skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I believe part of the explanation for this is that big landlords have more ways to make money off property than just collecting rent over long periods of time due to the way buildings are valued in the commercial real estate market. Building net operating income has a direct relationship to market value; the ratio of these things gives you the capitalization rate, which tends to be known for a given type of building in a given market.

If the unit sits vacant for a while but they do eventually succeed in growing building revenue through rent increases, they don't have to wait out the full breakeven timeline to make money since they can sell it on to the next buyer at the newer higher price indicated by the latest year's financials.

Let's take an example building where the local market has apartments trading at a 3% cap rate. If there are 30 units renting at 1.2k with no vacancy, that's $432k in annual rent. Let's say running this property requires a $80k property manager, $80k in property taxes, $40k in utilities, $40k in insurance, and $25k in miscellaneous expenses for a total of $265k/yr in expenses. The net operating income is $432k - $265k = $167k/yr. The market value of this building to a prospective buyer would be $167k/0.03=~$5.56M

Renting the 30 units at $1.7k (41% rent increase), gross rents would be $612k. Expenses constant at $265k/yr (taxes would go up, but this is napkin math), the NOI is now $347k and the building is worth $347k/0.03=$11.56M .

In this example, a 41% rent increase more than doubled the value of the building. For an investor with deep enough pockets, the $6M of equity created by renting units at the higher price is enough to cover the cost of a long vacancy / rehab process. But they can't get too greedy or the units will never rent and they're just stuck holding the bag on a high-vacancy underperforming property.

These dynamics amount to what is basically a slow-motion flip playing out over 4-10 years. Some REITs do this across their entire portfolio to achieve healthy annualized returns.
For what it worth, it is more accurate to bench on your own machine, you may find a different or interesting outcomes such as error and slower in Rust.
Except their answer is wrong, because Rust (LLVM rather) does eliminate bounds checks. They're comparing GCC vs LLVM here more than they are comparing C vs Rust. They should have compiled their C code in LLVM. Their implementation is littered with uses of "unsafe" which means its almost impossible for the compiler to eliminate the bounds checks.
Probably--assuming you already have the prerequisite knowledge required. But will you? Probably not.
That's not what the research shows, given a properly structured learning environment. Research actually shows the losses are much greater due to context switching than to saturation.
> (2) tie rent control to income.

Give one moment's thought to the most likely side effect of that...
...crushing all my dreams of being a starship captain, thanks.
OP may have other skills that they are now complimenting with coding knowledge.

Specific domain knowledge, outstanding interpersonal skills and customer empathy, design/UX/sales etc - these will likely be far more valuable than CS fundamentals if AI starts writing all code.
I think it does change it somewhat though. For example Tokyo has seen a growth in population but no increase in rent. The zoning there allows construction whereas bay area zoning does not.

If car production was outlawed existing car owners would get a windfall. But that's not due to some intrinsic feature of being a car owner. Land is definitely more limited than cars. But it seems to me that land scarcity explains only a portion of the increase in prices in San Francisco.

This article has more on tokyo housing starts relative to sf and nyc: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/what-h...

The difference from ag land is that the builders in tokyo are doing real activity to provide the housing. Lots of businesses benefit from externalities, not just landlords.
I've certainly seen requests for sources used obnoxiously by people who felt zero need to back up their side of the argument with sources. But it's also often a legitimate request to see what the OP is talking about.

The internet is vast. I sometimes have difficulty finding things I personally saw before and know exist. Slightly different search terms can turn up drastically different results and, with five million visitors per month to HN, it is a melting pot of people with vastly different backgrounds.
When Medicaid Takes Everything You Own
What prerequisites would you need? Notation and arithmetic?
Please explain.

