skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The other sad thing about charities is they take so much money in overhead. Plus the wealthy use it as a vehicle for tax avoidance - would you rather pay $500k in taxes or have your brother in law make a Save the Children charity and give it to him? Then the tax is written off and your brother in law gets a salary, plus his charity can spend the rest on socialite parties I mean fundraisers.
As counterpoint: I've donated to the Great Slate [1], a panel of Democrat long-shots in historically underserved areas. (I'd heard of them in large part thanks to Maciej/idlewords [2])

I've gotten emails, sure, but they respect unsubscribe. From that experience, I'm comfortable donating again through ActBlue [3], the donation platform they used.

[1] https://techsolidarity.org/resources/great_slate.html

[2] related: https://idlewords.com/2019/05/what_i_learned_trying_to_secur...

[3] https://secure.actblue.com/
Your "toy project" doesn't have 10+ team members, ranging in experience.
Can someone expain please? Wouldn't the devs just have a local copy? Or I guess their prod builds all crashed trying to install the dependency?
The Exxon thing is an off-the-cuff joke, not a serious statement of malfeasance.
> I haven't seen any indications that any of them intend to follow suit with the software.

Indications:

- Some advertising of the UI and the augmented reality displays: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPjvgXWA78E

- Platform plans: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2019/09/volkswagen-audi-porsche...

- Associations: https://www.automotivelinux.org/announcements/2019/04/08/vol...
US dealer networks are hostile in particular to EVs because they undercut one of their two primary revenue pillars: maintenance.

The other pillar is used car sales. I'll never understand why car makers built a sales network fundamentally incented to NOT sell their product.
Obviously, you are right. I also think it’s a matter of what scope you are looking at. Looking at the larger system, to me Snowden reported traitors. Yes he is a traitor to the NSA, but the oaths aren’t to the NSA, but the American people. Similarly, as a police officer you should not be loyal to other police officers, but to the American people at large.
This is pretty cool! It’s great to see that lots of tools are trying to make the command line less intimidating, and adopting more friendly methods than the man pages.

About the cheatsheets itself, it might be great to share the cheatsheets with a project sharing somewhat similar goals, tldr.sh[0] (which focuses less on interactivity but more on completeness and practicality).

I’m more than excited to see the shell being more approachable. I have introduced the shell to quite a lot of my non-programmer friends with package managers and bulk renaming, but they don’t use the shell enough to memorize all of the commands. These efforts lower the barrier to use the shell... hence making the demonstration of the command line’s powers more easy.

[0] https://tldr.sh
Trust Grandmas Not Doctors
What content blocker would you recommend?
But Micro-ORMs are ORMs. And you're right, they do remove a lot of boilerplate.
This matches my experience.

I like to give to charities, but I've built up a couple of rules:

- I won't give you a credit card number, because I've seen too many dark patterns about canceling recurring donations. It stinks for online giving because Paypal is awful, but it's basically the only way I can guarantee that I won't need to make phone calls if my giving habits change.

- You always get a unique email address that I can cancel or sort, no matter who you are. Fastmail thankfully makes this very easy.

- Unless I really trust you not to mail me, I won't give you my real address.

Patreon, for all of its problems, has the right idea here. Donors control their subscriptions, and their addresses/emails aren't shared by default. I'd love a similar service for more conventional giving.
Just learn both? Use ORM for writes, SQL for reads, if you need to. ORMs do not obviate the need to learn SQL.
I would say most apps don't benefit from multiple cores. So single threaded performance is still important.
Dunno about anyone else in Seattle, but I've never used my democracy vouchers.
https://design.lyft.com/hello-from-lyft-design-ea8a0b958628

"sharing our learnings"

must be a xoogler in there somewhere
It is a crapshoot. I’m fortunate in that my mother is a prolific reader. I am too, but she makes me look illiterate. She consumes a ridiculous number of books a year. Lots of it is crap. Some isn’t, and she’s always recommended those ones to me, keeping in mind my own interests.

Over the years I’ve met a few others who I trust to recommend books. But most people, even professional reviewers, just don’t work for me.

That said, I’ve only read a handful of books that I’ve finished and thought, “I wish I hadn’t read that.” I can usually get something out of it, whether it’s a classic, pulp, overrated, whatever. It took me many attempts to make it through Dune by Frank Herbert. Part of it I attribute to being a child for my first attempts, but part of it is the style. It’s dry, slow, and political. It’s now one my short list of favorite books. On the other hand, William Gibson’s Neuromancer has gotten about as many attempts from me, but that one I’ve never finished.

Interestingly (to me anyway), I generally find the books recommended by random HN posters worthy reads, both fiction and non-fiction.
There is a middle ground.

