skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Put things that would interest others, and let others find it. If you’re feeling brave, you can link to it in an appropriate context. For example, in this thread sharing my own personal website might be relevant: https://saagarjha.com
Scientists Fact Check Natural Disasters in Movies [video]
> We have a $1.5 trillion annual Total Addressable Market

FWIW, anyone who throws out ridiculous TAMs when trying to sell their idea is an immediate red flag. It's a poor and over-used tactic.
The form itself may not, but it doesn't stand alone. There is the constitution, possibly legislation, legal precedent and gloss, and ultimately, the rulings of a jury, judges, and courts of appeal.

Which is why we have a rule of law and a justice system, and not simply contracts.
When you grow older, do always keep your attraction within your age? Is it only moral for an older 70+ year-old-man to be attracted to an equally aged woman?

Of course not.

Then, where is the line? If not 18, then, 25? 30? I get why it would be creepy from the perspective of the woman wanting to be with an old man, but why exactly is the man himself a creep?

IMO, all adults are attracted to the younger opposite sex. Men have a biological drive to be attracted to women who will give birth to healthy babies, survive the birth, and live long enough lives to ensure that child is supported.

I'm 30 now. I hope people never regard me as a creep for masterbating when I'm 60 to the teen section of PornHub.
You can not defend pedophiles and theire entrapped associates in public. Pressuring them as a mob into services like the church was always the first judicative pillar. Thus moral outrage instincts = request for more justice for a unjust society. The bigger the injustices the larger the mob. It's tardcoded and doesn't go away.
An interesting note that I often like to bring is that one might not catch the entire idea of "There's no free lunch".

Follow with me. People need to eat in order to stay alive; therefore people will often spend a part of their precious time working on acquiring food.

So, there's no such a thing as "people working for free". What is effectively happening is that the costs are being outsourced, either to who's working or to someone else who buys the worker his lunch.
Sorry to be slow replying to this, and to imply that I believed you personally were a xenophobe.

That's not what I thought or meant; I was referring more broadly to the motivations of many of the people who make this a primary focus of their anti-immigration argument, not accusing you personally of this.

To summarise my thoughts on this:

- The topic of immigration is one I've wrestled with and debated for well over a decade, since it became a big issue in Australia, and I've generally been the one railing at open-borders advocates, asking in exasperation "how does this work economically?"

- These days I don't get emotionally invested in positions on immigration, as it's an issue that's too big and complex for any strong opinion I might form to make any difference (and I've literally made myself sick by getting too emotionally invested in things in the past so I now take care to avoid doing that about any political issue).

- That said, my position on open-borders policies is that it sounds like a nice idea but the onus is on advocates to articulate a way in which it can work, economically and practically, and I haven't heard anyone do so convincingly.

- My objection to the focus on disease-spread as a risk of immigration it's just not a convincing argument, due to the fact that it's a concern that applies pretty much equally to tourism and authorised immigration [1], and it exposes the proponent to accusations of xenophobia - justifiably in many cases.

In short: I'm on the side of those who are skeptical about uncontrolled immigration; I just want all the arguments in the discussion to be convincing, and to avoid being derailed by arguments over xenophobia, which is inevitable when people cry "disease!" in the context of immigrants.

[1] I understand those prosecuting the argument above are focused on the risk of immigration that doesn't go through any kind of checkpoints where vetting can take place; but there are versions of open-borders systems that can still require passing through checkpoints and undergoing health checks if necessary.
But while trying to make that argument, his messed up on basic definitions.

"Sexual assault" as is generally understood does not mean that violence was necessarily involved, while Stallman said it was required. He further went on to say that it was "absolutely wrong to use the term “sexual assault” in an accusation", and said that people should use more precise terms. However, "sexual assault" is the precise term, or at the very least the encompassing term for a sexual act with someone unable to give consent.

I don't think it's a misrepresentation to say Stallman doesn't understand what people mean by "sexual assault", as its generally legally defined.

With regards to (1), we also don't if Minksy thought she was a prostitute that Epstein got <wink>, <wink> for him, or why Minsky didn't think he was being set up for blackmail. Commercial sex with a minor is different from consensual non-commercial sex with a minor. Why did 73-year-old Minksy think that a teenager wanted to have sex with him?

We don't know. He can't defend himself. Stallman doesn't either. But he presents only one possible scenario - the one which puts Minksy in the best light.

Minsky also can't be hurt, so, why waste any social capital on this topic?

There are many age-related laws which differ around the world (drinking, driving age, and more). His complaint about the lack of world-wide agreement doesn't just make it "absolutely wrong to use the term “sexual assault” in an accusation", which is what he (wrongly) asserts. It makes it absolutely wrong to use any legal term. Which is absurd.
So taxing the people who need work trucks is the punishment? That will just make the rest of us of pay for it in construction, farming, our own taxes through government purchase of work vehicles for infrastructure purposes, electricity work trucks, cargo trucks.

