skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Three candidates actually. (Bernie, Warren, and Yang.)

...

Loss aversion is a powerful emotion with destructive effects on our politics.

Once enough people have something to lose from a change, change becomes extremely hard, even if the overall net effect would be positive.

Not only does this preserve bad policies, it turns some into a one-way ratchet--where it's easy to make things worse and very hard to make them better.

Examples

- Medical middlemen (insurance, insurance brokers, billing companies...) are pure waste. But they employ so many people and generate so much revenue that they are very hard to attack. The US has slowly climbed to ~2x the per-person medical spending of our peers... so now, any effort to reduce that to 1.9x will be met with fierce resistance.

- Prison guard unions are powerful nationally and in many states, including California. They fight any and all attempts to reduce incarceration. That was true in 1980 with ~100 prisoners per 100k population... and it's true now with ~650, by far the highest in the world.

- Realtors and car dealers essentially tax the two biggest purchases most people in America make, house and car. They have powerful lobbies in all 50 states.

There is no particular amount that will placate these rent-seekers. They just never want their income stream reduced.
Sure, the layperson knows what multi-threading is.
Man being fired brings emotional support clown to meeting
If you're going to write unreadable code why not use Perl? It's much faster than Ruby. Or Awk, even though it's one of the worst programming languages ever created?
Ask HN: How to get people to tell you their problems?
YCombinator, Startup School, etc. all discuss working through issues with potential customers. Asking them about their problems.

How do you start that conversation? Because it seems rather difficult to get just some random person to tell you their problems at work or at home.
And at best we will get expansive half measures.

The best thing that could happen to climate science would be to decouple from political ideology.
I agreed with that statement, but from the perspective that the FDA should drop its regulatory capture activities, and increase that 1% to a bigger sampling N. That is, they're focusing their efforts on the wrong problems.

The problems in the article amounts to fraud. Police that and let people decide what they want about what they're seeking.
The Italians have "Dolce Far Niente" - and the few I know and talk to on a regular basis consider it a commandment - it is like an activity.
I wouldn't call teenage motherhood "practically eradicated", at least here in the US. Two of my sisters had kids before they were 18; one is (like me) a millennial, and the other is (I'd reckon) Gen Z. They ain't exactly outliers, either; teen pregnancy is still pretty commonplace, especially in impoverished areas.

Thankfully, my sisters were part of a big family that was happy to share the burden of raising these kids and hopefully allowing them to live happy and healthy lives (and the numerous nieces and nephews I got out of it have been absolute blessings). Not every teenage mother has that resource, unfortunately.
A one liner does not mean "one line of source code in a file", it means "a single shell statement". That's why the Ruby command is prefixing them all. I routinely write 10-20 statement Perl one-liners at work for one off things.

For example, just yesterday it was to parse a log, grep for specific lines, pull out a time and a number per line, display name, number, and some number of characters afterwards as a quick abnd dirty graph of the magnitude to make it obvious if there were major outliers and to try to see trends over time. Still a one-liner.
>I don't care at all about this discussion!

Then don't say shit like "at least get it right".
Sorry, no sorry for your posting.

That wasn't a rant. It was more a failed attempt to spread FUD.

If you have actual information how and when companies regularly bid/paid for articles, you should tell us. Who bid/paid for the articles in the current edition, with the main article about the car industry?
A Perfect DNS Storm (2018)
And now Softbank is going to buy at least 25% of the shares issued in the IPO. Either they're true believers in the valuation (i.e., that $10-15B is a steal) or this is a last ditch attempt to salvage the IPO.
The Balloon as a Symbol of the French Republic
The Back-End for Front-End Pattern (BFF) Has Originated at SoundCloud
Green party!

Or act locally within your county and city, as any successful local model can be later taken up by other municipalities.
That is a highly privileged position from someone who benefits from the current system, or at the very least isn't actively harmed by it.

I realize I know nothing about your station, but understand that being able to make that statement is inherently privileged, and one millions of people around the world cannot proclaim.

If you have access to benefits and advantages in the system that others do not, then if you are not actively working to improve that system, you are COMPLICIT. Plain and simple.

Nothing happens autonomously or through self-correction. It happens through the blood, sweat, tears, and sacrifice of others (including those as privileged as yourself) while you disengage and offer nothing.
Exactly what I was thinking.

Plus the fact it is built on top of Starlette and Uvicorn and is frequently among the top of benchmarks of python based framework performance.

Fairly complete starter projects.

https://github.com/tiangolo/full-stack-fastapi-postgresql/bl...
Appreciate you explaining this point further, I didn’t realise there was a difference between ‘agile’ vs ‘Agile’ and the only other methodology I had heard of was waterfall which also seems to be universally disliked.
> Do you have experience living in countries where you need to bribe everyone everywhere to get anything done?

