skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They make zero-fuss LCD screens, many of them with standard VESA mounting and HDMI input(s).

Some of them are low-duty digital signage, or have a less-beefy desktop brother with the same/similar software and just mechanical/(power) electronics differentiating them between 8/5 and 24/7 usage to keep their warranty.

You are looking wrong when you make the price argument. Either your price source is weird, or you're looking at the "wrong" model. Just keep in mind that these are not your generic high-gloss consumer electronics flashy devices, but what a value-oriented engineering office might well use. I have yet to find a better LCD than their x4071uhsu-b1 ... Seriously, if you know of something comparable in contrast ratio: I dread the day mine breaks and I need to find a replacement.
+1.

Most of the support cases I get (meaning they've escalated through 2 to 3 layers of support engineering) are XY Problems (1). The customers are smart, and typically their issue is knowing too much about one aspect of the thing they're trying to solve. They used the sickle to cut their wheat, so yup, they're going to use the sickle to dry it, bale it, and tow it to market.

Ignoring everything they're doing, and even their initial question, typically leads to better outcomes. (Except in the cases where it turns out they really do have to be doing it in this backwards manner).

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_problem
(Disclaimer: I am an enthusiast of discussions around planned economy and wish we talked more about it instead of dismissing it as failed communism)

China tried centrally planned economy. It resulted in tens of millions of death in the great famines of the 50s and 60s.

Planned economy where a strong state and a market economy coexist, on the other hand, is a model that had success in many places. Not only China, but post-war France or South Korea had state plans but also economic freedoms.

My opinion is that there was absolutely no way in the 70s and probably just the glimpse of a chance nowadays to have the processing power and the amount of information to manage all the details of a national economy.

The emergent markets take care of all the information that can't be in the supercomputer of the central planning: that Bob's potatoes are tastier than Alice's. That Charles is more serious in his plumbing work than Yoshiko. You absolutely need an emergent system at that level.

It is true, however, that on a national scale emergent systems can have bad behaviors. It all hinges on individual, local decisions. A policy can't really emerge. That's where you have a state to step in.

South Korea, for instance, decided that it needed a steel industry, because it wanted to make warships. Market forces thought it made no sense to make steelworks so the government forced it.

France decided to go nuclear on public funds because it anticipated the Algerian oil would become harder to get for geological and political reasons, but the market thought oil was cheap enough!

And China is interesting today. I wish we looked further than its (obvious) authoritarianism and were able to look critically at its economic system. It is an oddity as it proposes a solution to blend communism and capitalism.

In capitalism, the idea is that you can get dividends from your investments in a company and that you can buy and sell shares. That's 100% possible in China. In communism, the idea is that the means of production belong to the people. And, in China, the end owner of most big companies and of the biggest holding structures in the country is the state. Now to call it successful communist you have to believe that the Chinese government is representative of the will of the people, which I do not. But I also think that the system they implemented would world equally well if China was a democracy.

Really, we need to consider the Chinese economic system separately from its political system. Use capitalism for the local day-to-day individual decisions and state-planned economy for the long-term global strategies. The invisible hand won't handle an energy transition or plan for a 20 year overhaul of the electric grid.
That actually seems low. Given the enormous growth in worker productivity vs how little real wages have grown in the last 30 years, I'm guessing monopolies cost Americans much more.
What civil war?
You don't need heavy tweaking for that. Just set your terminal to have a white background with black text. Unless someone moves up really close to you it'll look like regular old Notepad.
Spider Eye: Cross Platform.net Core Applications with a Webview UI
Backups, configuration and failover. Which traditionally meant a db guy or an ops guy which costs money. I've done it for multiple database technologies and doing it right is not at all easy or cheap on time.

With that said, Kubernetes might fix this because they have access to more parts of the system in a generic API. With tech like KubeDB[1] and other operators[2] we might see these prices coming closer to bare-metal.

[1] https://kubedb.com/
[2] https://github.com/zalando/postgres-operator
Cybersyn is great. It highlights the problem of applying cybernetics (systems theory) into a system with many unknowns. Economics as a whole is not a controlled environment like factory where systems theory can be successfully.

More modern approach with more success is mechanism design (reverse game theory). Design games that yield results even when you know very little about the players.

The Nobel Prize: What is mechanism design and why does it matter for policy-making? https://voxeu.org/article/nobel-prize-what-mechanism-design-...

>Mechanism design theory is a major breakthrough in the modern economic analysis of institutions and markets. It revolutionalised the way economists think about optimal institutions and regulation when governments don't “know it all.” It has had a major impact on current policy-making and will continue to do so in the future.
The reasons remain the same, regardless of how you label them.
I don't believe its a term in general use in the industry (of large wind turbines). Since "survivable" means "might survive" - that's not a very useful engineering target. Wind turbines have to be rated to reliably withstand specific gust speeds, so talk of certain speeds being "survivable" should be non-technical.