Everything gets more expensive and has the potential to effect even those who are in poverty who work those jobs as the employer can't afford extra employees due to the extra cost in trucks. Leaving a group of potential workers without employment.

You also negatively affect those who want to start a business (landscaping, catering, delivery). They now have to raise even more money to begin.

Regulations have downsides that may not be immediately apparent. California is already so stupidly expensive because of regulations it doesn't need to force it though. There is nothing stopping the manufacturers to continue being clean?
So, you would agree then that it would be better to have a law that, say, made the transition from "illegal to have sex with" to "perfectly legal" gradual, as long as the rules are clearly spelled out? That is, a law that tries to avoid the situation where a very minor difference in objective reality corresponds to a massive difference in consequences?

If that is what you meant to say, you really didn't explain that well in your original comment, as you explicitly claimed that the law could not take details into account, rather than that it should specifically avoid subjective criteria. After all, it is perfectly possible to take into account the fact that not all people of the same age have the same maturity without resorting to subjective criteria--such as by making the transition from legal to illegal sufficiently smooth in terms of possible punishment that the punishment statistically scales with the probability of the sexual interaction being with an immature person: While that obviously does not perfectly match the consequences to the actual maturity of each individual, it would give a much better correspondence between punishment and the abusiveness of the relationship overall than a hard cut-off, while still being based on objective criteria.

Now, you are right that the law is actually usually more complicated than a single hard cut-off, but it seems that it's often still doing a poor job due to lack of nuance.
Check out "Avorion" if you're into arbitrary spaceship-building in 3D.
This makes no sense. The domain is not free, there’s a reason why these plans are yearly: you’re paying for the yearly domain registration as part of the domain+hosting.

The domain is still yours and you can move it later just like any other domain.

There’s virtually no disadvantage in this deal unless the provider prevents you from changing DNS records.
> Unfortunately, neither of these things are protected in a way that would prevent them from being taken from me, but it's not happened yet.

It’s one of the more resilient platforms out there, at least considered to company-hosted social media sites.
I think were Prokofiev, Dvorak, Wagner, etc around thee days they would probably be writing film soundtracks.

I find William's The Asteroid Field to be the pinnacle of musical storytelling. It hooks into the action (tight and fast through the chase scenes and then soars with the escape) but is also interleaved with each character's motif. The soundtrack version stands alone very well.

On the video game side: Garath Coker's Ori and the Blind Forest is quite cohesive and listenable without knowing anything about the game.

Spotify can take you down some interesting rabbit holes of discovery.
That would involve changing code not touched since before AVX or even SSSE3 existed. Probably not even since before amd64 existed.

But it's hard to switch on use of a single instruction. Checking at the use site consumes a branch predictor slot. Switching in a function pointer interferes with inlining. Self-modifying code would have been the old way. The modern way might be rewriting in the linker or loader, or JIT compiling.

I have discovered that compilers are extremely bad at recognizing hand-coded byte-order swapping and dropping in movbe or bswap instructions. That Gcc and Clang recognized ham-handed pop counting loops seems miraculous now.
The versions that are probably 90+% of their user base are now free instead of a one time payment. That's probably not as big as it sounds because a lot of the people who might purchase the app have already done so.

The (less featureful) browser and desktop apps are subscription, but unless people want the new features they probably won't see huge revenue from those for 3 years when the subscriptions for people who already bought start expiring.

I'm not sure, but the desktop app is probably a wrapper for the web app - as someone who bought the Windows Phone version, their native app was barely MVP level.

Edit: also where is all this about ads coming from?
The yellow dot patterns that you’re thinking of are different from the slanted halftone dots that DataGlyphs use. Two interesting approaches, though DataGlyphs have a much higher density than the yellow tracking dots that most color printers use.
This is exactly my point, records should be apples-to-apples. This particular record should go to Shuttle or similar “aircraft”. In particular Shuttle is hard to distinguish from X-15. Same thing, but more of it.

“Takes off under it’s own power and brings all equipment back” is good limitation - otherwise you can trivially design a system that drops multi-stage booster and lands tiny glider after setting a record.
Yahoo Customer Data Security Breach Litigation Settlement
I don't like having all these companies having their own subscription models.

At the same time, they need some constant revenue stream and a one-time buy isn't going to give them a pump into your bank account.
> Charging money to fix something because of who they are seems unethical to me

Are you aware of how much price discrimination these corporations do to everyone (including yourself) every single day? Most stuff we buy everyday, including the name brand generic stuff, is priced at what we will spend and is completely divorced from any kind of cost to produce. You will be charged more if you live in a wealthy area, you will be charged more just for living in a developed country, you will be charged more for shopping at certain times of day, you will be charged more because advertising manipulated you.