Yup, two years in India over a decade ago when it was much worse than it is now.

At the end of the day, a country will ally with or back the country from which they can extract the maximum benefit. Game theory applies.

Many Pacific Island countries (many of the tiny countries you allude to) have benefited greatly from switching allegiance to China. In contrast, the US has much bigger fish to fry (billions in aid to Israel supposedly for mid-east stability) and paid these tiny nations no attention whatsoever over the past few decades.

>
Do you have experience living in countries where you need to bribe everyone everywhere to get anything done? I doubt you're speaking from any sort of authority when you say these decisions are not made via shady backroom deals.

Do you mean like the US, where unlike anywhere else in the world, bribery (cunningly called lobbying) is both completely legal and publicly accepted?
But isn't the brain massively multitasking? It controls and keeps track of an awful lot of stuff. The "can't do multiple things [well] at once" really just applies to conscious efforts.
If we go down this path too far, you're going to get a shock when you read the wiki page on "Aryan" for the first time.
most are still stuck in the loyalty type mentality buffered by things like patriotism and national anthems and flags for any event with >5 people and a TV camera.

50 years ago people had the same loyalty towards their companies, and look where that got US manufacturing workers. nowadays you'd be nuts to expect to stick with a company for 10 years. get yours and get out: others be damned.

so it shall be with citizenship. as more and more citizens have more and more power to up and leave, or work outside the confines of the US without too much hassle, questions such as "what on earth are we still doing here?" will be asked, at first in whispers (as they are now), later in louder volumes.

where things go from there, anyone knows.
Support. It seems to be especially common in American publications which begin with a mini-story about some random person before getting to the actual point. E.g., I just looked at [1] which was linked from Hacker News and it starts out with some completely unnecessary details about somebody tripping over a garden hose.

[1] https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2019-09-12/medical-eq...
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2543012

> We find evidence of pervasive errors of historical fact, opaque methodological choices, and the cherry-picking of sources to construct favorable patterns from ambiguous data.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/social-science-histo...

> I conclude that Piketty’s data for the wealth share of the top 10 percent for the period 1870 to 1970 are unreliable.
The values he reported are manufactured from the observations for the top 1 percent inflated by a constant 36 percentage points. Piketty’s data for the top 1 percent of the distribution for the nineteenth century (1810–1910) are also unreliable.

http://voxeu.org/article/piketty-s-housing-capital-results-n...

> A key observation in Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century (Piketty 2014) is that the share of aggregate income accruing to capital in the US has been rising steadily in recent decades. The growing disparity between the income going to wage earners and capital owners has led to calls for government intervention. But for such interventions to be effective, it is important to ask who the capital owners are.

> Recent research has shown that the long-run rise in the net capital income share is mainly due to the housing sector (e.g. Rognlie 2015, Torrini 2016 – see Figure 1). This phenomenon is not specific to the US but has been evident in almost every advanced economy. This suggests that it is not entrepreneurs and venture capitalists that are taking an increasing share of the economy, but land owners.

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/99455/...

> The results from at least four studies were compared for three measures of income change: change in median incomes, share of growth captured by the top 10 percent, and the changing income share of the top 1 percent. In all cases, Piketty and Saez (2003) were the outlier, showing the most increased inequality. And in all three measures of income change , Piketty, Saez, and Zucman (2018) found much less growth in income inequality than Piketty and Saez (2003).
Even worse, the people that would fight are often: dead, incapacitated, have age related mental issues, or old enough to not care to fight...
What exactly are those developers doing all day then? Because every time I open an Instagram.com link I'm struck by how bad it is. The images are small, the comment list is the same height as the image, so wide but short images have short comment list, the comments are scrolled to the bottom so the poster's description isn't visible without scrolling up, videos doesn't have any kind of playback controls so you can't even see how long they are, and so on. It's a terrible web site and I don't understand where all the developer time and productivity is going.

And wouldn't a 10% hardware cost decrease be worth a lot at a company with such a high load, or is it all rendered so seldom because of the caching?
The FDA’s budget is more than 6x what it was in 1992.[1]. An increased every year since then.

What do you mean downsized?

[1]https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R44576.html#_Toc82198...
I am sure for a claim of this magnitude, there would be plenty of references other than the book which shows our bodies somehow magically adopt and regain the lost weight. The burden of proof is on you to support this false claim
I knew Ruby copied a lot from Perl, but I wasn't prepared for just how much these are exactly how you would do the same thing in perl, just with the the order of passing lists reversed.

The command line switches are the same, the BEGIN/END block stuff is the same, the $F auto-splitting is the same.

