces instead of 2 in Delphi, because that's the way you've done it, fine. I don't care. But this particular one, I don't get it. I never have. The amount of time that this one particular trick saved me in terms of time and frustration is huge. When you spend 45 minutes tracking down a problem because you assigned 5 (or something) to variable by accident, it almost always leads to a mouse throwing event. When someone comes back and says that seeing 42 == x is too difficult to read even though it can save countless hours, I just don't understand. (not every project has the benefit of having a linter or a compiler that will catch things like this.)
No, the return on investment is provided by the claim on assets at dissolution. It can be realized in advance of dissolution (since, as it turns out, companies tend these days to be chartered for open-ended purposes and so not to dissolve when successful) either by trading the claim for money or by the company doing periodic partial dissolutions. The whole idea of public trading is to enable the first to be done efficiently, dividends provide the second, but there is no reason a firm must do both. A firm that does neither makes it harder to realize returns but some investors may be happy to trade that for what they perceive to be higher returns or better serving non-financial interests the investor has.
There's a bunch of real-world examples on the svelte website: https://svelte.dev/examples.
I have 5725 points and I consider that most of them are the equivalent of small talk. Points are worthless, except to inflate your ego.
I lived in socialist society for 30 yrs and I know what it means and what are the consequences for people.

What you learn about it by flipping TV remote and checking your favorite social media is not what you'll actually be getting at the end.

And it's not going to be pretty.
Disclaimer - I'm a VP E at Engineer.ai

All of our project timelines are generated fully automatically. Today we are hovering at around a 90% accuracy on those estimates, and are moving more and more towards solving that last 10%.

We put our money where are mouth is - for example if our system generates a spec with a timeline of 10 weeks and a price of of 10K, and we take 15 weeks, we do not charge more than 10K.

Unfortunately I can't reveal more details of how we generate those timelines automatically apart from the fact that is uses NLP, CNNs, and regression analysis as it is proprietary and core to our business.
Thanks! We're big Observable fans, and you can find quite a few examples here: https://observablehq.com/search?query=mapd and https://observablehq.com/search?query=omnisci. But imagine we could do something deeper, any thoughts?
The hack that I've seen people use the most is to write a line like this:

() = foo;

Then rustc will print out an error that includes the type of `foo`.
I'm aware of this.
Sorry to beat a dead horse, but I think you are still missing the point. When I was alluding to them being "just instruments" analogous to the way drugs or guns could be considered "just instruments", it was tongue-in-cheek. Sorry if that didn't come across clearly in text. So yes, my comment is still congruent with thinking of financial derivatives as "just instruments" is a cop-out.

FWIW on your second point, "some" of those people are members of Congress who are meant to represent constituents and draft laws. What you're advocating in listing the pros/cons is a risk based approach, which is the way most decisions, including these, should be framed.
Just because the author "doesn't understand what the fuck is going on here" does not make it a bad investment, a terrible company, and so on.
The world's first solar road has turned out to be a colossal failure
You are exactly correct. I saw them do a demo at the Collision conference in Toronto and the process involved going through a lengthy setup wizard about the project and its characteristics.
Somehow it makes you feel good to call me and others that enjoy the productivity of better tooling shills.

Do you think it matters at all to us with actual experience passing by the soap box?
Similar approach used by a lot of self-proclaimed self-driving car companies. They have a driver and an engineer in the front seats but can't stop from saying we have self-drivings cars on the streets :-) .

Also, the same pattern with Cloud hosted companies. It might be true these days but back in the day - a lot of them were claiming to be hosted in the Cloud to look cool but actually, they were using colo data centers.
I mean it's only fair that the Chairman and CEO of my parent company made 16.6 million in compensation in 2018, 474x (four hundred and seventy four) what I made.

I'd just hate to be our new President and COO, he only has a base salary of 955 thousand.

And for some reason people wonder why I'm always asking if it's time to go home, if it's time to die, and why several people in the office several times a week mention how many years or weeks they have left until they 'get paroled' (can retire and go find another job). It couldn't possibly be because my CEO made 20-23x what I need to retire last year.
Decoding the combinations (and thus resetting the indicators) on those is surprisingly easy. They're actually great for locksport beginners, the key lock is really easy to pick and the combination is easy to decode, AND they're cheap!
I think deindustrialization is not exactly a symptom of productivity growth. It's more of a symptom of loss of labor competitiveness, possibly from a failure in productivity growth relative to other industries. Mobility of capital has a lot to do with it. For example, an area with lots of factories that popped up at the same time, and now they're reaching end of life and the capital owner will rebuild them in a different location where labor is more competitive.

