skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Again?

BTW, I'd like to see how much they've spent retrofitting their website to handle the load of the customers trying to find out the details of the outage as it relates to their neighbourhood, and how soon after the start of the cutoffs that their website will go down again.

Prior discussion:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21212135
Look at the problems that Eskom has. I'm no expert in the field, but I don't think this would alleviate the problem much. It sounds like PG&E needs investment to dig cables underground and probably should've done so a while ago.
I mean in previous instances they held the patient until any previously ingested alcohol must have been processed, waited for their BAC to show a clear descent, then gave the patient sugar and watched the BAC go up at subsequent timepoints.

I don’t think even the most isolated docs would be naive enough to trust an incoming intoxicated patient about their own substance use.
This was fascinating for me. I had an experience early in my career where I was given some code written by a Spanish engineer to port, and the Spanish comments and variable names kept interfering with my ability to see the code structure. I ended up converting all the variables to simple letter/number sequences and removing all the comments in order to get past that.

Years later I read papers by linguists which described concepts in one language that were no expressible in another language. That too seemed pretty amazing to me since something like snow is snow right? But English typically has adjectives doing the heavy lifting to distinguish different kinds, but the Inuit people had even more words[1].

The idea that it might be possible to express computation differently in different languages, or perhaps even more effectively, seems really intriguing.

[1] "Yet Igor Krupnik, an anthropologist at the Smithsonian Arctic Studies Center in Washington, believes that Boas was careful to include only words representing meaningful distinctions. Taking the same care with their own work, Krupnik and others charted the vocabulary of about 10 Inuit and Yupik dialects and concluded that they indeed have many more words for snow than English does." -- https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/there...
Well engineered and coded decisions made in the age of single user desktops are still well engineered. Hard for someone in 1995 to predict the need for a file format that supports real time coauthoring with automatic saving and complete revision control of every edit.

Esp. when the target machine the code had to run on was a 486 with a slow hard drive and a tiny bit of memory.

Of course Office updated their file format, but they probably did it a little bit too soon. I always wondered what would've happened if they had waited a few more years, released in 2007, so probably design started a few years prior. Talk about just being a smidgen too early for a world of unlimited(-ish) data and always on internet connections.

Oops.
> My desktop isn't a tablet - stop trying to make it one!

Game over. Do you want to play another game?

(...you know - material ui is the new shit. I wonder what are they smoking, i would _love_ to try it too)
Honestly, running an E-Mail is so tedious that I just allow Migadu to manage it for me. You have to deal with configuration (as the original poster said) and run into issues with systems just blocking you outright (especially Outlook). There are some utilities or Docker images that make it easier, but in the end its not worth the hassle. I still think domain-based email is way better than allowing G-Mail or Outlook to host your email though.
I'm sure you don't want to be mistaken for one of those annoying people who tries to weaponize the Socratic approach and feigns ignorance of all context.
http://wondermark.com/1k62/
You can use the patcher on Github to patch a font of your choice, although underlining currently only works well with some fonts.

I also have some good fonts pre-patched on the download site at https://thume.ca/numderline
It’s the same with the environment: future problems were calculated decades ago. But doing anything woulda been “big gubmint” interference, and the godheads either figured they’ll be dead anyway, or a true believer would be Heaven, don’t let gubmint get in the way of what they’re saying is the lords duty!! Murcia!

The biology is clear: emotional identity is locked into the limbic system early on. Nation states know that too thanks to all the money they’ve spent on propaganda research.

That’s my concern with the kids & Internet, Facebook. One can get “soothed” into poor association between feeling and truth: “when I feel like this, my brain feeds me a bad fact.” like brown people are to blame for my status as a temporarily embarrassed millionaire.

If anyone is wondering why US society has stood still that’s why: in post WW2 we kept telling each other bullshit spoon fed to us via TV which we are seeing now was curated by industry via omission.
The global stage _is_ a free market. Actors making their own rules is what a free market looks like. Complaining about fairness while demanding a free market is a contradiction.

You want US global allies to enforce an artificial market, which I'm not really against at all. Its just very silly to call that a free market action if China's actions aren't.
That's equity compensation, in my view. It's not like it's different at the FAANGs. If you go to work at Apple, and you work super hard, and the company declines in stock value from $5jillion to $3jillion, nobody is like, "Whaaaat? Why didn't my equity go up in price? I worked really hard, and also $3jillion is still a ton of money!"