You can build images using Bazel with distroless as the base image. Similarly I think Jib/ko use distroless images without needing a docker engine.
I imagine some old systems from before the dawn of big data don't.
I’d guess (cause I’m lazy and don’t want to verify the code) that it’s because the CLR has much better unmanaged support. It’s a first class feature.
> This is way slower than Docker.

add-job bake-instances --app=my-id --instances=200

Oh, you never wrote tooling and you dont have a jobbing engine? Well, that's the complaiing that you can't get an an Uber because you did not download an app. It is sort of funny because every single shop that is "oh containers!" either creates them manually ( slow and painfully ) or just uses random ones developers find.

> There is a reason containers exist and that every large cloud platform has adopted them, including Microsoft adding support in Windows.

It is the same reason why Whole Foods sells sushi: that's teh way to sell salmon for $85/lb to hipsters. Hipsters hate buying salmon for $22/lb but they love the rolls.
So in other words, landlords love to reserve the right to kick a tenant they stop liking out at the drop of a hat for no specific reason, by jacking the rent up as high as they want. As compensation for this power, they are willing to charge well below market rates to help indigent tenants.

If they lose this “right”, they insist on becoming pure profit maximizing machines?
>> I mean is that really a controversial statement?

Yes. "Biologically impossible" is quite the high standard to meet.
Counter anecdote: I've lived in a rent controlled apartment in Santa Monica for 5 years. My rent increases by the maximum allowed every year, but that's drastically lower than the non-rent controlled apartments in Santa Monica and West LA. My rent is now pretty significantly below market.
Is this correct? I thought the headline feature of WSL2 was that unlike WSL it didn't use the hypervisor.

Edit: I looked it up. WSL2 continues to use a VM.

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/announcing-wsl-2/
Well, i disagree with your opinion. Silicon Valley has been attracting a lot of people from lot of states, who all need housing. Remember , size of California is fixed. Housing in Silicon valley doesn't grow at the same rate as number of people coming here. Added to that, foreigners living in foreign countries ( who have never visited USA, who have no intention of living in USA) are able to own land/houses in silicon valley , and do that purely for monetary reasons, ie get more money out of the property , jacking up prices even more. An ordinary American who wants to live in California is suffering as a result of this. rent control or low income housing are essential tools to make ordinary Americans’ lives better.
Uber Fires 400 Product and Engineering Employees
> have the gateway act as a local resolver, which forwards the new requests over DoH

This is what I would like to see as a default (and included in routers). In fact, it's what I already do myself.

I think (as others here have said) that the privacy concerns the article raises are mostly FUD. But I do agree with the article when it says handling DNS at the application level is kind of a terrible idea (even though it might seem justified in this case). If the end result is that every application has its own built in network stack, that's going to be terrible for security, usability, and make it much harder to debug third-party apps.
Have you ever tutored or taught a Calc 2 class?
Does this take into consideration that your mass increases as you travel closer to the speed of light?
I'm trying to find a game that has a creator that is paying attention. I tried starting my own game too but no one is joining! Interesting project, can't wait to see more.
> Article you posted is mostly P/R fluff.

This article is the source of the HN-linked BBC article.
Inspire | https://inspire.com/ | Arlington, VA or Remote | Full-time | Product Manager - Member Growth and Engagement

Inspire.com, is a patient support network. Inspire has 230+ communities, each a condition: lung cancer, psoriasis, ovarian cancer, brain tumor, etc.

We are looking for an Engagement and Email Strategy lead around product retention. Local Metro DC area preferred, remote is OK too.

Highlights include:
- Lead Email Strategy and Mobile Push Notifications strategies
- Work with developers of Inspire products to use dynamic content, event triggers and important touch points (APIs, transactional, etc.) to onboard, activate, and retain our users

Apply here: https://inspireinc.applytojob.com/apply/W4gdr7hImB/Marketing...
What if someone’s on vacation or has mail being delivered there etc. or comes in once in a while or Airbnb’s it’s much harder to impliment I think than it sounds.

If you're putting the place up on AirBnB more often than not, the unit is not your primary residence and shouldn't be afforded benefits as such. If the goal of a vacancy tax is to increase rental supply, AirBnB does pretty much the opposite.