If you think about the postwar boom, there was massive productivity growth in many regions that saw continuously increasing labor force participation and internal immigration. Detroit comes to mind. In the low-productivity 80s (when productivity growth reached 0 at one point) factories started closing because they were uncompetitive with foreign producers. Northern industrial centers started evaporating as they were replaced by southern ones with similar productivity but lower overall labor cost.
Just try assigning the expression to a variable of definitely the wrong type, and the compiler will print out the full type in the error message, e.g.

let x: () = foo.iter().map(...).filter(...).step(...).take(...);
Could you be more specific? Does which part scale?
Live Debate with Ryan Selkis from Messari and Preethi Kasireddy from TruStory
Companies go out of their way to give you the illusion of privacy even though it’s BS for many reasons (including legitimate ones like debugging).

Maybe the other reason is that people expect accountability and legal consequences for companies that lie, but Facebook still being around clearly shows the legal systems of most countries don’t give a shit.
> [...] Android probably would become insolvent at some point, because a free mobile OS is not exactly a big money maker

They'd still be making 30% is it? On every app purchase and in-app purchase on the play store, which is surely in the billions.
Can we get this data overlayed with the stock market? Correlations?
How many years does it take before you get to quit calling them invaders? 250? 500? Do you see people in England calling people with French names invaders?
This is an important thing that optimists often miss. If you naively apply simple estimates of how many flops it takes to simulate a mind… well, I have and it would be possible to put ~35,000 real-time human minds onto all the iPhones Apple sold this year: https://kitsunesoftware.wordpress.com/2018/10/01/pocket-brai...

There’s also the problem that we don’t yet know how ignorant we are about our minds. I’m sure neuroscientists do at least have a rough idea by now of how much there is left to learn, but I’d be surprised if they are confident enough to be able to estimate the cost of the remaining required research to less than a factor of 10, especially as we necessarily started with the easy-to-learn knowledge.
How much has compensation grown for professional basketball players - or any sort of professional sport - over the time period?

Or Doctors?
After working with React now for a few years. I will now never learn any more JS frameworks. I think React is the best and I don't need anything more.
I know of your personal experience, and thank you for your response. I actually hadn't realized that the surveillance bureaus had regulatory-captured general legal immunity so openly. So yes, I was overstating the legal situation thinking they would be better on the hook for libel. Frankly this overbearing immunity should be a talking point of every "identity theft" article, but unfortunately those articles are written from a perspective that is still wed to the primacy of this system.

> I think HNers might be surprised to learn that the state machine pretty routinely achieves the objectives

None of these stories really focus on irreversible damages (besides eg SIM swapping stealing cryptocurrency), but rather the time taken dealing with that "state machine". Diligently checking your own dossier is doing the surveillance bureau's work for them - adding to this perverse incentive where they don't bother doing the diligence of verifying loan applicants hoping that consumers will be responsible for guarding use of public identifiers associated with them.

A quick reading of the FCRA still doesn't show any statutory timeline within which surveillance subjects ("consumers") are required to verify the dossiers on themselves - compared to say regulation E which requires that you verify your legitimate account ledgers at least every month and a half (please correct me if I missed something). I'm not the type to be continually applying for new credit cards for whatever incentive they're offering, so dealing with any backscatter from identity fraud is purely a cost to me. The less I involve myself with their system, the more I can handle its involuntarily burden in "batch mode".
The shame part is huge for elder folks. Not only the feeling "I must be old; I wouldn't have made this mistake when I was younger" (though you might have) but the feeling that others will realize you are losing it.

It's bad enough that banks and such are starting to set up arrangements where (adult) kids can intervene to prevent their parents from losing all their savings this way.
As mentioned in another story on HN, the Huawei ownership structure is a little more complicated than you suggest, although the essence is the same.

Listen to the Acquired podcast for a more thorough history of Huawei.
https://www.acquired.fm/episodes/huawei
If it's unnatural to include before or after, that's because it's not that relevant to the story in the first place. It's enough to be able to picture that his risk is compounded by a physical disadvantage, we don't need to know his exact dimensions if that data isn't worth bringing up afterward. And if it is that important, the middle of someone else's sentence is the most flow-breaking place you could possibly put it.
maybe those intel mitigations had a very heavy toll on ssl handshake perf?

