skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's not a fair response, since the two sides are not "Catalonia should be independent" vs "Catalonia should be part of Spain"; rather, the two sides are "Catalonia should have a right to discuss terms of independence with its own people and the rest of Spain" vs "Catalonia should not have the right to discuss terms of independence with its own people and the rest of Spain".

Catalonia should have a right to poll its people about whether to engage in negotiations, and to discuss terms with Spain (who, naturally, should represent coherent minority interests in Catalonia who do not want to depart).

Spain should have a right to say "Well, look, the border should not include Barcelona since 60% of them (or whatever the figure might be in a just and fair plebiscite) have expressed a desire to remain".

Once fair negotiations have taken place and each side has accepted that they have won some and lost some, Catalonia could have another referendum, and it might turn out that no-one wants independence from both Madrid and Barcelona.

Spain says it's illegal to start, middle and end the process. If the Catalans don't really want to separate, then starting is free. It will almost certainly increase the order and decrease the tension if they let a plebiscite go forward.

(The last paragraph is an irrelevance, since there's no evidence that a European Union of many smaller states, incapable of independently sustaining a modern armed force, will be any more likely to go to war than a European Union of fewer larger states, capable of independently sustaining modern armed forces. In fact, even putting the argument down in black on tan really brings out its ridiculousness.)
No problems in South Florida or the Bay Area. In fact, since the 600mhz rollout I’ve been getting reception deep inside Costco etc
Also avoid tiny rental car companies for this same reason. You'll find them listed on the major travel booking websites and they'll have names that you've never heard of. They often appear to be cheaper than the large rental companies, but they frequently have a chipped windshield or a tiny dent in a body panel.

Even if you point it out during the pre-rental walkaround, they won't mark it on the contract. That's the scam. Then when you return they charge you for a new windshield or a body panel/paint job, which of course they never actual have done because they want to scam the next person too.

Yes, you rented your car with your VISA and VISA will cover these charges eventually (takes about 3 months and you're on the hook for the charge for that time, and you'll never get the hours back that you spend sorting it all out).

You could say that you could just make sure all damage is marked before you sign the contract, and that's good advice at any rental agency, but it's still better to pay a little more up front to one of the major car rental companies who make their money on actually renting you a car instead of the company trying to find a way to scam you out of an additional $1000+.
Right! Engineers driving busses; office managers flipping burgers. And the administration dares to call it 'full employment'.

Its part of the very wealthy keeping all the money - if nobody has a skilled job, we don't get (much) income, and wealth inequality zooms onward.

A better measure of employment would be, how much total payroll is across the country. Per capita if you like. That would tell us how we're doing. Not just a total of whom 'has a job'.
He would have died sooner. I say that only partly in jest. When he was going to retire, he wrote the last strip ahead of publication and people were wondering what it would be. It was basically a thank you to the fans. He died the day it ran in the papers.

Edit: he died the day before.
Sometimes I really hate spell correcting: apologies for "foi gras" becoming "foo GRAS"
Funny, having young kids is what has sent me back to hotels (at least for the time being), simply because they are mostly designed with accessibility and some level of child-proofing. Also, the long corridors, lobbies and elevators in hotels are great outlets for toddlers to burn energy and curiosity. Cooping the kids up in a grown-up oriented space with fragile table decorations they can't touch can be exhausting.
It is illegal to hire an H1B if a qualified American is available. You should file a complaint with DoL.
I think you just reinvented Airbnb Plus

https://www.airbnb.com/plus
Bands 12 and 71 have been added since then, so in theory it would improve. But I've always found indoor reception to be highly YMMV. Best to test first. Also, wifi calling largely solves this.
This is a not very difficult problem to solve. Whenever there is a dispute, send somebody to verify the property. For sure AirBnb already has an anti-abuse team, so it is an extra step there. Also, disputes anyway cost them money for the person that answers emails, sometimes do refunds, legal risk, etc. So it will also not be more expensive.

It is one of these "growth" problems that a company is good to have and normally solves in an easy way. Furthermore, the author is still an active user of AirBnb.
It seems like you have diagnosed the issue, and that you believe it is simple and easy to fix. So why not just whip up a nice looking CRUD web app over the weekend and solve your problems? It doesn't matter how "hard" something is if it doesn't demonstrate to the typical employer that you can solve their business problems.
So you're willing to risk multiple hundreds of dollars at each airbnb stay?
Computer vision applications across industries
A century of research on conscientiousness at work
You could, but it’s tedious to write a new class for every scenario you want to test. Or to program for every scenario within that test implementation. And now you kind of should test your test implementation, and who wants to do that?

Mocking makes it quick, easy, straightforward, and cuts out a ton of code noise from the test.
> Try to get refund from AirBnb for misprepresentation or deliberate omissions of negative points.