Good on Ruby, that's the stuff that makes Perl one-liners actually worth coming back to again and again.
The book is an essay collection, so I think he's saying each essay from the book is available on the 'essays' section of his website.
Selling something is OK. Fraud is not OK. Pretty simple distinction.
Segment the continental United States into quadrants. In which quadrant would the Notre Dame pin fall? It’s also about 1.5 hours from downtown Chicago. Tuscaloosa, Alabama is about 3.5 hours from the nearest major city with a sports team, Atlanta.
I once tried to return an unopened, sealed 30 day supply of overpriced $150 medication to one of the big pharma chain stores and I was told that they won’t accept refunds because there could be a chance someone tampered with the medication.
> It's not solving the problem, and may just mean huge government waste.

You should look into the efficiency of medicare and medicaid if you're really worried about this. It might put some of your fears to rest.
Office 365 Home for 6 users is $79.99 a year

With Dropbox if you have 1TB and someone shares a folder with you that has 1TB, your total allowed storage is still 1TB. With Office, you can share folders across users and the storage is contiguous.
It was a wrap for the ACA when Lieberman used all his remaining Joementum to kill the public option.
I don't consider anyone to be different in those ways but I never learned about Persian philosophy or history in any class.
FYI: The iron within meat is much more bioavailable to your body
Academic abstracts are very similar but evolved to serve a slightly different purpose. Papers take time to read and there are a lot of them coming out all the time, so researchers need to know if a paper has something they're interested in it before investing the time to read it. I've grown accustomed to this consideration from people who want my eyeballs to read their words. If you send me messages, etc. similar to what this article uses as "before BLUF" examples, it's very likely going to piss me off.

There are a decent number of long-form articles posted on Hacker News that don't follow this standard and don't have a last paragraph (or two, or three...) that's any more helpful. They typically have an intriguing click-bait title that fails to fully parse and I wind up clicking on them just to figure out what they're about. I read three or four paragraphs in and it becomes clear the article is going to do a painfully slow reveal of it's point, if it even has one. So, I scroll alllll the way down to the bottom, noting that it will take a good twenty minutes to read that far, and find the last few paragraphs to be utterly unhelpful ramblings rather than a summary or conclusion. Giving up, I read the comments here and it is frequently the case that a lot of people are just commenting on the title without having figured out what heck the article is about either.

I find this absolutely infuriating.

I apologize for venting.
> The fact is that anyone with half a brain should have known decades ago that the US government, like all governments, does all kinds of surveillance [...]

Before Snowden you could say that TLAs were surely reading everything, but no one took that seriously -- "what a tinfoil hatter" might have been their internal response.

After Snowden we all know that TLAs are reading everything.

> Also, while it's perfectly reasonable for ordinary citizens to question what level of surveillance is justified and what kind of information the public should get to see in order to hold the government accountable, it's not reasonable for an individual to just decide on his own that it's OK to violate the law [...]

Indeed. Yet it happened, and now we have to decide if what Snowden did is good or bad, and that's not as easy as it is to determine that he broke the law.

Another case like Snowden's that of the former head of the NSA, Admiral Rogers, who visited the President elect to tell him (many presume) that he was being wiretapped. Was that breaking the law? Almost certainly -- surely it must be illegal to tell the target of a secret FISA warrant that they are being monitored, though in this case it wasn't the President-elect, but someone in his campaign, but still, telling must have revealed things which it would not be legal to. Was it good? That depends on a great deal on your political views. And even if what Admiral Rogers did turns out to have been legal, you might still think it was bad.

Snowden clearly broke the law, perhaps even committed treason as defined by the U.S. Constitution. But so did the Founders (they inarguably committed treason against the Crown). Breaking the law is not necessarily enough to make an action bad, and sometimes it's more than enough to make it good. As to Snowden, I think the metaphorical jury is still out.
> Over time. I was not dehydrated at the end of the month, but I was 15+ 1bs lighter, and my neck, waist and limbs were slimmer.

That establishes what month you lost fat in. It does not establish what time of day you lost fat in. It does not establish that you lost fat through your urine.

I totally believe you that you lost weight in a month; I'm not objecting to to that claim. The claims you made that I am objecting to are:

1. That you know what time of day you lost weight in.

2. That you know you lost weight primarily through your urine.

You did not control for water weight when testing either of these hypotheses.

> I find though that science _requires_ discussion to move forward.

No it doesn't. Discussion is sometimes helpful to the scientific method, but it is not a part of it. Science requires sound experimentation, which you have not done.

> In the morning, you will not have lost any weight (call it water weight if you want).

I don't need to stay up all night to demonstrate that I can lose weight while awake. I just got back from a run and had to go, so I urinated and lost 1.6 lbs according to measuring before and after on my bathroom scale. Since you've given me permission, I'll go ahead and call that water weight.