It's unethical, but giving them a taste of their own medicine isn't.
I've upvoted more comments (including this one) among these responses than I have for the entire year previously. I think this goes to part of what creeps me out about WeWork, generally.
Nope, that theory is busted. I found an article that references a Polk County press release:

> The Polk County Sheriff's Office said in a release Monday that the two suspects in the burglary have been identified as, 43-year-old Gary Demercurio and 29-year-old Justin Wynn. Deputies said the suspects were identified through surveillance footage captured at the courthouse. According to the news release, they are the same suspects in the Dallas County Courthouse burglary. Polk County Sheriff's Detectives continue to work closely with Dallas County Sheriff's Office in this case. Deputies said a small electronic devise baring the company logo to Coal Fire was located in the Polk County Historic Courthouse during the investigation. [0]

[0] https://www.kcci.com/article/deputies-believe-same-suspects-...
Hey now, don't get all bitter so quickly. Public radio and television are still some of the last journalism left in this country.
I found that website a bit small on mobile, though Reader Mode fixed it up quite nicely.
This message in the console was interesting:

"Hello! Interested in code? Drop me a message :) info@becooked.com"

Wondering what 'add your instagram post to the recipe' means specifically--is that basically adding the Insta post URL to the recipe data or something else?

The sharing of the becooked link with recipe details and the Insta pic is pretty cool.
I like most things better when they don't taste of butter. But when they should, ghee is the answer.

Organic ghee is even harder to find than ghee.
To my knowledge that's not a crime. However, it is creepy and unprofessional, and the sort of thing that gets you fired (unfortunately not quickly enough)
Honestly, no one is going to care about either your or my comments about Chinese government on this niche forum. Think about it, what would Chinese government gain by arresting you? And why would they start looking at your comment history on hn at all?
It seems that in the last batches of adults we got there has been a growing minority that doesn’t subscribe to the „go home at 5“ mentality.
From personal experience WeWork type locations are an excellent thing for such people whereas anything focused and tied to classical careerism just doesn’t work for them.

I also think this is cool.

People in these places (not necessarily only WeWork) seem to be often interested in finding true purpose through work. It is a nice idea. Work, like sleep, is a large part of our life. Might as well be fulfilling in itself not by side effect.
I'd suggest, if you go that route, just revoking their drilling licence. I find it highly unlikely as current governments, with few exceptions, seem hell bent on extracting even more, even if that means using grotesqly environmental destructive practices such as fracking.
Bought the app, well worth it! Currently using two phones and my progress syncing perfectly ... like one should expect!
I have never heard of Euterpea, nor have I seen the rest of your code, but I suggest you refactor your slightly convoluted code like this:

notePlayer notes octs dur = musicSeq $ notes <*> octs <*> pure dur

Coincidentally, this might be a testament of the power of parametric polymorphism and equational reasoning.
I'm currently in Hong Kong (planning to leave in December). Honestly if you want to come as a tourist I can't see you'll face any problems. Just be sensible and you'll be safe.

Unless you don't want to fund the economy of Hong Kong through tourism because you disagree with politics of its government and China. In which case, fair enough, really. I'm avoiding pro-China companies as much as possible myself. Although obviously the necessities of living do get a little in the way of that.
As someone making hiring decisions, I very much do visit the github accounts of my applicants. I consider the quality of their code and look favorably on them for making code available. I look even more favorably on those who bother to make licensing decisions for their code. Do you get an extra $5k for pushing 1k lines of GNU-licensed code? No. Did you get a callback on your job application? You bet. Do I take pride in the OSS work of my people? Yes. Does that factor into their performance review? Yes. Does that factor into their annual raise and prospects for promotion? Yes.

I have also hired people who don't have GitHub accounts. In those cases, they have some other proof of work. Papers, thesis, references (which are a drag, because then I have to also figure out how to vet the reference) and, particularly valuable, referrals from people I already know personally. This last one goes both ways: not only do I have high confidence in the good intentions of the person making the referral, I can then retrospectively assess this contact's ability to assess.
The chinese government showed restraint and maturity in acts (if not in grandstanding) and the HK gov is slowly shifting to serving its people rather than ask them to serve it.

The protesters are now a minority and extreme to the point any win ends up "not enough", I for one am seeing it as a milestone for China's shift toward democracy.

Visit or don't, but HK has a unique history, from its troubled beginning as a british colony to its difficult chinese integration. We prefer to slowly build it compromise by compromise rather than shun any sign of progress in the name of absolutism.
It's NOT free. It now gives you annoying popups to upgrade to subscription paid version. Very shady marketing to call it free.
> What I don't understand, is this idea that firing people in response to media shit-storms is somehow something to be applauded.