In California, and most of the US, property assessments are done by elected officials on an annual basis. In California the rate of increase is severely capped, but you're free to apply for a reduction if the value of your property decreases. If you're legitimately on vacation (or whatever), apply for an exemption. It's not that complex.
How myopic for you have to be to not just wonder why a mcd app in Japan would not be expected to work in the us but to say that's how it should be? All the complex shit that goes into a company like mcd in a single country and you expect what you're expecting?
I built the first app for the FIRE movement
I’ve been told that supply “caught” up in 2017 when I moved into downtown Bellevue, so the market has been weak on apartments (indeed everyone was offering incentives). Anyways, as anecdotal, we aren’t paying more than 7% more for our third leasing period in 2019 as we were in our first leasing period in 2017.
The solution is more housing, not deincintivizing apartment construction.
Taxing automation is absolutely wrong. We want automation. In the same way it would be wrong to say landlords of condos make too much profit because there are so few condos so we are going to tax condos more. More automation is required to contribute to liberate resources to eventually push our civilization to the next level. If anything, incentivize it. We want things behind made with "infinite" productivity. But we need to provide for one another, to guarantee a quality of life worth living, even when you yourself aren't necessarily contributing to that productivity anymore.

In particular, you can use tax policy that actually pushes the economy in the directions you want to fund UBI. Carbon taxes are opinionated in the right direction, or a VAT tax is not opinionated but closes loopholes exploited by businesses like Google and Amazon. You don't want taxes that disencentivize behavior that you want - it is one of the reasons I'm flabbergasted US property tax law exists as it does, because it could be opinionated to incentivize ownership but isn't because of a mix of inertia and manipulation by vested interests to keep it the way it is.
> Wind and solar are intermittent.

True, but the story is actually worse than they paint it. Electricity from renewables + storage is now cheaper than electricity from a new coal or nuclear plant. As those old plants close, they won't be replaced. https://www.abc.net.au/news/11495558

In the tussle between renewables vs fossil fuels it's all over bar the shouting, which is to say all we will have to put up with the coal and gas industry screaming how unfair it all is until the last of them die off.

But it's is just as well renewables do cost less because if someone had to plan on losing money to save the planet it would be a gonner.
That's a difference that arises out of a goods market (with some services attached) vs. a more pure-play labor/services market, but it's not a fundamental distinction about control or what is core to the platform provider. The whole gig economy is a new phenomenon, because it is enabled by the ease of communication that is only recently possible to create a liquid labor market, something that should be applauded.

The obvious Duck test is staring you in the face, that here is a new type of thing that only half looks like a duck, and should be treated as such, which is what rideshare companies have been arguing for forever, including at the legislative level. Instead of forcing a non-duck into a duck because of stupidity, lack of imagination, or pure emotional hatred for certain companies, the level-headed thing to do is to look at how such a new type of market really should work for the benefit of all participants. The race-to-the-bottom thing that drivers complain about is a consequence of ideological cock-blocking by pandering politicians unable to come up with a real solution between fucked-up taxi medallions and raw market forces. AB5's madness lies in pretending it's the 1950's and takes the cake in making it worse not just for gig companies but a shit load of other industries as collateral damage.
When did I blame Republicans?
The end game is to remove all drive throughs and fast food joints, and replace them with drone and/or pneumatic tube food delivery. I'm hoping for the tubes.
Telegram open network – the new blockchain
> Is this correct? I thought the headline feature of WSL2 was that unlike WSL it didn't use the hypervisor.

No, the headline feature of WSL2 is it uses a real Linux kernel under a hypervisor, as opposed to WSL1's approach of a kernel driver running inside the NT kernel which partially emulates the Linux syscall API.

> Edit: I looked it up. WSL2 continues to use a VM.