Afaik modern turbines are specified to reliably withstand an "extreme 50 year gust" estimated by their locales "Wind Class" [1] Some headroom is likely as with all large constuctions, building, bridges.. The matter of what stronger gust speeds might be survivable by the majority of installations is not specified.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEC_61400
You're lacking context. It says that when you don't know where to send correspondence at big banks you could try and address investor relations because they are usually bored and will gladly forward your complaint to the right department. This is where the investor part comes in. And only there. Other suggestions are that you could address the legal department because they are diligent by law. Or the CEO, because if it gets handed down from their office it will have more weight.

Note that the cases talked about involve legal deadlines so knowingly delaying to handle them is not a good option.
Good point. I hadn't realized that this is not all-inclusive of social media, just the top ranking sites.
What is mechanism design and why does it matter for policy-making? (2007)
As in, emphasis original; the words italicized in the preceding block quote ("royalism", "King", and "Queen") were italicized by Yarvin/Moldbug, not myself.
Ask HN: Alternative merit/moderation systems for message boards?
This is neither a critique nor praise of any message board system, including this one.

I wonder whether any significant attempts have been made around overcoming the limits I see below. Have they succeeded or failed, and why? What are the alternatives?

Observations:

1. Anonymity: Anonymity contributed to /b/'s creativity and originality. /b/ was quite funny at some point, and there were some interesting discussions to be had. Lots of great music and book tips to be found. There was and still is no merit system. Things went to shit around the time that the idea of "newfags" came in, and when those "newfags" formed the "We Are Legion" identity, losing the original anonymity. It seems that a concentration of power, identity and ideas can arise even under anonymity.

2. Merit: HN solves merit to some extent. Points on comments are not immediately visible; the colour just changes a bit. Flagged (and thus hidden) posts deal with flamewars quite well, but at what cost? I would personally prefer accountability, and I would like to see the content regardless. Like in any competitive system, power concentrates in a small minority of ideas.

3. Moderation: Moderation on HN is quite opaque. This opacity actually seems to enforce staying in line, being "civil". Fair enough. One is never quite sure when or where the flag comes from, when or why the article ends up on the front page. HN must rightly maintain its reputation.

Ideas and questions:

How to build a moderated, unmoderated or self-moderating message board system with a diversity of ideas?

How to build a system where people can leave their egos at the door, can be open about their opinions, but also open to changes of their ideas?

Is this possible, and should it be possible?

Could ideas of genetic algorithms or other sorts of randomness be applied to perturb concentrations of power in moderation and ideas, and could this be done in a decentralised fashion, or is decentralisation necessary? Maybe what we have here is simply the most fit solution?
I imagine a lot of people would oversell their capabilities. And to be fair, as annoying as it is to run through a script of basic things, sometimes it will work, even for experts.
The 1GB redis instance on hosted infrastructure typically comes with opinionated defaults - and tight integration with the hosting provider's other offerings - for security, monitoring, resiliency, support and license management. If you're only going to run one or two Redis instances, $500/year compared with the additional engineering time required to handle anything other than just tossing the box on the Internet starts to look pretty reasonable.
I was following along until the author stopped explaining new syntax.

"over", according to forth.com, copies second item to top... ( n1 n2 — n1 n2 n1 )

But I get lost with >r, r>, r@, and !
>Apple did not release a native-code Pascal compiler.

Originally, an Apple Lisa computer was used to develop Macintosh software. A Pascal compiler that ran natively on the Mac came later.

>Macintosh development in the early days (circa 1983-1985) was done using the Apple Lisa computer and its Lisa Workshop development environment.

The Lisa Workshop hosted a command line interface which accessed a wonderful mouse based editor, a Pascal compiler, a 68000 macro assembler, an object file Linker, the RMaker resource compiler utility program, and the MacCom Lisa-to-Macintosh utility communications program.

https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=3rd_Party_Develo...
Not correct. If you own an ETF you do not have voting rights of the underlying stocks. So you are not a beneficial owner of the underlying.

You also do not have "direct" access to the dividends. The fund manager will pool the dividends and pay them out on a regular schedule, after taking their cut of fees.
The idea with the hosted version of the service is that you're paying more but (in theory) you're also getting more. You can certainly host your own Redis but Azure's hosted offering probably automatically takes care of a bunch of "housekeeping" things that you would have to manage yourself otherwise, like provisioning, HA, scaling, backups, and automatic integration with other Azure services.

For a lot of companies, an extra $35 per month to save hours of work is a no-brainer.
One of the core concepts of Urbit's naming schemes' origin and systemic ethos is that by naming a thing (or by reusing an existing name for a perhaps closely related thing) you confine and constrain the newly created thing in ways you may not have anticipated.