Everyone should know sql, but choose an ORM (micro-ORM) that doesn't have any abstractions, and gets data in and out. There are many solutions that offer you this without needing to write any SQL.

https://github.com/CollaboratingPlatypus/PetaPoco

https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack.OrmLite

Micro ORMs is where it's at. You're asking for trouble if you choose something that does WAY more than it should, like Entity Framework.
OK, I was thinking the shovel gets you closer to the dirt and you can ‘manually’ choose where to specifically dig, or not dig.

Whereas, the mini-ex is a complex hydraulic machine requiring regular maintenance and an operator that knows how to use the controls, and a fuel source. Lots of dependencies.

There was a youtube video of a group of men using shovels cooperatively to ‘throw’ cement:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Xz31W2Uci0c
We definitely do not represent the vast majority of users.

Many have no idea these risks even exist, or mostly wrong notions about them.

Pretty sure my parents and grand parents don't even want to know their (probably randomly picked) ad blocker could pick up their credit card number every time they type it in their browser.

How could we hold it against them? Computers to them merely are (sometimes cumbersome and annoying) tools.
> How does it benefit society

In general I don't give a rat's ass about the greater good. I'm far more concerned with what's earned and what's right, since I don't have a crystal ball and I'm not a Culture Mind. But for the sake of civil argument and all that, let's talk about the greater good...

> (now) that Amazon was first to sell stuff online at scale?

You mean letting people reap the rewards of being first, if they can get them, doesn't motivate them to innovate further? Doesn't motivate others to innovate? Doesn't indicate a stable market and encourage investment?

> So you think that 25-year-old companies can't be monopolies?

That's not my point at all! I'm also hard pressed to imagine how you thought it was, but I'll try to be more clear. As I understood it, you were saying that essentially the only reason Amazon is as powerful as it is now is because it acted monopolistically. But to act in such a way, you already have to be in a position of wealth and power, to throw your weight around like that. So my question is, how did Amazon get that powerful originally, so that it could become monopolistic (assuming that it is, now)? My answer is, because it was really good at what it did.

> Let's I produce and market a product, i.e. the Iron Gym pull up bar that goes in your door frame. I start selling it on Amazon. Amazon then leverages their platform to identify successful products, identifies my Iron Gym pull up bars are successful, creates an Amazon Basics pull up bar that's identical, and uses their platform to boost their pull up bar over mine. So I take all the initiative, do all the work, and take all the risk, and once I show that I have merit, Amazon swoops in and takes all the rewards.

Now I'm confused. First, you talk about the greater good and dismiss my comments by saying that's what really matters. Now, all of the sudden, when it comes to companies that aren't Amazon, it's about merit and what you've earned again? How does it serve the good of society (now) for Iron Gym to reap the benefits of being first, to paraphrase a man I met once?

And then, you talk about how they should get the benefits of being first to market--- why should they, but not Amazon? Because Amazon is too successful now?

> How is that not maintaining dominance in spite of merit?

Because the only reason someone would choose Amazon's product instead of theirs is because it's better. Either A) it's cheaper, B) it gets faster shipping, C) it's easier to find, or D) some combination of the three. It's better.

> And what a limitation that is, being limited to the largest online sales platform in the world!

Ha ha. But seriously, my point is that they aren't using the government to crush competitors, or anything of the sort. They are influencing their own product, which they maintain and own.
Well sort of. In my view, duplicate SQL chunks that have defined business logic should either be a new table/view or extremely well-documented with really rigid communication policies for changes.

For example, a company with many data analysts/scientists who may each be writing their own queries. As a basic example, the definition of some “very important” company metric changes, then there would need to be a large number of disperse queries to change.

But an ORM isn’t the answer for the above situation either.
> It turns out that SQL is actually much simpler than ORM's.

Are they simpler when it comes to matching the data to the application's data structures? One advantage of ORMs is that they encourage this setup from the start.
Why do we need to not use oil for chemical production? They aren't necessarily producing CO2 being adapted to other forms.
> and handle mapping data explicitly.

Here's your problem
EUV is definitely solidly in the realm of magic for me. A spray of tin blasted with 2MW of lasers into a plasma to generate the “light” which is then bounced off of mirrors which barely qualify as mirrors to produce a focused beam to burn in features only a handful of atoms wide... 100,000kg of equipment. $100M per unit.

It’s mind boggling.
I think conservation and stewardship is only very loosely coupled with economic system. No form of economics that I know has been inherently better for conservation. In all economic systems taking shortcuts is the easy way.
A lot of them just need to be on the taskbar/notification area and not in a browser tab, honestly.
Is the outcry against ICE happening due to its operating methods or is it contesting the legitimacy of ICE altogether?
> A sensible approach blends use of an ORM with handwritten SQL where needed. In fact most ORMs will allow you to do things like build collections of objects from custom SQL anyway, so there's really no need to shy away from it.