-I don’t know whether their policy differs from country to country, but after using AirBnb 30+ times traveling with wife and three kids in Northern/Central Europe, I’ve only had two issues - once the place we were to stay was double-booked (and we arrived last!); the other it turned out what was described as a ‘bedroom’ in the listing was a storage room with no windows, hot water tank, a few shelves packed with all sorts of junk and barely room for a dirty mattress on the floor.

In both cases AirBnb promptly decided I was due a refund, my only minor gripe being it took a couple of weeks before the money was actually refunded.
An interesting aspect of this that is not mentioned here is that, fundamentally, although the amount of propellants is large compared to the payload, the vast majority of the propellant (and thus the lift-off mass) is oxygen. Liquid oxygen is extremely cheap as it just requires compressing the air (and, of course, airliners also must compress the air to burn with fuel, it's just that they compress it in-situ).

Only getting 4% of your lift-off mass to orbit sounds like a terrible deal, but it's really not so bad when you consider the vast majority of your lift-off mass costs just 5 cents per pound, and almost all the rest costs about 10-30 cents per pound. Near the limit of rocket performance would be the 2016 SpaceX ITS (now Starship) proposal which had an expendable capability of about 550 tons of payload for about 8500 tons of propellant (of which about 20% was fuel). That's a fuel to payload ratio of 3:1. (unfortunately, reusable performance is nearly half as bad, so about 5 or 6:1). https://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/making_life_multip...

For long-haul aircraft carrying cargo, the situation isn't that much better. Near the edge of their range, cargo airliners have about 2-4:1 fuel to payload capability. And considering that rockets are now starting to use LNG for fuel (often significantly cheaper than jet fuel), the fuel cost for Starship (or similar vehicles) could actually be less than that for a long-haul airfreighter on very long routes.

In fact, for single-trip flights half-way across the world (i.e. at the edge of the capability of modern aircraft), the fuel:payload ratio for ITS (Starship) or an airliner would be about the same, might be even better for Starship/ITS. In part that's because launch vehicles stage, which makes them extremely efficient.

And Don is a fantastic guy, but I also think he exaggerates slightly the engineering in rocketry vs other fields. The cost per unit dry mass of an airliner and a launch vehicle is approximately the same. The factors of safety are also similar (although usually rockets don't have high cycle requirements...). And in some ways, rockets are simpler structurally as their typical load case is pressurization and axial loading (which is often in the same direction). That means they can use relatively inexpensive thin-gauge stainless steel construction in ways that the more complexly-loaded aircraft cannot.

The main issue is we just throw away rockets for the most part. Fix that, and we don't need exotic nuclear propulsion or anything to have low costs to achieve orbit.

There is one figure of merit that rockets tend to do much better at:

Final dry mass to payload.

Because rockets stage off the vast majority of their mass early in flight, only a small part of the rocket dry mass has to go through the majority of the delta-v. A rocket upper stage may be a fourth to a fifth the mass of the payload. With airplanes, the dry mass of the airplane essentially always is greater than the payload mass, and on longer flights this might be 2:1 or greater.
Good on him for digging into it, but his conclusion is not much more cheery than the 40% statistic he is bashing. His conclusion: most of those 40% would be able to borrow money to cover an unexpected $400 expense, and only 14% of all people truly would be unable to meet a $400 obligation.

That is still a damn scary statistic that still illustrates how close to the edge so many people live.
Clearly that it's my opinion that such behavior is unacceptable. There is no legally unacceptable behavior here. But private or not, why couldn't a company's behavior be regarded as unacceptable? There's plenty of things that, while legal, are not things people would be comfortable with a company actually doing. Plenty of people find Facebook's actions unacceptable. Are those not legitimate opinions, backed by reasoned arguments? Absolutely they are, even if there are reasoned opinions on the other side as well. What you seem to be saying is simply that you don't find unacceptable.
I stopped using AirBnb. Their customer service on a number of occasions made it apparent they are not going to deal with hosts who have fake and outdated pictures and ruin other guest's stays. It seems hosts are the only side of the equation AirBnb folks care about.

Airbnb let the host write a review on us for the stay which we didn't even take, as when we arrived in the apartment it was in a such appalling state, dirty, broken - we had to spend 4 hours inside while looking for the replacement and trying to convince Airbnb this apartment is inhabitable based on their T&Cs. Yes, we managed that but couldn't find an adequate replacement for the same money and had to move into the hotel. At the same time, Airbnb let the host write a super-negative review about us for not taking this apartment and never sent an invitation to myself to write my own review. I could not even image it is possible to write reviews for cancelled stays! I was left with negative review and ruined stay just because the host could care less and because Airbnb protects hosts first and foremost.