Why for example in Urbit terms you may have "gates" and not functions, "battery" and "payload" instead of methods and objects, or functions and parameters, because these things do not work exactly like the familiar constructs from your well-known languages that you're perhaps already familiar with.

It would then also be tempting to make them work more like the things they are being called like, or "anthropomorphize" them into those things, for lack of a better word, giving them traits which they don't innately have in spite of being part of a perfectly workable functional system.

There is also certainly a difference in concept between an aircraft carrier and a galaxy (although both may invoke imagery of energetic nuclear processes powering them, it's hard to argue they are the same or even similar), or differences between a destroyer and a planet, submarine and comet, although it's true that the addressing math hasn't changed, ...

I think you'd be hard-pressed to make an argument that IPv4 and IPv6 are feudally inspired, and they both use very similar maths to pieces of Urbit that we're talking about.
I saw a somewhat recent interview with Jennings where he called Silicon Valley a "cult of money" now. This struck me as such a succinct label that captures the essence of the current state of things on so many levels.
> his understanding of the material is well below that of a first-year history student

Met plenty of history grad students in grad school. Well-read but intellectually very limited, and very herd-minded. But, then, I did not go to an Ivy with a tradition of excellence in the humanities.

> Second, there is nothing new about his positions

Of course there is, it's just the nutty cypherpunk stuff like crypto-locked nukes.

> As someone who studied both physics and history in grad school

You're a member of an extremely small class. He does not write for people like you. It makes no sense to write for people like you if power is the goal.

Marx's writing was childish beyond belief. He did not even know calculus. Yet, look at how much has been unleashed on his behalf.
About 30 years ago I was being asked by some guy I barely knew to do something over the weekend. I didn't know how to tell him that I would rather just be at home with my family. Eventually and without thinking it through, I just said "It's my weekend with the kids." He instantly became apologetic and said he understood completely. And I instantly felt like a heel for pretending to be someone I'm not. I had accidentally identified with a group that suffers in a way I did not. It worked, but the experience has stuck with me. I don't like myself when I'm too afraid to be truthful and while I don't think I hurt the other guy, it was a close call. One that I try to avoid.

edit:spelling
There are 500 million members to the EU. I am in favor of all of them being equal, yes. We still have to quelch local nationalisms so there are some compromises being made to give state some kind of sovereignty, like the US used to need 200 years ago, but once the reasons for these are removed, remove these privileges.

India: You assume states work against each other and populations automatically favor their states over the federation they belong to. If that's the case, you have a cultural problem to solve first. I doubt this is the case in the US right now.

And yes, there are various reasons for some state to be populous. It is irrelevant with the question on whether all the peoples' vote should have equal weight.
I'm still unsure what this actually brings to the table and what necessity it actually tries to solve. Bitcoin actually tries to solve the issue of trustless, decentralized money (Whether or not it actually does that is a topic in itself, but it tries), then you've got endeavors like Ethereum but for distributed computing (In fact, as far as I can tell, some of Urbit's aspects are built on top of Ethereum), Namecoin for domain names, and so on.

It makes for interesting computing outsider art, I suppose, but being compared to TempleOS might not be too desirable.
The Green Short: Funds Target Laggards in Sustainable Shift
Authenticity is orthogonal to expression. Authenticity is about owning your values and understanding your self.

Authenticity is not sharing your political opinions with the world. Sharing opinions is about controlling your image.

You can hold political views of any stripe and be well accepted by people whose opinions clash with yours.

Authenticity is not broadcasting your opinions about the world, it's not compromising on your values in order to fit in. Political views are imperfectly derived from values; they're derivative and less important and should be freely modified as you acquire experience, new perspectives, and more information.

Values and authenticity, in contrast, stem from internal discourse and exploration.
The magnetron dies, and the thing doesn't scale down to a keychain flashlight like the 88lumn/W LED. We do have LEDs with >130lumen/W though...
I think a surprising amount of Americans are invested in the stock market. But that does not make them shareholders in us companies. Most of this exposure is through "40 act" funds like mutual funds and ETFs where investors in these funds do not have the underlying vote of the stocks the fund is invested in.
There is a cost to manage the instance, upgrading monitoring etc. Even though there is no SLA on the basic tier, I would imagine Azure does some maintenance and monitoring. However is it worth 35$ etc, I am not sure. Also, the basic tier does not have replicas. If you want replicas you have to pay 100$ per month.
You send an email to the oracle asking a question (usually funny, but sometimes very personal). The oracle will return somebody else's request (in an anonymized form), and you reply to it. The result is publicly readable, and a whole culture developed around it. Try it!

See https://internetoracle.org/about.cgi
> LaRose said Ohio’s election results are safe because neither the election machines nor the ballot counters the state uses are connected to the internet.

Neither were Iranian centrifuges, and yet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet
>> You have to "learn to predict" the <next frame, action> pairs.