I can easily see a cdn having to spend enough to double server capacity almost overnight because of a software performance change that can't be delayed.
While I agree there is a risk, I think a lot of their free customers would either not be using SSL at all, or else would find it too complex to remain independent and just have a Facebook page instead, if Cloudflare didn't make that kind of thing easier. Neither seems like it would be better. Not to mention things like being able to resist a DDOS from anyone who dislikes you.

Sure, there may be some people using Cloudflare free services who would otherwise be doing it themselves, but I think by far the greater majority of their non-paying users are folks too small and/or non-technical to maintain their own site otherwise.
Check out this example crunching 1.45 billion rows on my 32GB Macbook Pro (CPU-only). https://twitter.com/ToddMostak/status/1162067442081751040?s=... With a GPU cluster it's very possible to handle 100+ billion rows with sub-second response times.
Agreed, but the point is that this particular mechanism doesn't disincentivize the fraud. The CEO of Wells Fargo has pretty much no power to stop an individual sales rep from lying on an account form, and neither that sales rep nor their manager is going to stop lying because we've threatened the CEO with jail time. The only thing the CEO could do to reduce their risk of going to jail is try and stop investigations from turning up evidence of fraud.
I also blame the victims.
One of the things I like about Plant money is that they have transcripts for all their podcasts. I used to listen when I was a driver, but now I don't I can just read the transcript in a few minutes instead of spending 20 minutes or so listening.
I really appreciate the clarity and communication style of these Rust release notes.

As an enthusiastic Rust user who is perhaps not as academic/intellectual as most of the Rust community, I often find Rust-related reading material quite daunting. But never these. They're simple and they're great.
I don't know how you can possibly believe this. Do you really believe that Terry Tao got lucky, and just worked way harder than everyone else? Same can be applied to business executives.
Arguably a lot of that R&D should be capitalized and not be on the I/S. Investments like that shouldn’t impact net income. I’m more concerned with G&A going up 500%.
A lot of Sillicon Valley startup fundraising ends up resembling an iterated prisoner's dilemma. Most startups fail and it's likely that you might have to work with people a few times before you get it right. The [generally] dominant strategy for Iterated Prisoner's dilemma is tit for tat[0], and consequently you see a lot of people cooperating when when it might be more lucrative to defect is because they know that they might want to work together again. Basically, neither side wants to burn the bridge.

This guy seems to have reasoned that for him, it was more optimal to defect, and it seems to have worked out. TopTal succeeded and he didn't raise any more money. His reputation with VCs is torched, but he doesn't need to raise any more money. If TopTal had failed, it really wouldn't have mattered because he wouldn't have needed to raise any more either.

You have to wonder if VC will eventually become a market for lemons[1] as founders who know they have a big opportunity only offer investors unfavorable terms. Obviously no startup is a 'sure thing' but it does seem like founders increasingly have a lot more information than their investors.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tat

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons
> If you have to muddy the definition to make it fit

They're not muddying the definition. You're ignoring part of the definition.

Everyone has been consistent about what the definition is, and you have consistently pretended that part of the definition isn't there.
Student hacks high school software and finds “SQL injections galore”
It might have been that the specific server in question usually didn't crash because of the applications being run. Also it could have been that the bad guy wasn't giving any detailed information about what happened so it seemed like a setup.
"Sure, this is another company that hemorrhages money, but that free DNS service is super cool!"
I have on my todo list a lambda function that will get invoked from bitbucket and will kick off a bunch of tasks. Then another one that can be called multiple times and let you know if those tasks finished and the exit code.
In theory, the board.

The board represents investors. And usually the big investors will have a seat on the board.

The board should have intervened here.
Probably because the majority of the people using Facebook are neither programmers or employees that handle data so don't know the laws or methods used.

So I would argue there isn't common sense around this issue because it's not a common issue for people.
> The first ANSI standardized language.

Not quite; the "ANSI first" in relation to Lisp is supposedly that CLOS is the first ANSI standard object system, which makes Common Lisp the first ANSI standard OOP language.

Of course there were plenty of ANSI languages before 1994!
I'm working at client office, at one of the WeWork spaces in Jakarta, Indonesia.

My work notebook runs Windows 10, never have any issue with printing. And regarding connecting to printers/TVs in conference rooms which requires the installation of another apps, I think it has something to do with charcing your office's quota.
but you are missing the forest for the trees.

small websites are not hosted by small websites, they are hosted by ISP and small CDNs. who have/contract their own dos mitigation services, which are now all dead because everyone settled for the one big cdn to cdn them all.
It occurs to me that this is like supermarkets charging companies to put products on their shelves, then also launching their own brands and competing with them on their own shelves.