Guess what? Most of non-scam non-inhabitable properties listed on Airbnb are almost always available on other sites, including a well-known booking site. Where you pay and receive service and have means to complain or at least write a review without the fear of being reviewed back for something you are not even at fault.

I had 23 positive reviews and that one last negative. When I later tried to book an apartment and started asking a few questions to host (have to be fastidious with the choice as I often stay for 2-3 weeks, so need to ensure there is no construction works around..etc) - the host has referred to my last negative review and told me I won't be welcome. And that was that proverbial straw.
My experience is different. Inversion of control is a pattern that works just about anywhere. Javascript, C, Kotlin, Ruby, etc. You name it. I've dealt with a lot of code bases where writing tests was hard because the developers did not understand this simple design pattern. E.g. a lot of javascript frontend code ends up being hard to test for this reason. Anytime you mix object creation and logic, you make it harder to unit test.

In Java, using frameworks for this is common mainly because it has reflection and annotations, which means you don't actually have to manually call a lot of things to get your objects. E.g. in Spring, all you need to do is slap the annotation @Component on your component classes and it sort of self assembles the object graph from just that information. It's kind of neat if you do this properly. There are tons of ways to customise that or do it differently but it can be pretty minimalistic.

You can do this without frameworks as well (lookup DIY dependency injection). It basically just means that you write the code that constructs your objects yourself and do the right thing of not putting that in the wrong place (which results in hard to test code).

There are only two simple rules you need to remember: constructors must not do work (like constructing other objects or initializing some middleware) and all dependencies come in as constructor arguments. If you do that consistently, you are doing DIY dependency injection. Any time that looks tedious, you are likely violating some of the SOLID principles (e.g. because your constructor has 10 dependencies and the whole class suffers from poor cohesiveness).

In Kotlin, the trend is to move away from using reflection or annotation towards using more explicit DSLs with helper functions that figure out how to construct stuff at compile time (by using the type system and some language features). For example, KOIN https://github.com/InsertKoinIO/koin is a framework for Kotlin that uses neither reflection nor annotations. The same principles are used in Kofu, which is a kotlin centric way of doing similar things for Spring. Aside from being easier to debug (both of these use simple function calls), it also has the side effect of enabling better startup performance as well as native compilation using e.g. Graal.

Whichever way you do this, IOC ready components are easy to unit test because nothing gets constructed as a side effect of constructing them. Side effect free construction might be a better term. I was recently working on some python code that was the opposite where db initialization happened as a side effect of importing some module that exposed a global variable. I would call that broken by design. Python has all the tools you need to do better than that. There's no technical need to write broken code like that. I've seen similar problems in javascript code bases for frontend as well as node.js. Usually if you find a system that is hard to unit test, this is the root cause.
Because the expected value of using the platform is still greater despite the known risks?
Somewhat ironic since we were told in no uncertain terms that automation would cause the exact opposite to happen.
My understanding is that the exploiter agents are not based on the meta. My take is that the exploiter agents have a different goal than the main agent. While the main agent is trying to develop a strategy to win against as many opponents as possible, the exploiters are focused on finding new ways to beat just the main agent. It seems similar to the inspiration behind GANs
Bullshit, crises in astronomy for example. The Big Bang Bullshit has be falsified for years now.
http://cosmology.info has links to dozens of papers.

Show me one paper that measured Lorenz contraction, you can't because it does not exist.

The whole standard model is based on wrong assumptions.

In fact If you would actually talk with scientist in the respected fields that don't take every explanation but ask critically, you will see that most of them are stuck.
This has happened to me, earlier this year. Luckily it was just for one night and the room was low cost anyway (£35 for central London!) so should have seen this coming.

Oddly enough, there was someone living in the switcheroo apartment I ended up in and they were paying £800 a month!

I reported it to airbnb today after reading this story and checking that listing's reviews, almost all of whom had reported the same problem and airbnb have come back to say they've cancelled the host's account and listing.
I think for non scientists looking to work in biotech, it is critical to also understand how the industry works and how value is created. That's the failure point for most biotech startups -- they dont have a useful application of their tech, or the useful application takes costs too much to develop compared to the value it creates

A practical way to do this is to invest in biotech stocks. This will expose you to clinical data, the regulatory process, and how value is created and destroyed. Evaluating clinical data and unmet medical needs is the core skillset in evaluating market potential of a drug, device, diagnostic or patient-facing software

Having skin in the game will help you focus your learning. But only invest as much as you can afford to lose, treat it like tuition.
What's new is old: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Program
What a wild story. I search Austin property records for "shray goel" and the guy owns a house literally around the corner from where I live. I wonder if I've seen him around.
Just because I’m subscribed to someone on social media doesn’t mean they show up in my feed. That change happened long ago. It’s only guaranteed to show up if they pay.
> Also, the long corridors, lobbies and elevators in hotels are great outlets for toddlers to burn energy and curiosity.