This is really where it's at. Seriously people. Nobody should be writing raw SQL.

Give me just enough of an ORM/abstraction to give me type-safety, leave the rest at the door.
> you effectively get spend to $1.37 for every $1 you remove from your taxable income

But it's still an expenditure, and a bad one at that. Imagine you can spend $1 in the stock market or burn $1.37. Which one would you do? The very point of the article was that if political expenditures actually provided a substantial return we should see orders of magnitude more political expenditures.

Estate tax avoidance is also a little misleading because you're only avoiding the estate tax, not income tax. Any money you move into a tax-exempt foundation would have already been taxed as income. So whether you shift it into your foundation or simply spend it all immediately by donating it to existing tax-exempt entities, what's the difference?

In no situation does donating money either save you money or come out equal to not donating. Donating always costs you money, period. Your original point was that "donations are effectively free", which is categorically wrong.
The same for alumni donations for my former university. Donate even a small amount once and they'll ramp up future requests by an order of magnitude (a Global 50 university, Top 10 by some rankings, not short of cash).
I wonder if there is a service that could handle the donation and subsequent trashing of incoming correspondence for you. Although, I also wonder about giving money to annoying people.
> Giving everybody a home is not enough.

This is actually surprisingly untrue. That approach both works and is substantially cheaper than the status quo.

https://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chroni...
I think that the way to say it without starting a war is to preface it with something like:

> Well, redundancy and dependency both have downsides, but in this case...
Do you want to learn how to trade?
The successful Spanish trader Fernando Martínez Gómez Tejedor, through his YouTube channel:
https://youtube.com/channel/UCP4Q8PTVsUGUTlJlScPYz1Q will teach you how to trade in real time with real accounts, in any market of your choice. He will be operating in real time to teach his new movements, give exact signals and for free. It will also be allocating $ 1000 to the first 500 subscribers who subscribe to your channel.
This might be more convincing if the link was relevant to your claim, maybe some studies of places that increased housing availability and saw decreased homelessness or something. Instead it seems mostly about transit.
Take a look at these issues: https://github.com/aspnet/EntityFrameworkCore/issues

How many of these are a result of of features that have nothing to do with getting data in and out of the database.

Get bare metal. Anything caked on adds friction.

That doesn't mean "write raw SQL". That means I want just enough of an ORM to give me type-safety for my queries and updates. Leave the rest at the door.
> Once I tried a tool like this, but just realized, there is already a method of that: the ~/bin folder.

One thing I'd add to this is that "crib notes" can be captured in man[0] pages. For example, having them in $HOME/man and ensuring MANPATH[1] includes it serves as a nice complement IMHO. There seems to be a markdown-based tool[2] which can assist in authoring them too.

EDIT: It looks like pandoc[3] can generate man pages from markdown as well.

0 - https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/howto-create-a-manpage-fr...

1 - https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=man&apropos=0&sekt...

2 - https://spin.atomicobject.com/2015/05/06/man-pages-in-markdo...

3 - https://pandoc.org/MANUAL.html
"otherwise none of the banks we know would exist today"

isn't that a good thing? otherwise they will never learn.
Support to multiple textures added
Predicting the climatic future is riddled with uncertainty
> But uBlock Origin keeps me safe online.

The problem is that all of the spyware says exactly the same thing. If the API exists, ordinary users are going to be asked to make huge security decisions with no effective way to tell whether the vendor (or the new owner who just bought it) is being honest.
Rapid accelerations of Antarctic Peninsula outlet glaciers driven by surfac melt
> Why can't I lend banks money overnight for 9% or 8 or 7 or 6

There are two kinds of money: central bank money and private money. Central bank money consists of accounts at the Federal Reserve and hard cash. (Your checking account contains private money.)

The repo market concerns itself with borrowing and lending central bank money (a/k/a "reserves"). Given the only way you could do this is with hard cash, and given borrowing and lending hard cash is quite expensive to manage, particularly overnight, you aren't in a competitive position to participate in this market.
government can borrow at negative rates. i doubt that yooropean joe blow can do that.
Ayup :) Rails ain't dead, it's just mature.
> But Micro-ORMs are ORMs.

Not in the traditional sense.

> And yes, they do remove a lot of boilerplate.

Here is all the "boiler plate" you'd need to use something like OrmLite with C#.

https://pastebin.com/XUhQVPUk

Type safety. No boiler plate. No abstractions. Errors are a result of the underlying data storage.

