skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My experiences as an infrequent IRC user over many years:

- hmm, I have to download a client? maybe I can access a web interface?

- okay, I have this connection string/url

- how do I join a channel?

- how do I set my nickname? is this persistent?

- oh someone else is using my name? is this for the channel or the server??

- what's the etiquette of this particular channel? (I realize this is probably the case for any chat, but it seems like etiquette is much more vaunted in IRC)

vs. zulip

- enter url in browser

- login with my github credentials

.... that's it
Podman looks interesting at a quick glance, though not supporting docker-compose makes migrating nontrivial for us.
Rent control is a thing world wide. It’s not populism.

It’s the same concept as free healthcare or free education. It’s here to ensure people can still find affordable places to live.

You can’t make everything an investment if you want a healthy society.
Just because they were there doesn't mean they the have evidence
Proving something, or coding something?
Sounds like a design funnel using AI system that doesn't respond to the shenanigans would take the reward away from them, and they'd just "behave" and order.
• https://www.indiehackers.com: community for tech bootstrappers with a bit of overlap with the HN community (full disclosure: I help run this community)

• https://www.designernews.co: community for designers

• https://www.wattpadwriters.com: community for aspiring storytellers
Remember to factor in taxes. You will only see 6k a month cash on 120k a year after maxing our your 401k. A tiny studio will go from 2.5 to 3.5k last I checked.
It's great to see 3/4 of the options are open source! Whatever happens, I really hope the community get behind the open source options and don't let more things get eaten up by commercial silos cough slack cough.

I'm partial towards Matrix/Riot.im - the progress made on those projects is awesome and they really have a highly usable product, with bonuses such as e2e encryption and federation.
I’m trying to imagine a world where this technology is ubiquitous, but I can’t shake the feeling that it’ll be easily exploitable from the perspective of a nefarious actor (e.g. a jamming device of some sort). I just can’t see safety-critical systems coming to rely on it
Their company doesn't need to use your morals
tldr: highly educated and well-off engineers are able to adapt.
How would they get a plan? I thought you had to be an adult to get most cell plans, though I guess prepaid plans might work.
تحميل برنامج Kinemaster Pro للايفون وللاندرويد كين ماستر بلس مجانا
Still poops in his pants at 8?

You might want to get that checked out.
Really? I've seen touch screen ordering at McDonalds all over the place and most people seem to have no problem with it. Why do you think people avoid it?
Whimsically, I’d like to see this system only take orders in Japanese.

Well, you can speak to it in English (or whatever native tongue you prefer) but it gets translated out loud to you, then in response it speaks Japanese back to you and again on the fly translates that to you in your native tongue. Imagine a live translator between you and the ordering system (as redundant as it is).

Eventually returning customers would learn to order in Japanese and they would not need the translations.

But I want it to have a contrived aspect of Japanese futurism even if it’s rubegoldbergian.

M:いらっしゃいませ

C:ハンバーガーを1つくださ

M:はい
The article is completely on point. Because of all the reasons exposed there (and a few more) I started Wasmer, a new container system based on WebAssembly - https://wasmer.io/

Here are some advantages of Wasmer vs Docker:

* Much faster startup time

* Smaller containers

* OS independent containers (they can run in Linux, macOS and Windows)

* Chipset independent containers (so they can run anywhere: x86_64, Aarch64/ARM, RISC-V)
Will is stop people from using drive thru? If not, then it'll be annoyingly tolerated.
> their outsized gains are due to market manipulation, front running, or other insider activities (as in, illegal/unfair).

as a former insider at a different, less successful-than-rentec-but-still-successful firm, I doubt it. They have better data, technology, and employees than most other market participants. So then the question is how did they get there:

> No one is smart enough; no algorithm or model is future-proof

I agree with the sentiment, but the way it worked was in the early days, it was much easier for one person or a small team to get those advantages. Then, as the market matured and simple algorithms became less profitable, they made new, more complex ones. It became harder for new entrants to jump-start the whole process from scratch. Simons started rentech in 1982. Teleport that Simons to today and his fund probably wouldn't even get off the ground. He would still be a genius, but a billionaire? I don't think so. As you say, no one is smart enough. It was right place/right time, and they built on their advantages.
This same thing happens prior to rent control coming into effect - landlords institute a forward looking rent increase to compensate for the fact they’ll be limited in the future.

Same when a rent control unit opens up in SF, the goal is to push the rent as high as possible since it’s not going up much after that.
>Sorry, to clarify... Are you saying that because we have public transit no one can own cars anymore?

You joke but many people here would support just that.
We have those and they are slow. I wonder when they’ll put them in the drive through.
> they won't release them until they have a new iPhone to try to sell.

like the one announced in the referenced iPhone announcement event?
Nearly all points (daemon-less runtimes, daemon-less builds) the author has mentioned has been addressed by open source ecosystem in smaller standalone projects that are available.