1. RMS wasn't just some random guy in the foundation, he was supposed to be a leader which means he should be held to a higher standard. Firing someone who doesn't meet that standard means your organisation has integrity which is important and should be applauded.

2. The downsides for keeping him around, especially since RMS didn't seem to be all that apologetic, are also important. The goals of the FSF are not advanced by being pushed into this media storm.

If FSF didn't do something, they would have been forced to answer alot of questions in the media about how they actually feel about age of consent laws, whether they took any money from Epstein and/or Minsky, how they felt about Epstein and/or Minsky, etc., and would then have had to give a number of awkward statements about this mess. Then they would have also had to answer many of those same questions from their donors. And likely if the controversy gained traction, their largest donors may have then been forced to answer their own set of awkward questions from the media about this whole mess. Especially if those donors also had ties to MIT. At some point, many of them would have also reconsidered whether they wanted to donate money to FSF, which would also be bad for the organisation.

All of which is to say that it's not about free speech, it's about protecting the organisation.
Glad Apple's Podcasts product has grown more compelling, with native apps for desktop coming soon. Pocket Casts has been great but few softwares are worthy of a monthly recurring charge. It's a shame as I've already paid for mobile and web apps and would happily have paid for updates. I just don't want to lose access to software if I needed to cut costs on a sudden basis.
> I think it's important to note that when you buy shares on the secondary market the company doesn't get any capital.

Companies are artificial abstractions. The people who invested in the company before you get money. If you consistently engage in a policy of engagement to deal with bad corporate citizens, you increase the positive financial rewards for earlier investors to use their governance influence to direct firms to bad corporate citizenship. Conversely, divestment does the opposite.

The magnitude of the effect of any one investor doing that is small, but that's the situation with all economic boycotts.
I am in the same boat and am going to give plex a try. They do have silence removal in the iOS app at least, but plex lacks a lot of podcasts features otherwise. I hope they keep improving on this.
AI helped Facebook identify and ban 200 white supremacist groups
> there is quite a bit of documentation and process involved in terminating anyone

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

No. They say, "Ralph, pack your stuff. You're gone." Hell, I've been laid off via a Jabber message.
My go-to graphics packages are still Gimp for raster / Inkscape for vector graphics.

Started using Inkscape in 2007 to illustrate a math paper, and been using it ever since whenever I needed to TeX something up.
I use it pretty often too. And bought iOS, Android and Web version due to it’s previous marketing words, no subscription, no blah blah, one-time payment. Now it just discards those promise. But it’s understandable. Syncing feature causes server cost.
If that's what a "newbie" discovers on a rough first sweep, just dismissing it as the ignorance of ill intent of an "outsider", and wanting to move on, is pretty damning.
Also to pay for retirement, roads and safety. Dictatorships have many shapes, they're not all corrupt to the core so much they tax-enslave their people.

Singapore and HK, for example, have very low taxes.
I really don't know how to feel about Pocket Casts. In the past I loved it, but recently it seems to have been getting worse (starting with the redesign), and now I'm suddenly not getting the full experience without a subscription?
At least in academia the tradition is still going strong.
Correct, we need to largely regulate these companies out of existence.
If you pay a monthly premium rent, the coffee ain't free. I've been at a WeWork and a smaller coworking space in Seattle and couldn't really tell which one had a multi billion dollar evaluation.
Whoops, you caught me skimming a wikipedia article :)
> And therefore, it's perfectly acceptable to say "I know how monads work with Maybe and List, but not Reader" Because fundamentally, how a Reader implements bind is in no way related to how Maybe or List implement bind.

If this is indeed true, what is the point of learning these "patterns"? From a mechanical understanding of the signature of bind and unit, you'd arrive at more sophisticated signatures, say filterM, but an understanding of what it does will still need an understanding of the specific implementation of the Monad instance it is being applied on. That sounds like a leaky abstraction. If so, why bother?
Web App Deploy to Glitch.com
The existing users already paid for it.
>Who would buy a $10B brand?

Phillip Morris (a cigarette company) paid over $13BN for Kraft Foods, the vast majority of which was simply for the "Kraft" brand. And this was a long time ago.

Brands have enormous value.
Just make a fun website that is only accessible through the system.

Businesses can own a cryptographic asset (their domain name) that can accrue value based on services provided.

Potentially people may try to use their domains as collateral or experiment in collective ownership of public services through multisig or DAO like constructions.

Hopefully it helps push forward innovation on the chain of trust, opening it up to be something more configurable and dynamic.
My favorite part about Haskell is how you can know literally nothing about the domain and make meaningful changes to programs regardless thanks to local reasoning.

That's really one power of functor/applicative/monad - if you understand their interfaces, you can work with new unfamiliar types that have these instances without much effort at all.