Equity compensation is about owning part of the COMPANY. If the company has destroyed value -- if it is now worth less than its bank account, with no company attached, was worth before any revenue -- then your equity is valueless.

Asking for the reward of equity with no risk is weird.
Yeah. My "to the extent..." preamble represents my feeling on polygraphs and lie detectors in general.

The entire situation of being strapped into a machine and asked invasive questions is going to be nervous-making. And depending on which questions are asked, and how they're asked, the examiner can easily contaminate the exam and extract a false positive.
But math is also very difficult to understand. The information density on all of the symbols is too high and it's easy to misunderstand (or not understand) as a result. I've met very few people who were comfortable with reading math, even fairly simple things that they otherwise understand.
> The 25 minute value is only the time to verify a single Coq proof.

Logically it is a singe proof, but technically it consists of quite a few theorems and lemmas, so this is not a valid comparison. Also proofs in Coq are typically structured and pretty high-level because of all the automation, while metamath proofs look like core dumps :)

${
$d A a b v w x y $. $d B a b v w x y $. $d F a b v w x y $.
$( The ` 2nd ` (second member of an ordered pair) function restricted to a
one-to-one function ` F ` is a one-to-one function of ` F ` onto the
range of ` F ` . (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens,
4-Feb-2018.) $)
f1o2ndf1 $p |- ( F : A -1-1-> B -> ( 2nd |` F ) : F -1-1-onto-> ran F ) $=
( vx vy va vv vb vw c2nd syl cv cfv wceq wi wcel wa wrex ex com23 wf1 crn
cres wfo ccnv wfun wf1o f1f fo2ndf weq wral f2ndf cxp wss fssxp cop ssel2
elxp2 sylib anim12dan fvres adantr ad2antlr eqeq12d op2nd eqeq12i funopfv
wf vex f1fun anim12d eqcom biimpi eqeqan12d simpl anim12i f1veqaeq sylan2
opeq12 syl6 com14 syl6bi pm2.43i syld impcom syl5bi sylbid adantl adantlr
com13 com12 wb eleq1 bi2anan9 anbi2d fveq2 simpllr imbi12d imbi2d 3imtr4d
simpr rexlimdvva rexlimivv imp mpcom ralrimivv dff13 df-f1 simprbi dff1o3
sylanbrc ) ABCUAZCCUBZJCUCZUDZXNUEUFZCXMXNUGXLABCVHZXOABCUHZABCUIKXLCBXNU
AZXPXLCBXNVHZDLZXNMZELZXNMZNZDEUJZOZECUKDCUKXSXLXQXTXRABCULKXLYGDECCCABUM
ZUNZXLYACPZYCCPZQZYGOXLXQYIXRABCUOKYIYLXLYGYIYLXLYGOZYAFLZGLZUPZNZGBRFARZ
YCHLZILZUPZNZIBRHARZQYIYLQZYMYIYJYRYKUUCYIYJQYAYHPYRCYHYAUQFGYAABURUSYIYK
QYCYHPUUCCYHYCUQHIYCABURUSUTYRUUCUUDYMOZYQUUCUUEOZFGABYNAPZYOBPZQZYQUUFUU
IYQQZUUBUUEHIABUUJYSAPZYTBPZQZQZUUBUUEUUNUUBQZYIYPCPZUUACPZQZQZXLYPXNMZUU
AXNMZNZYPUUANZOZOZUUDYMUUNUUSUVEOZUUBUUIUUMUVFYQUUSUUIUUMQZUVEUURUVGUVEOY
IUURUVGUVEUURUVGQZUVBXLUVCUVHUVBYPJMZUUAJMZNZXLUVCOZUVHUUTUVIUVAUVJUURUUT
UVINZUVGUUPUVMUUQYPCJVAVBVBUUQUVAUVJNUUPUVGUUACJVAVCVDUVKGIUJZUVHUVLUVIYO
UVJYTYNYOFVIGVIVEYSYTHVIIVIVEVFUVHXLUVNUVCUVGUURXLUVNUVCOZOXLUURUVGUVOXLU
URYNCMZYONZYSCMZYTNZQZUVGUVOOXLCUFZUURUVTOABCVJUWAUUPUVQUUQUVSYNYOCVGYSYT
CVGVKKXLUVGUVTUVOUVNUVGUVTXLUVCUVNUVGUVTUVLOOUVTUVNUVGUVNUVLUVTUVNUVPUVRN
ZUVGUVNUVLOOUVQUVSYOUVPYTUVRUVQYOUVPNUVPYOVLVMUVSYTUVRNUVRYTVLVMVNXLUVGUV
NUWBUVCXLUVGUVNUWBUVCOOXLUVGQZUWBUVNUVCUWCUWBFHUJZUVOUVGXLUUGUUKQUWBUWDOU
UIUUGUUMUUKUUGUUHVOUUKUULVOVPABYNYSCVQVRUWDUVNUVCYNYOYSYTVSSVTTSWAWBWAWCW
ATWDWJWETWFWGTSWHWKWIVBUUOYLUURYIUUNYJUUPUUBYKUUQYQYJUUPWLUUIUUMYAYPCWMVC
YCUUACWMWNWOUUOYGUVDXLUUOYEUVBYFUVCUUNUUBYBUUTYDUVAYQYBUUTNUUIUUMYAYPXNWP
VCYCUUAXNWPVNUUOYAYPYCUUAUUIYQUUMUUBWQUUNUUBXAVDWRWSWTSXBSXCXDXESTXEXFDEC
BXNXGXKXSXTXPCBXNXHXIKCXMXNXJXK $.
$}