More accurately, WSL2 starts using a VM, whereas WSL1 didn't. WSL2 runs the Linux kernel inside a VM. WSL1 runs Linux processes under the NT kernel (albeit as a special type of lightweight process called a picoprocess), with an emulation layer to translate Linux syscalls into NT kernel calls.
It's good that they're investigating the "insider dealing" varient of citation boosting but I haven't seen anything around excess self or chain-citing, which I always viewed as a more common offense. Obviously follow-up papers are a good thing, but I've known several authors that aim for long chains of follow-up papers (or summarizing several chains) purely for boosting citation numbers. The idea being that if it's a hot topic their paper will be caught in the crossfire regardless of whether it truly merits a citation.
This move is already proving pretty awesome for homebuyers like me as more builders seem to be focusing on "build and sell" not instead of "build and rent out".
This sounds like a great idea. Docker on ARM is such a pain if you aren't building everything yourself because half the packages are x86 only
You've got it backwards.

WSL was a translation layer between Linux and Windows, WSL2 uses Hyper-V (I believe with some special sauce to handle integration).
Please show me the research that says there is no saturation point to learning.
SF has extremely harsh rent control laws. In SF you are seeing the result of rent control run amok (amongst other factors).
> Housing in Silicon valley doesn't grow at the same rate as number of people coming here

Bingo. And why not?
WSL2 doesn't continue to use a VM, it is new in that it uses a VM. WSL1 did not use a VM, it directly interfaced with the NT executive.
Pai isn't doing any useful work, he only does the bidding of his monopolistic masters.
I worked McDonald’s drive thru as a kid and plain cheese burger meant bun cheese and meat. They even had a key for it on the POS, it was completely standardized.

Of course, it’s always possible some new employee would mess it up, or anything on your order actually. With turn over so high, there was no shortage of such errors.
I've never understood why drive through ordering was not done through a call center. It could be in India for cheap labor. At the end of the day, you are "calling" someone and they punch things into a computer that is the same system no matter where you are ordering.
This seems about right. Also, there is a time frame when a new complex after completion transitions from a short term builder/construction loan to a long term permanent loan. For that loan as mentioned above the building is valued at theoretical sum of it leases by the bank. Thus for that loan it is better to show high actual rents and extrapolate to secure a better loan value / term.
The speed of light is just a compute constraint imposed on the physics simulation that is our universe. If we can just get the gods who are running that simulation to give us a little extra compute time in our neck of to woods then we can all be galactic explorers.
Housing in California is fixed because of zoning and construction regulations. Also, more people can't move here than can be supported...and how does putting arbitrary limits on maximum rent increase the amount of people that can live here if we're already dealing with the limitation of too many people wanting to live here? That will just increase the demand...

Otherwise, there is a natural equilibrium. Many people want to live here, housing scarcity goes up. Prices go up, less people want to live here (this is already happening). What you're left with is the price reflecting precisely the degree to which people are willing to pay to live here.
As I remember the book, they back tested quite a lot. It's just that whenever they went live with trading reality changed on 'em. Go figure.
I don't like touching the screens either.

https://metro.co.uk/2018/11/28/poo-found-on-every-mcdonalds-...

Traces of faeces have been found on every single McDonald’s touchscreen swabbed in an investigation by metro.co.uk. Samples were taken from the new machines that have been rolled out at restaurants across the country – every one of them had coliforms.

Senior lecturer in microbiology at London Metropolitan University Dr Paul Matewele said: ‘We were all surprised how much gut and faecal bacteria there was on the touchscreen machines. These cause the kind of infections that people pick up in hospitals.
And it's not like the world lacks places to put new pumped storage: https://nationalmap.gov.au/renewables/#share=s-oDPMo1jDBBtwB...
Oh, you're one of those. My parents never order what's on the menu. They've always got to customize it. Which is fine. But then they get all bent out of shape when the order isn't right. From a fast food joint. Can't you just order what's on the damn menu?