> Go take a nap, when you wake you will urinate again, but it will be different.

How will it be different? You've literally provided no explanation whatsoever for why you think there's fat mass in your urine.

> But maybe you can only understand this difference if you are carefully monitoring your weight over an extended period of time?

I have gathered my weight data almost every day for the last few months, to correlate with a weight training routine.

Maybe I could understand the difference if you could explain it to me, but all you've done is just say there is a difference.

> The reason I don't think the carbon dioxide thing is the primary method of weight loss is because of my tests, where your body weight simply does not normalize until after sleeping.

What do you mean by normalize?

> I think the majority of the fat (by weight) comes out in urine.

Why do you think this?

> But I am just guessing based on my experiments over the past few years. Yep, I am an amateur scientist, but I control my weight now.

You don't get to call yourself even an amateur scientist if you refuse to even consider very obvious confounding factors. Science is about isolating phenomena, and if you haven't even measured the heaviest thing coming out of your body (water) then you can't claim to have isolated any information about lighter substances leaving your body. What you're doing is not science.

I'm happy for you that you're controlling your weight, though. Good job.
It’s called Reservoir Sampling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reservoir_sampling

I was just re-reading this yesterday! I think a lot of the Monte Carlo rendering people know about this family of algorithms, and the idea is pretty simple. I’m not sure why it’s described from the start as picking k samples though, I find it a lot easier to understand and see how it works when you start with k=1.

Btw, it’s fun to work out the probabilities of picking a sample to prove how this algorithm works, and that it’s uniform. Big piles of factorials that all cancel out.

Pps the other super rad algorithms that aren’t well knows are the alias method for simulating a discrete distribution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alias_method

...and the suffix array, which is crazy surprisingly useful https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffix_array
>Become involved. I think the minimum you should do is to vote in every election in your municipality. One of the main causes of the problems in our current system is the atrocious voter turnout rate.

Hot take: voting is not ceasing to be apolitical. Voting is something you do, usually once or twice a year every few years. If you vote and don't take part in any collective action beyond that, you are apolitical.

>HN is not the place for that discussion.

This is typical "radical liberal" cowardice: insist that everyone must stop living apolitical lives, get organized, get involved, agitate, educate, organize... except by involved, you actually mean taking the most individualist, minimal form of political action available, rather than actually being political.

For the record, I send regular dues to the DSA and ACLU, as well as belonging to a local Democratic caucus. Socialism, as it turns out, does indeed take up quite a lot of evenings.

Being actually political, I am spending my interventions in this thread sticking up for the right of others to be apolitical, because frankly, most political organizations are currently extraordinarily hostile to anyone who wants to get properly involved, to be political in the proper way, without agreeing a priori to a party line. And why shouldn't they be, from their own point of view? Everything from the Republican Party to the Neighborhood Progressives maintain the convenient fiction that they are private clubs with a right to run themselves according to their private standards, rather than being, at least aspirationally, collective community assemblies.

All of which is to say: why should you subject yourself to an environment you find unpleasant on a massive and regular basis, while that environment insists you're free to leave at any time? The answer is, as you had said, because that environment also insists that any failure to show up and be part of the private club activities is letting the enemy win.

Sort out your distinctions between private and public institutions.
It is actually still 8-bit aligned with padding - we are talking about a system with a 68000 and Z80 here. The way the graphics systems of the era accomplished color depths like this was generally to do one of two things:

1. draw them in "planar" mode(multiple bitmap layers of a more convenient depth like 1-bit, then composited together into the full image) vs the "chunky" mode we are familiar with(all color information packed in each pixel of the bitmap). Planar graphics are much less convenient for ordinary drawing tasks, but they allow for a tradeoff between memory usage and fidelity. Put they ease a few kinds of raster effects if you carefully use your palettes. This is what the Amiga OCS had, and VGA in many of the custom modes.

2. Allocate the colors to sprite and tile hardware with limited palettes, so that you can achieve "n colors visible" by carefully combining all the different elements. Each element might be able to sample part of the 9-bit space with a palette of 4 or 16. In the case of the Genesis VDP your limit is ~64 colors visible of 512, with the special Shadow/Highlight mode allowing more. This is not as big of a limitation as it sounds like since the low resolution graphics of the time weren't suited for detailed color values: 4 is enough to do a shadow/midtone/highlight, and 16 allows for substantial color ramps with multiple hues.
Pretty common to see things like "Child Jones" or "Son Adams" or "Daughter Johnson" or similar placeholders even in Western family trees. Lots of kids wouldn't get names until they were at least a couple years old.
BuzzFeed battling Elon Musk's attempt to depose one of its reporters