Docker provides a nice high-level layer for the end user on the developer machine. Its CLI is efficient, so are the builds when they're local, with a cache. I still use it on my dev machine despite being aware of the alternatives.

Anyone security-aware company using containers in production most likely go with non-Docker approaches. Some notable examples include runc, Podman, Buildah, img, ko, Bazel/distroless.
It’s not “equally easy” though. I’m asking what the pros are, of versioning by header, and I’m not actually hearing a sensible response.
I know several people that do that: luck into a sweet rent control deal even though you were wealthy enough to afford market rates anyway, never, ever give up the lease even after you've essentially moved away anyway and then sublet the unit out at market rates yourself.

I don't know the same people that get mad at a corporation for allegedly "cheating the system" in some way don't find this sort of thing offensive, but weirdly they don't seem to at all.
This always comes to mind when an event like this is announced. Paging Captain Norton.
That's not exactly right. You're correct the ruling only upheld a preliminary injunction. Like you imply, that's a provisional remedy before trial, subject to change. But in practice the court is unlikely to change its views about how the CFAA operates. And rulings about preliminary injunctions are frequently cited as precedent.

Here, the opinion strongly suggested the CFAA does not prohibit scraping of publicly available data:

"It is likely that when a computer network generally permits public access to its data, a user’s accessing that publicly available data will not constitute access without authorization under the CFAA." (Opinion at 33.)

Since this was a preliminary injunction, this passage won't be binding on other courts; however, it certainly will be cited as persuasive precedent. So will more policy-oriented passages like the following:

"giving companies like LinkedIn free rein to decide, on any basis, who can collect and use data—data that the companies do not own, that they otherwise make publicly available to viewers, and that the companies themselves collect and use—risks the possible creation of information monopolies that would disserve the public interest." (Opinion at 36.)
tbf, I think far more people can do jobs where they talk to people and teach (teachers) and take care of people and nurture (nurses), than jobs where you look at a screen all day, do abstract symbol manipulation and spend most of your focus inside your head building structures of code and programs.

I showed my relatives how you 'follow the line of execution' in a program running down all the instructions. They sat back in shock, thinking how alien that job would be and how so few people are probably able to do that, and that i should be lucky (?) to have the skills to think that way.
I see no reason why a computer couldn't answer those questions
I'm newer to the Docker scene but haven't really found any of the complaints in this article realized in my work. Faster speed would be nice but I don't really mind it now.

I see a lot of complaints about the docker daemon and root privileges on HN and I've tried to understand where they are coming from but I can't get anywhere. For instance, I understand the reasoning behind "if there is no need for a daemon there shouldn't be a daemon" but I don't really understand what the actual/realized/tangible benefits of not having a daemon would be.
For a town of 20k people, a couple hundred apartments doesn't seem like much at all to me. That's probably less than 5% population growth, right?

A big big problem is that we have underbuilt for decades, which has normalized underhousing for younger people.
Rent control decreases the liquidity of the rental market because anyone currently renting is strongly incentivized to stay put in order to keep their low rate.
So you have a problem with a fast-food restaurant trying to sell fast foods?
There's a fair bit of weight getting behind Matrix too, with the french government starting to use it for internal communication.
I would suggest you fire your property management company. Any relatively savvy tenant is not going to pay above market rate. Then you'll be out of a presumably stable tenant and taking a risk on a new one. You'll also forfeit the money while your unit is vacant. Lastly you're gonna have some repair and cleaning costs. All in all unless there's crazy price appreciation in your market this strategy is going to cost you money.
I think AlphaGo put paid to that notion. It's real this time. It's all over but the scaling.
In NYC, rent stabilization laws have long had the concept of "preferential rent."

Rent stabilized apartments have a limit to how much can be charged for them (called the "legal regulated rent"). That amount can only be adjusted (on a percentage basis city-wide) by a government board every year and by a handful of other exceptions (historically: improvements to the building/apartment, major repairs, new tenant in the unit---however some of these exceptions were recently eliminated). The legal regulated rent is sometimes hilariously more than what any sane person would pay for a particular apartment and landlords would never be able to get a tenant at that price (for reference, as an NYC renter, my preferential rent is ~26% less than the regulated rent).

So in comes the concept of "preferential rent": a price below what the landlord is legally entitled to charge. That preferential rent is in effect for the duration of the lease signed. With the recent rent stabilization reforms in New York state, renewal leases on rent stabilized units will only be able to charge the preferential rent plus that year's percentage increase (as decided by the government board). Previously, landlords were allowed to raise the rent all the way up to the legal regulated rent plus that year's percentage.