...
I really dislike menu bars. Seas of text with tiny hit targets strike me as not usable at all, and studies have shown this.
Do you really think they're feeding people MFD? :D

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium-density_fibreboard
I think it's a mix of both? I "loved" XP once two things happened: I got a computer with more than 256mb of ram, and I installed SP2. After that it ran really well and yes, so much better than Windows 98 did.
It's strange to me how anyone can have such arrogance about a complex system -- especially a social system -- that they "lacerate" those who question them.
Whoever thought a no name tech company founded by the guy from the Black Eyed Peas was a good investment kind of had this coming.
> Yet it has taken an awful long time for economists to admit that their profession has been far too sure of itself

I think that's something where diversity in the field could have helped.
That changes just about everything I thought I knew about space-time.

The message is perfectly fine-- But definitely weird even for a guy who can often be described as "weird".
A Cypherpunk Privacy Reading List
Yes, there's no mathematical significance, but finding such a thing so early is emotionally intriguing to some humans, myself included.
Anyone trying to extract tangible amounts of iron from hemoglobine is an utter imbecile. It cannot be done now with modern technology and fossil fuels (after all, we do not see abattoirs selling their blood by-products to the steel industry), much less under the restrictions of a pre-industrial society.

Contrary to the GP opinion, ancient people were not dumber than dirt. Any ruler stupid enough to try anything like that on the scale suggested would not remain a ruler for long. People would revolt, oportunistic leutenants would organize a coup, neighbouring rules would seize the chance and invade.

But more importantly, the ruler thenselve would refrain from pursuing this atrocity. The fact that he was a ruler would imply a modicum of competence. Even if he was amoral enough to try, he would stop trying after the first thousand murders turned barely enough iron to cast a hatchet. After all, the tributes that village would have produced during the first year alone would be overwhelmly more valuable.
I’m not sure... HN is supposed to be real time discussions of articles. summarizing the article not only is not discussion (read it is regurgitation / bastardization) but any argument / discussion had based on the summary will be inaccurate as they are going off of the words of another, who more than likely integrated logical fallacies that did not exist before the comment.
Exactly. I once asked a founder if his books were open to viewing by employees and whether I could see the cap table. He looked at me like I had a horn growing out of my forehead, and later I learned he privately complained to the recruiter about how unreasonable and unacceptable requests like that were. There’s this big “youre the tech help and you don’t need to care about banky things like liquidation preference and future dilution” attitude still. Much safer to just go with an established company whose shares can be sold as soon as you get them.

Also:

> How is a legitimate startup supposed to recruit the best people under these conditions?

I’d argue most startups don’t need “the best people”. They need a few hard workers who can wear multiple hats and have a promising skills trajectory. The “social network for dogs” doesn’t need to hire Ken Thompson.
Cellulose
Won't be surprised to see sales of batteries (PowerWall, etc) and solar to tick up due to this.
Ha! They are blocking users outside of the USA:

Block ID: GEO02
Block reason: Access from your Country was disabled by the administrator.
Now that's one complex password, I'd imagine.
The comment on "founders getting offended when asked about the preferred overhang" is a point I think that is getting missed. Yes, there is the whole "caveat emptor" of being an equity employee, but there is clearly a culture of hiding all of the necessary information for making an informed decision.