I think it's easy to see how customers are harmed by this, their choice becomes the supermarket brand or whoever shelled out the most for shelf space.

So Google search is an android home brand?

(Also why isn't the supermarket thing deemed anti-competitive?)
What is your proposal? I don't see not much other options:

1) Excludes Google from Android/Chrome's default search engine options. This clearly doesn't make sense for Google and I don't think there's an easy way to enforce this.
2) Lists all every search engine that exists on the planet. This still doesn't answer the question who should be placed on the top of the list.
3) Break google up into Android/Chrome and the rest. This is not even an option for EU since their jurisdiction doesn't reach to Google.

Maybe Google can say something like, "all of the profits from this auction will go back to the society!", which practically doesn't make any differences to them since the profit from this auction will likely be a minute fraction compared to the Google's yearly revenues.
I work DevOps at a 60 person company. I wanted Splunk very badly, but due to pricing had to compromise.

We got SumoLogic. I'm very happy with it relative to ELK.

It's almost as good and much cheaper. The limitations would be that dashboards aren't as customizable and that some advance searches are harder.
Everything after that first sentence is entirely about your interpretation of it.

Brevity is a key signal of clarity and cohesiveness. If it takes a journal paper to even attempt a discussion then this entire concept (under your interpretation) is suspect.
Plus Karma, fundamentally, shows you have nothing better to do... Lurkers are valuable too, even if they do only give their two cents once every eight years.
The reason I think this is not good is that CEOs are out of touch with what losing a job would feel like to most of their employees. They can afford to take risks or just become complacent. What happens, though, is that employees lose their jobs and struggle because we all know that's the first tool in the CEO belt; cut jobs. I think if wages weren't so inflated companies might be better run because even the CEO has skin in the game.
I'm I missing something? It seems to me that everyone involved knew what they where getting into specially the investors. You hear about the cases where founders get screwed all the time. This is a case where a founder gets to keep his company. Good for him.

I for one think it's a bit greedy after all he did not build the company all by himself but silicon valley investment is all about greed. It's just another day.
I think the advantage is, primarily, that you can pretend that you are pod racing. Minor caveat, the top speed currently seems to be 20 mph.
I viewed the PBS documentary of Nikola Tesla a few days ago. It had useful information and I enjoyed it: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/tesla/.
Nope. Not really. CEOs don’t rule anyone. We elect representatives who vote and make laws.

But you know all this, so the feudal comparison is pretty melodramatic and ridiculous.

You can be a CEO if you want. Give it a try!
Not 'axiomatically', rather just naively from basic legal principles. In the same way that one would expect many police shootings to be prosecuted as voluntary manslaughter.
Just wondering, I have this Mac, and I had the battery replaced, but I doubt there's any way the FAA can tell that, maybe they can. Wonder what'll happen if I try to fly with it.
One interesting observation: there’s a noticeable gap between average sentiment on Fri/Sat vs. Mon/Tue/Wed (especially when viewing the “Full” trend). Fridays rule—it’s science.

I wonder what accounts for the trough between ~2012-2014?
Putting aside the fact that it's absolutely asinine that "we" can be trademarked at all, $5.9 million seems like a pretty hefty price tag for a relatively unknown trademark.

Edit: I pulled the trademark[1] on USPTO. I don't know much about IP law but it looks like the mark was only registered in December 2018. And WeWork "rebranded" as the "We Company" in January 2019.[2] Am I reading the trademark info wrong or is that suspicious timing? Could Dec. 17, 2018 be the date WeHoldings LLC assigned it to We Work Corp.?

[1] http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=88232116&caseSearchType=US...

[2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-08/wework-s-...
Bridge Cybersecurity with Risk Management
They just got an additional series funding and turn a profit year over year currently.
It's about time I install WebThings on my Pi and give this a try. Really cool demo!
At this point, the battle for terminology is lost. What the casual observer is talking about when they talk about "AI" is "Deep Learning" is Curve Fitting.

The war for terminology is more lost than differentiating "Hacker" from "Cracker" when referring to computer security. There's a specialist arena where the distinction is occasionally respected. This is not that forum.

Artificial General Intelligence is so far off that it's not a general conversation topic, it's not even a specialized conversation topic - It's a fantasy conversation topic.
I felt sad when reading this comment. You are saying that children are "creative" and think "outside the lines," but once you're an adult you should follow directions or else be disciplined. A bit dystopian is this society you describe.