Letting toddlers run up and down the hallways is a good way to make you the most hated guest in the hotel.
Good point: I do have a hard time communicating why I'm fine with a CRUD position. Because sometimes I think things are self-evident, when they're not and then I poorly communicate them.

One of the reasons is: when you look at my resume (I'm Googleable), I am simply just starting out. And just doing the grind for 2 or more years would ground me in what I've experienced the past 8 years during my studies and jobs I did while studying.
Thank heavens! This tech can't come soon enough. My ISP runs a co-ax just below the surface of the road to my side of the street to the junction box. It then runs the co-ax along the edge of my driveway along the property line with my neighbor. It then runs the co-ax across my driveway, laying the cable in the section divider groove with a thin layer of caulking over the cable. I literally run over the cable every time I park my vehicle.

I've seen other places in our neighborhood where this is done in the sidewalks and the cable has been ripped up on the sidewalk. If pedestrians don't step over the cable they'll trip over it. It's a complete joke.
More broadly, Congress has failed to act with respect to campaign finance reform. Twitter's response gives me (some) hope that there could be a grass roots, free market reform of sorts.

Fundraising becomes slightly less important if you can't spend the money online. Not sure of the overall effect, as TV providers are unlikely to turn away the lucrative ad spend.
Go on. How so?
Whitney Johnson on Leading Remotely
In my region the government employment office likes to state that there are tens of thousands of IT vacancies but these numbers are misleading. It's actually a form of ghost liquidity. The same job at one company is advertised by different recruitment agencies, and multiple companies are bidding on the same contract with the same client. At the end of the day it's the same work that gets done by the same person, the intermediaries take their cut, and you are stuck upgrading some old software under the auspice of digital transformation.
This person is a journalist and wrote a successful trending news article about it (seriously -- #1 on Twitter right now). You should consider this part of their job, not free time wasted.
I was just talking about their statements, but regarding the argument, isn't this an arrogant position to take? You are basically saying that the majority of the population is not smart enough to detect fake news by themselves, and that a smaller group of smart individuals (you included) are better poised to protect "the people" and control what they should and should not be exposed to.

Sounds a little dystopian and authoritarian to me as well. Fair democracy is hard.
Where are you located? A lot of places now have community biology labs in makerspaces that are doing really fun things. Start here: https://wiki.hackerspaces.org/Hackerspaces

Not all of the places on that list will have biology labs, but some will! It's a good way to get some experience at the bench without going the degree route.
>Machines on the other side, can be scaled arbitrarily. Once you've built a small crane, you can build even increasing ones, it's just a function of money and interest.

It doesn't matter how much money or interest we have, but right now it isn't technically feasible to build a 36000 km tall crane (also known as a space elevator). Humanity simply couldn't get it done even if we poured all our current resources into that project. It isn't physically impossible, but such a behemoth has requirements that current materials science cannot meet. Building tall cranes generates useful know-how for a space elevator, but it's a really different problem, not just a matter of resources.

Following the analogy, a general purpose AI simply isn't a bigger Deep Blue or AlphaGo; it's probably something different that requires knowledge that we currently don't have. Sure, building Deep Blue and AlphaGo most likely generated part of that money, but that doesn't mean we have everything we need.

You can argue that is simply also money and interest, and that's true, but it's not in the same as building a 10 meter crane and a 20 meter crane.
> designs and front-end code can live side-by-side in the docs

This one sparked an idea. We all know that it's really hard to automatically convert designs to code (eg. React components). Right now the only feasible way is to code it manually.

If you are able to import and show designs side by side with real React components using Storybook, would it make sense for you to tackle diff-checking between those two, making sure the design is coded correctly?
You seem to use sentience as a synonym for human intelligence. Works, accomplishments, cooperation: if you don't see those things when you leave the city, you're (forgive the hyperbole) blind.
I wasn’t able to find any indication of connection speed either
Coq and Isabelle are much more mature systems, they have already been used in a lot of big developments, and they have large user communities and existing textbooks and so on.

Agda is pretty finicky, proving stuff in it is harder and the entire project feels more researchy (as a playground to try out ideas for programming languages).

Lean seems promising, but it's still kind of new, so compared to Coq will not find as much documentation, and there are fewer people on Stack Overflow to answer questions.
I agree - I found the final "We'll all just keep using AirBnB forever" paragraph (after doing all that work in the opposite direction) kind of infuriating. Are we in the throes of heroin addiction here? Are we married to AirBnB, trapped there come-what-may, for the children's sake? It's like how people are with Facebook, Uber... et al. There are other ways of doing things, people! I dunno, apparently I've built up some cumulative frustration with people.