In a lot of ways, I think the over-emphasis on "startups change the world" has been a contribution to this. There is a greater supply of people who "want to work in a startup" (or rather, think they like the whatever idea they have in their head of what a startup means) than there is demand for early stage employees. So any founders who might have something to hide will have their pick of people to fleece. They can easily pass on anyone who asks the the probing questions about the real value of the company and just wait for a shmuck to come along who doesn't ask.

What can we do to educate the general populace enough to dry up that pool of shmucks? In the long run, the way things are has to be terrible for investors, too. They put their money into founders who aren't being up front with their employees, and probably not getting the best employees because of it.
Typing in programs from magazines was one way to learn how to program. After a while you couldn't help but pick up some knowledge about the machine.
lmao owned
> in video games

First of all, this is a different demographic. Second, workplaces have a totally different dynamic.
>, but is it sensible for the employees?

Yes, if the employees' future paychecks for the next few months is being funded by that VC check. If the options are (a) VC money - but can only get it with liquidation preference ... or (b) insist on no liquidation preference - and therefore no VC agrees which leads to bankruptcy ... the "sensible for employees" is a moot point because the constraints of limited runway mean the employees care more about steady paychecks rather than owning worthless stock of a bankrupt company. (E.g. Google's first employees' salaries were funded by $25 million VC money from Sequioa and KPCB because Google had near zero revenue. Yes, Sequioa & KPCB had liquidation preference but it was irrelevant to employees since they needed the paychecks.)

On the other hand, if payroll expenses can be funded by revenue and the VC check is optional, maybe not.
:c but please!
No you need to be a Dutch national (as in having, or being able to claim a Dutch passport), it's the same with Romanian army, you have to be Romanian to join.

EU Law doesn't prevent EU members from discriminating against EU Nationals unless it explicitly discriminates against them, for example you can't disallow specific employment under the freedom of movement if it's allowed under a non-EU work visa (there are few exemptions when it comes nationals of "EU" territories which have various ties to specific EU member states and may or maynot be EU nationals on their own right), if you look at national level government employment as a whole across the EU they either limit employment of EU nationals (sometimes with caveats such as unless they lived in the host nation for a certain period of time) or set quotas on how many EU nationals you can employ in any given agency or institution.

This is because many government institutions and agencies while not being elected officials do affect and even set policy all the time. The EU "officially" isn't set to supercede national sovereignty of its member states so it's not really surprising why France might not want the majority of its foreign service employees to be German or why Germany might not want a bunch of Polish prosecutors and judges mucking with its legal system.

Also don't forget that being an EU national while grants you the right to vote in another member state, you are only allowed to vote for the EU elections in that state. Whether member states allow EU nationals to vote in local, or general elections is up to the individual member state, most of them disallow it, the same thing goes for running for office in some places you can run for local elections but even in those nations many of the party bylaws disallow foreign membership so you have to run as an independant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_militaries_that_recrui...
> What exactly should they do differently?

They should not have spent the decade before the fires of the last three years paying generous dividends while deferring fire safety maintenance, as they were excoriated for this April by the judge overseeing their felony criminal sentence for the San Bruno gas explosion (who had the matter before him because the PG&E actions leading to the 2017 and 2018 fires were charged as, and ruled to be, violations of their probation for that criminal conviction.)

Or, maybe, repeatedly committing deadly crimes in the operation of public utility should mean you are no longer entrusted to operate that utility, and the instrumentalities of the crime should be forfeited to the government the same way they would be from any individual criminal, with someone else (public or private) less prone to deadly criminality given the job.
My understanding is that they have already filed for Chapter 11. Also the stock has fallen from 50 to 5.

Meaning, the "old" PG&E is already dead. We can beat said dead horse over exec bonuses and tree trimming failures all we like, but its somewhat beside the point. How to go forward?

Specifically, in Chapter 11 right now they're surely aggressively trying to re-negotiate every financial thing they can touch. Another fire opening up another lawsuit right now would almost instantly torpedo any deals in the works.