:)
I'm not a finance guy, but I think the idea is this:

Ren says "we bought an option and held it for a year". The option's counterparty was a bank, I guess, so they just form a company to hold the bag, and the company that is created reports to the IRS that they don't have any assets, just a basket of assets to offset the option they're responsible for.

At the end of the contract (and there can be more than one of these going on at the same time) the assets can be sold, and would be sold, in order to pay for the option contract which was now held for a year. Some money would go to the broker for executing the trades over time, etc. but much less than the taxes that would otherwise be paid.

So, the part that has the tax man scratching his head is that if Ren was directing the buying and selling of the assets in the basket constantly, is that really holding on to an asset, or is it just a lie? They say they got a tax lawyer to sign off on it, so it goes to court to see if it's a defensible position. If not, they'll probably pay a slap on the wrist and won't get to do it again.

It's not done in isolation IIRC. This sounds a lot like how I understand swaps are done, so it may be that this is only slightly unusual.
Not a physicist, but I spent some time on this, exploring the possibility of a "teach scale down to nuclei, then nuclei up to matter" learning progression for primary school.

Nuclei are quasi-classical little balls. It's electrons that are wacky quantum weirdness.

Which makes the current pedagogical emphasis on electrons, rather nuclei, as a foundation for understanding atoms... perhaps miss some opportunities for greater clarity. And that's even before getting to state standards that require teaching both "atoms are conserved in chemical reactions" and "atoms are electrically neutral, so if charged, they are no longer atoms, but ions". Sigh.

Nucleons overlap (not orbit), but nuclei aren't homogeneous, especially light ones. Light nuclei are well described as clusters of alpha particles, heavier ones as liquid drops. Ground states are generally more or less spherical. Though Neon looks like an old-style wine bottle, with a tetrahedron of alphas in the bowl, and a fifth making a neck. Non-ground states for lights are mostly rearranged alphas, for heavies, variously distorted balls. Fission is droplets stretching and necking apart.

A proton is a mix of odd shapes, but directly measurable properties are spherical. It's just a ball.

Nuclear mass and charge density are, to a good first approximation, colocated. You don't have mass concentrated one place and charge somewhere else. No surprises.

Electrons are a peak with exponential falloff, making choosing a radius quite arbitrary. What's the diameter of a cartoon volcano, that blends seamlessly into plains? Wacky, wacky electrons.

Nuclei have a flat-ish density plateau, then a steep slope, and only then a tiny exponential footlands (Woods–Saxon potential). So it's just a ball with a fuzzy edge, rather than a wacky exponential cloud thing.

Note the narrow range of sizes being discussed. No one is suggesting 10 femtometers, or 0.1 femtometers, or even 1.0 fm or 0.8 fm. "GEOID-Next committee tables discussion and heads to a bar, unable to agree on the shape of the Earth!!! News at 11!!!" But for most everyone, primary school up, that's "a femtometer ball".

A superball can be bounced, and crushed, and burned. You need polymer physics to understand just why it behaves as it does. But you can describe that behavior to a Kindergartener. They don't need polymer physics. Nuclei are just little balls.

Now look at the giant hairy mess of this thread. It's like, we teach "4/3 pi r^3, 4 pi r^2", but not "the volume and area of a ball are half of its box". But dialed way way up. Science education, variously distracted, failing to provide a coherent briefing on the physical world.

If anyone has ideas on how to describe this point, I'd appreciate them, as I've never come up with something nice.

Here's a tiny Neon pic. I just think Neon is cute. https://arxiv.org/abs/1406.2473 page 4. There's a nicer one somewhere...
Bounds checking is a “zero cost abstraction” in the sense that it is both “pay for what you use” and “you couldn’t implement it yourself any better.” That said, the implemention is not as fast as it theoretically can be, because the compiler isn’t always removing bounds checks that are provably true.

When const generic lands, you will be able to make those assertions! A basic implementation is in nightly.
“docker system prune” is a recipe for pegging my cpu for the next few hours.
What was your application if you can tell us?