But where do the actions come from?

For example, if I play chess, I could pick up a piece and throw it at my opponent's head. Similarly, if I play Atari I could chuck the controller at the monitor. These are actions I can perform that are available to me because of my basic human anatomy and because of the laws of physics (I can grab and throw and a thrown object flies through the air untl it hits a target or gravity wins).

In the case of MuZero, what actions can the system perform and where do they come from? I don't see where that is described in the paper.

>> For Go, and chess, we twist our self into NOT using the game rules in the simulator e.g. for each move, just indicate if GAME LOSS WIN

Similarly - what determines "each move"?

EDIT: I can see in the MuZero paper that "Final outcomes {lose,draw,win} in board games are treated as rewards $u_t \in {-1,0,+1}$ occurring at the final step of the episode" but I also can't see where these come from, what tells the model that a loss, draw or win has occurred at the end of an episode.

I mean, if you're telling the model what actions can be performed and what end-states values are, then what game rules are you _not_ giving to the system?
OpenEmbedded and Yocto are separate entities in time. The OpenEmbedded project started in 2003, Yocto in 2010/2011.

When you "use yocto", you're likely just using parts of the OpenEmbedded project. Yocto takes all the flexibility of the OpenEmbedded project and packages together a functional setup (called Poky) that can be more easily customized to build custom images. (There are non-poky, non-openembedded components of yocto, but I'm not familiar with them).

The default packages shipped with Poky are I suspect just the minimal set required to get a network connected device with a GUI interface up. Remember that it's default setup is effectively suppose to be a "hello world" project.
Yeah...

It's a warning sign to be ultra-defensive and strictly adhere to protocol (and document every action taken). In any normal situation, there is room for adjustment, but not if you're interacting with someone who seems to have a superiority complex (doesn't mean they actually do, but it seems that way). No one is going to scare me into doing it wrong so I can get reprimanded for it later.
You’re completely correct: new modes of explanation can be extremely useful, and you can’t judge from the Wikipedia article alone because it can’t get to the meat! That’s why I had to read the papers. Turns out, the meat just isn’t there, it doesn’t exist. There aren’t any ideas beyond the vague popsci outline, which by itself does no good.
Supercharge Your TypeScript with AssemblyScript
Once upon a time when we'd ring up support for Sun, SGI, etc., they did know that, for instance, they could just send a new part to swap ourselves when we said it was broken. (That was after GEC, at least, no longer actually had an office on site.)
Zippo Hand Warmer: why do you need it? – FitnessHealths
>>> While a lot of the AWS service offerings are sub-par compared to alternatives

If you try to get some services in an entreprise, maybe a physical server or get a database, you may easily find that it takes months of paperwork and waiting. Then it's poorly operated and broken half of the time (why are they provisioning a hundred databases on a single shared host? or using a shared NAS as storage?)

AWS services may not be perfect but it's miles ahead from the shitty services you get in an enterprise.
Most people don't care if they will be slaves or not.

Most people don't care about anything. So what? Let's burn this planet to ashes?

Democracy can work only with people that do care.
The politics of second-hand clothes: A debate over 'dignity'
It wouldn't be too difficult to modify things like ttl, syn/ack prng, and banners to fool something like nmap, but more sophisticated fingerprinting software would require mimicking SSDP requests and responses; totally doable with enough packet captures over a period of time. Would be a fun project.
There was also a sci-fi movie I watched as a kid that is set in a post-apocalpytic earth in which a constant wind belt around the earth that people 'sail' to get around. Does anyone remember?
This needs to be in the Cybertruck.
I've always wished that tls-srp was better supported by tools or that srp was a method for http forms that would work in some standardized way.
One major thing this doesn't consider is the technical limitations which are latency & bandwidth.

(1) You save a ton of money on bandwidth when you move data from AWS to AWS

(2) Your stack, in most cases, needs to be near each other to minimize latency. Databases get wrecked by this.

This is why, cloud database providers have to often transparently show you which cloud you're launching on [1] which effectively means AWS is going to get a good share of it anyway. My uninformed guess is that EC2&S3 are by far their biggest money maker which is going to be what unbundlers target.

I'm all for the unbundling and will probably take part in some of it, but I don't think it will be that easy.

[1] https://www.cockroachlabs.com/product/cockroachcloud
New South Wales rolls out mobile phone detection cameras
Relatedly, when on an automated phone line “press 1 for accounts” etc I just mash the keypad and/or make random noise down the phone until it sends me through. Otherwise try staying quiet after being presented with options.
LAMP was a simple stack. It was performant, and not bloated. That's why 1000 different datacenters could provide the same service. Are there such sub-bundles in AWS that are cheap enough to run without amazon's scale ? Do people even need that huge scaling capability or is AWS just convenient?