Its a remarkably lose-lose situation.
Just to note that it's not useful to group all of these companies together. While they all have massive valuations, and raised lot of funding, they don't have similar businesses at all, or capital efficiencies. The market is also different today than it was with Microsoft or Google. Companies are expected and also need to grow faster (or others will). It took Microsoft 10 years to break $100M in revenue. All companies on your list are about 10 years old but have revenues in several billions.

WeWork's problem was that while they valuation was $47B, they also had $47B committed in long term leases (essentially debt). Uber & Lyft, are in war and their scale hasn't helped the economics as much since neither can get a monopoly on demand or the supply side of the market. Postmates, Doordash, Instacart, all likely operate with large gross volumes but low transaction sizes and low margins which can be challenging.

Airbnb has now more cash the bank than they have ever raised ($3.5B) and it's growing [1]. I suspect Stripe's financials are strong as well.

Free cash flow, and the ability to use or invest it well, eventually lead to a great business. Raising a lot of money doesn't necessarily mean that you are burning a lot of it, and the economics of the business matters.

It's also likely Airbnb will do a direct listing since they don't actually need the cash. Which is also potentially better for employees than traditional IPOs.

Disclaimer: I used to work at Airbnb, but this is all public information or speculation on my part.

[1]:https://twitter.com/KateClarkTweets/status/11849334122319953...
There exists a paradox in social choice theory (game theory applied to elections), the paradox of voting -- this comes out of Anthony Downs around 1950.

We can roughly consider that the utility value of voting is equal to a formula that looks like: E[voting] = pV - c, where c is the cost of voting (time cost, information cost, etc.), V is the value of your preferred candidate winning over other candidates, and p is your probability of being the pivotal voter. By pivotal voter, I mean that if everyone other than you cast their vote first, and then you cast your vote, the question is would your vote have a capability to change the outcome.

The typical view is that c is small but non-zero, V is reasonably large and by definition positive, but p is infinitesimal. And so, no one should bother voting. And yet, people do vote, an off-equilibrium behavior. And although it could be the case that someone's subjective belief in p is much higher than the true p is, this seems an unsatisfactory explanation because even stupid idiots know that their individual vote is unlikely to make the difference.

There are two major lines of rebuttal to the paradox. The first is that individual equilibrium models are not appropriate for assessing these kinds of questions. The second line of rebuttal is that there must exist other terms in the equation. The most promising of these is that the civic religion we have built around voting (social pressure to vote, personal moral imperative to "do one's part in society", the dumb stickers, how good it feels to stand up for what you believe, etc.) creates a "consumption value" of voting. So maybe the equation is E[voting] = pV - c + d where it is assumed that d >= c for many people, who vote.

I mention all of this because based on your post, p = 0, V = Infinity, c = high, and d = 0. If you are looking for a call to action, all you need to do is consider the great many benefits of changing your d term.

Finally, I think it weakens the approachability of your third paragraph argument (why bother, states should do it instead) that it comes after your second argument (environmentalists don't even help the environment) or your first argument (vegans annoy me because I can't eat gluten, why aren't people listening to me).
True, but my point is that backwards compatibility is almost totally neglected in the JS world and jQuery did that very well.
$1B/year dividends plus stock buybacks - for example $200M/$400M/$800M/$800M in 2018/2017/2016/2015 https://ycharts.com/companies/PCG/stock_buyback
Very insensitive....
Mass shootings affect 0.00001% of Americans, it’s not a comparable problem.
Sony did the same thing with the ps3
Not necessarily a majority.
I think it's worth questioning whether "a step up" is preferable to possible forward-thinking alternatives - the belief in free-market capitalism has, as I see it, created this dilemma in the first place, to the point where the only two options are to exploit more or exploit less. I'd say this totalizing logic actually hinders progress, similar to being stuck in a local maximum.
> We wanted it.

I'm not entirely convinced this is accurate. It definitely is in part, but not in whole. We wanted these better search tools and we like recommendation systems. But I know a lot of people are frustrated with algorithms like YouTube's recommendation system trapping them. (e.g. watch one Joe Rogan video and you get firehosed with more JRE videos). The thing is we also don't notice that this reinforcement also pushes us away from one another. But the solution sounds very similar to the solution to the complaint. People are complaining about being walled in by the algorithm (I for one am one of those people). People are asking for new suggestions. As in new topics, not just other youtubers doing the same thing. I think the difference is that it has become so obvious now that we're noticing and saying "wait, that'd too far."