This is where it's at. The sweet spot.
I learned about the prevalence of Pareto distributions in computer systems from Harchol-Balter's Performance Modeling and Design of Computer Systems[0] (which, I will admit, I properly understood perhaps 25% of).

She reported the Pareto distribution of process times from first data collected in 1997[1].

[0] https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~harchol/PerformanceModeling/book.htm...

[1] https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~harchol/Papers/TOCS.pdf
What ORM do people use that influences the structure of their database? The ORM I'm currently using the most can do whatever I need with my Postgres DB.

Also, the ORM allows me to specify models that are not only used for structuring the database, but also for validation of incoming JSON requests and easily serialize queries back to JSON.
When I worked for a big company in 2005-2009 I did, in fact, use a markov gibberish generator to fill in my yearly self-assessment.
That's absolutely not true.

With any of the ORMs I've used, as soon as you do something even slightly unorthodox like using a view, you're on your own.
FYI DDT and DEET are completely different chemicals, one is an insecticide, the other is a repellent. Some people in this thread seem to confuse them. I don't think they would spray DEET at scale.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEET
To be fair, there is plenty of historically based anime and manga in which the Nazis, or vague stand-ins for the Nazis, are villains.

Still, Japan was an Axis power, and every vile thing the Nazis did, they did to foreigners half a world away, so Japanese media winds up being a lot more comfortable around Nazism as a motif than Westerners would be[0] because there's just not the same stigma around portraying it.

[0]https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/the-troubling-relationship-bet...
Painting with Math Formulas in Google Sheets [video]
If you're in debt and not making money, at least you can have the decency to appear frazzled and overwhelmed...
Regenerative breaking also means less heat in the breaks I guess, so less need for cooling. Not sure how much that matters tho.
Former Donkey Kong champ threatens to sue Guinness over record removal
> Let me just completely dismiss your "evolution is a good optimizer" - it's a decent optimizer,

Perhaps I put it badly. I wasn't saying natural selection is perfect - just that it is better than us. Obviously it isn't perfect because evolution makes mistakes - our blood vessels being in front our rod and cones is an example.

So why don't we just fix that?

It because it's utterly beyond us. It's inevitably controlled by 1000's if not millions of genes acting in concert, tuning when they switching on and off according to the body they find themselves in (small or large) over our lifetimes. It's an extraordinarily complex mechanism.

We have made very simple adjustments to that mechanism. They are invariably involve just one gene that has one clear effect. But playing with something as complex as how the eye is laid out is completely and utterly beyond us and our computers. Yet natural selection pulled it off.

It really is just a question of computational power available. Natural selection is currently doing some phenomenal number (as in many zero beyond trillions) of experiments on eyeball construction every year. We can't hope to match that, and until we can natural selection will always out compete us in the "lets design a super organism" game.

So, when we do beat natural selection, it's in environments we create so the design natural selection chose is no longer optimal. Nonetheless it's only a temporary advantage, as our losing the battle against antibiotic resistant bacteria demonstrates. The same thing will happen with round up ready and Cowpea - we didn't just get round up ready crops, we also set in motion the mechanism that will create round up ready weeds. We had an advantage when we created round up ready crops - we cheated by taking an existing example from nature. Natural selection doesn't have that advantage, but over the long term it won't matter - it will just invent it again. Unlike us, it can do that. It really can create new super organisms. Right now we can't do better than copying what natural selection has done in other organisms.
It's relative, if the duplication is that large maybe you do need to abstract.

It also sounds like you would be well served using a service abstraction at that point to remove the data layer from client scope entirely.

The "model changes, now we have to change it every where" isn't going to be solved by abstraction, it's only limited by the amount you're willing to limit access to the underlying model, if you need that information, you need to share the model.

The best solution to this I've seen in practice is domain modelling, colocating shared code near other users. When things get too distant you start using anti corruption layers which allows more flexible model changing.

But at the end of the day this is essential complexity, orm, or any other solution is never going to be able to hide the fact that you need information elsewhere in the system to be useful.
I used SQLAlchemy and would not reach for it again, but you can prise DBIx::Class from my cold dead fingers, so I think _which_ ORM is an important consideration too.
Yes, like I said it does not excuse it, and for some laws especially those with severe punishment, it's a serious concern.

However in the case of certain types of policies it's not about intentional selectivity, it's about selectivity due to infeasibility, a type of selectivity that is not completely effective against any individual. For instance this one i'm pointing out: it's not possible to hold every single food source hostage in any country... but seriously, we are talking about food... in China... i'm running out of ellipses...
The charging rate is related to how many cells the battery pack consists of. Each cell can take a certain charging current, so more cells = higher total current.

If they implement the longer range by adding more cells (which I assume they do), then that's your technical reason.

Of course, could also just be a way to get more money...