In other words, before the recent reforms, landlords had a strong incentive to keep the legal regulated rent as high as possible since they can always raise rents upon renewal to that value. Previously, preferential rents were truly temporary and the landlords had no obligation to maintain them upon renewal. Now the only way to raise the preferential rent to the regulated rent is if the current tenant vacates the apartment and the landlord finds a new tenant, on whom they may charge any value up to the regulated rent.

It's difficult for landlords to kick out rent stabilized renters since those renters are generally entitled to renewal leases, but one simple tactic before was to just raise the rent from the preferential value to the regulated value. With the recent reforms, this is no longer a viable tactic.
Actually using the “REST” abstraction and taking it seriously is perhaps one of the most common mistakes!
> It’s here to ensure people can still find affordable places to live.

Rent control does the opposite. It radically reduces choices and increase on price on people looking for a place to live.

Rent control chooses a small handful of existing renters to be winners. And it makes everyone else a loser. Except it's also shitty renters, because it traps them in place. Sure it gives them a home somewhere. But it denies them opportunity to move to another city, or even the other side of time, to pursue opportunity.
Agree 100% with you. Treating housing as an investment VS a human right is what got us here in the first place.
If we can simulate wetware perfectly, we would also be able to solve any health condition.

This is all presumptive of the preferences of individual humans. It may be that the giant extrasolar Earth-type planets could be dismantled and rebuilt into smaller Earths located at various Lagrange points.
Rent control is about housing security for existing tenants. Even a perennial 7% increase can be better than discovering your rent will jump 300% next month.

But rent control in the absence of housing supply increases will undoubtedly exacerbate the problem, and at a steady 7% inflation would also slowly price out existing tenants.

Many parts of California already had rent control that was based on building age. Theoretically this could have been the best of both worlds--improved housing security for the majority of existing tenants, but an incentive for new construction, which would be excluded from rent control. Of course, the price of housing security would be marginally higher rent prices up front, but in the real world that's a reasonable tradeoff. Security and predictability are at the top of most people's hierarchy of needs, whether they admit that or not, and regardless of whether they'd willing pay for it. (Healthcare being a great of example of people predictably making irrational decisions, requiring government intervention to mitigate the consequences.)

Unfortunately, new construction in California is extremely costly for entirely unrelated reasons. I think most developers in California would have bargained statewide rent control for development as-of-right. That California permitted rent control again without doing anything substantive about lowering the costs of development is inexcusable. I'm sure lawmakers told themselves that they were buying the acquiescence of NIMBYs and local control advocates regarding future development as-of-right legislation, but they're just lying to themselves.
In some ways, the notion of humans as instruction-following-meat-robots actually just feels like an extension of a todo list or a check list, but with AI. So basically I could give the computer my task list, my goals, or whatever, along with data about my energy levels, mood, etc. Then it could return an optimized & personalized set of "Do X for the next 5 minutes, do Y for the next 15 minutes" instructions. That could result in significantly more productivity.

I'm quite the fan of the exocortex notion - the computer as an external brain that extends my intelligence, productivity, etc.
Where do you plan on raising the funds to actually build housing?

Unless it’s economically attractive to invest in real estate, the money won’t flow into housing.

Sure you could have the govt do it, but based on their track record I don’t assume it’ll be done very efficiently.
This is a surprisingly hard question to answer! An orthodox point of view says "diameter" is just a word for a physical quantity which can be measured by experiment and plugged into a formula to predict the result of other experiments. In my personal opinion, theoretical physics is not currently capable of providing a satisfactory answer, but if we knew more about the relationship between quantum field theory and general relativity it would probably be possible to say more.

There are plenty of ways to wave your hands about it, and I have been doing this for a long time and could give 100 different explanations. At the end of the day what do I see in my head when I think about the "diameter" of the proton? Basically a probabilistic soup which is confined to a small area.

The "wave function" of a quantum particle can tell you where it is but is not the same as the particle itself. Standard QM assumes particles are infinitesimal points, in QFT this leads to infinities which can be resolved if you assume particles have a "smeared out" radius. This "smeared out" radius is what the proton diameter should be related to when the more complete quantum and gravity theory is discovered.
The word you're looking for is "fiction"
This is a misleading headline.

The problem with rent control is that it allows many well-off individuals to collect ever-growing rent subsidies, to the point where after 10 or 15 years their rent is a joke compared to what their (often less-fortunate) neighbors are paying.

This bill does not have that flaw. Crucially, it sets the maximum allowable rent increase to be well above, not below, the historic long-term rent curve. Over time, in the long run, rents will approach market-rate. And that makes all the difference.
Losing an entire year of 1.2K rent breaks even with 1.7K rent after roughly 3.3 years, breaks even (1.7(x-12)=1.2x, x = 40 months). And that’s if the new tenants stay with no churn and you don’t play the same game forcing them out for another year. Had they just raised your rent $200, the break even point becomes almost 6 years. I don’t understand your landlords at all.

With regard to the story before it, it sounds like they actually lowered rent to about $1600 (2 months free is a 17% reduction, which is pretty hefty. Sure, you’re betting on them staying after, but it switches to month to month usually after a year so it’s risky).
Meanwhile in the booming Seattle: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/real-estate/amid-build...

> “I’ve been renting in Seattle since 2014, and this is the first time where I felt like I have negotiating power,” said Kjerstin Wood, who went apartment hunting with her partner last weekend and got bombarded with offers like free parking that she plans to use to play landlords off one another. “For the most part, everyone we’ve met with has been very eager to get us to apply right then and there.”

> The trend is likely to continue: The apartment-construction surge that began earlier this decade is continuing at the same brisk pace, outpacing demand for rentals even as the city’s population booms.

And a 2017(!) article talking about vacancy rate in Downtown LA that has seen a huge building boom (no not nearly enough to really depress prices, but enough to stave off the meteoric rise): https://www.scpr.org/news/2017/09/15/75615/in-high-vacancy-d...
But Debian images are from enthusiasts and the community. Also, your windows updates don't come from HP, and they often break things. Lineage isn't much different than most Linux distributions.

My guess is maybe you'd be happier with an iThing.
My experience is old, but my summary point remains: Language defined and compiler supported functionality usually is faster than libraries of external functions.

The relevance here: C isn't the fastest thing around and can be beaten. Maybe similarly for Rust.

For PL/I and strings, for the IBM versions on S/360 and S/370, the compiler might have used some of the hardware instructions for string handling.

I'd be surprised if in C strcpy, etc., were not still external: They USED to be, and then someone might have written their own version, e.g., for their own versions of strings, and linked to it; for compatibility, strcpy would about have to be an external function call still.
Voice ordering would have a lower installation cost since it can rely on the existing outdoor ordering interface, and it’s more familiar to their customers. There are 14,000 McDonalds in the US alone, so the switching costs and risks add up.
Would be nice to also see why Java is slower than C# and Go.
This bill specifically exempts new housing from its controls.
I shouldn’t have asked the question while commuting, clearly didn’t explain myself well.

Elsewhere I saw what I thought was the speed of the comet, which was around 69k mph. Didn’t Helios 1 and 2 do something like ~150k mph[0]?

Assuming those numbers are correct (please say so if not), then what would stop an intercept from being technically possible (even if very very very hard)?

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_(spacecraft)
Eeeeh, in the long run I think it'll just become unnecessary to own a personal car for most people if self-driving car fleets become a thing - I dunno... it might be a luxury like owning your own boat, if you're vacationing on a lake you can always rent one so why pay to maintain something you very rarely need... more apt might be to consider it equivalent to owning your own train car.

At any rate I don't think personal property ownership should be made illegal, it could just be made to cost - taxi companies are taxed for running a fleet of vehicles and charging people to ride on them, that sort of mass property ownership could be similarly taxed.
I'm shocked at the ideological fervor here and the fact that virtually no one seems to have looked at the details of the actual bill. This is nothing like the rent control ordinance in SF that has caused $3000 units to get stuck at $500 rents. That will never happen under this law. The allowable increases are so much higher than "normal" rent control laws that any given unit will catch up to market rates in a matter of years, at most. Whereas the laws we love to hate result in units getting stuck far below market for decades or even generations.

The difference with this law is that a 20% rent hike will take 3-4 years to be implemented instead of 30 or 60 days. That difference, while not enough to allow all families to remain in place, will allow families time to adjust or move within a reasonable time frame.

This law is different. If you want to complain about rent control in SF or NYC or elsewhere, have at it, but know that most of your complaints do not apply to this law.
I cannot wait. Finally, going to McDonald's will lose all semblance of visiting a restaurant, and be fully realized as the experience of receiving various permutations of bleached flour, HFCS, and sad meat from a giant red and yellow robotic playdoh factory that it was always meant to be.

One can only hope the robot arms will sport giant mickey mouse gloves. Value added.
I think everyone can agree that the private car culture destroyed any hope for good public transport in the US.
>>> If you made a viable investment in a property and are currently renting it out, wouldn't rent increases just need to equal inflation in order for you to maintain the same level of profitability?

Not necessarily - taxes on property owners don't follow inflation. They may go up greatly compared with inflation.

>>> I hardly see why maximizing profits should be seen as a necessity---especially when it comes at the cost of pushing people out onto the streets.

Because if don't allow it to be profitable people won't do it. Particularly in California it can be quite risky the rent out a property. It's an extremely tenant friendly location, so much so that evictions for major infractions can take several months, or in some cases years.
Yeah, because the same machines that wiped the floor with a 9-dan Go champion a couple of years ago will be completely flummoxed by people placing orders at McDonald's.