skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Partly, and I won't deny it, this is because of serious chemical changes that happened almost instantly when our first child was born. It was like someone flipped a switch. I suddenly felt protective not just toward our child, but toward all children. As I was driving my wife and new son home from the hospital, I approached a crosswalk full of pedestrians, and I found myself thinking "I have to be really careful of all these people. Every one of them is someone's child!"

This just flipped a switch in my (kidless) brain. What a strange feeling to realize every person on earth is someone’s kid. Someone’s grand kid. I’m now puzzled at how we humans can even conceive of being less than stellar to each other
My impression is that at-rest butterflies usually have their wings folded together, like this: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Melanargia_galathea_...

When they're sunning themselves it's a more relaxed position, similar to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Man_with_a_backpiece...

Overall though all the positions seem good and it's more of an artistic choice. The "dead butterfly" pose shows off the wing patterns better and it's close enough to positions the butterflies assume in daily life. You don't often see spread-eagle positions in photos either but nobody would mind using it to show off some full-body tattoos.
Yes! My kids love me fixing stuff, so I can multiplex minding them, fixing up the house and, in a sense, educate them all at the same time. Obviously it takes longer with them spilling tools everywhere, but chores get done and the kids are happy
> Just looking for some dads who can relate and maybe give some wisdom on the subject of having young kids and losing your ability to work on something interesting--which to be fair I never did before having kids

Your problem is not that your kids have blocked you from interesting work. In fact it sounds like quite the opposite: you are so passionate and rewarded by childcare that it has inspired you like never before.

It just sounds like you need to look for a more interesting day job.
Gold was the inflection point. It wasn’t just the US economy you will find a similar inflection point around the world. Even if all the other factors remained the same but the world had stayed on Breton Woods, the economic change that could have occurred since 1970 would have been orders of magnitude less.
General intelligence?
Apart from showing off syntax tricks, what exactly was the reason to write f(sleep(7)) instead of e.g. sleep(7);--i&&f()? Just minimizing the character count?
Does really all of your data come from the human web project or do you also buy clickstream data from data brokers?
From an efficient market standpoint, a good balancing measure would be if consumers knew exactly what it cost Uber/Lyft to provide the service. That way even if they charge you more for being rich, you can make an informed decision whether or not you want them profiting as much as they are from you.

A competitor might even find an advantage by providing that information. For example, if a car service told you exactly how much the driver made and how much the service took as a cut, you might be willing to pay more because you know where the money is going.
Beats me! But I suspect even if the answer were, "super awesome!" that it would not be helpful here. I think their mission is to try to go from absolutely-nothing to basic-cell-service. I've got decent cell service, so things aren't awful. They're just lame and disappointing.
Not OP, but taking a stab:

The distinctions are usually not very clearly presented, because reasons. There are a few dimensions that have become evident to me:

- Markets are exchange mechanisms. They are not specific to private capital ownership.

- Capital is productive capacity. "Capitalsim" is an economic system in which capital is (putatively) the critical input to production.

These are only two of numerous possible elements that an economic system might consider. Among others:

- Property is legally-enforcible claims to control, benefit, or exclusion, from defined economic elements. Those might be personal / mobile / chattle property, real (land) property, productive capital, trademarks, copyrights, patents, contracts, specific other legal rights or licences, animals and livestock, mineral and land rights, and in certain times and places, other human beings.

- Social welfare is a claim to general rights (healthcare, education, unemployment or disability insurance, retirement pensions) which might be included.

- Various social rights or restrictions, including privileges or restrictions / legal sanctions.

- Accountability and/or liabilities for various risks or consequences.

At various times and places, individuals have held birthright to community capabilities, or been all but wholly restricted from it. Land has been deemed private, or held in common, or subject to temporary lease or bequeathing from a king or other government. Labour has been entirely free to move across international boundaries (where those even existed), or entirely bound to specific feudal lands. Ownership rights in property may be near total, or highly restricted.

You can have markets with or without private capital, you can have private property with or without inheritance, you can have market capitalism with or without liberal democracy, you can have liberal democracy without market capitalism. And numerous other variants.
I just think our industry would be a better place if we didn't try to tear down other technologies, say stuff like "X sucks", etc.

But I agree that friendly competition is a good thing! I feel this article was a little past that, though.
It does not.

Edit: Answering the very last part of the comment; it does not have the same protections.
If you go back to my original post, I used the idea of "biologically programmed" in the context of "sole purpose of reproducing effectively." That's the context that I am using "biologically programmed." It seems you are using it in a much broader context of "all possible human behavior." I am using it to distinguish between behaviors that support reproducing effectively and those that don't. If you are using it to include all possible human behavior, which it seems like you are, then of course we are going to disagree, because our basic definitions are not aligned.

Example: suicide before reproduction may be a "biologically programmed behavior" in your context, but not in mine, because it's not a behavior that supports the biological programming of reproduction.
Ask HN: Why doesn't anyone ever read the docs?
This is one of the strangest behaviors i've seen in programming. I understand some docs are incomplete or incoherent but most of them are really good, especially the ones coming out of an enterprise setting (React, GraphQL, Apache, etc.).

Most engineers I know rush to youtube or medium or some other outsourced interpretation of the docs that is far more scattered in info. I was wondering what made you (if you're one of the types that prefers medium/YT over the documentation) prefer these off-hand interpretations of a program rather than the one who created it ?
Producing CPU (and chips in general) are rightfully seen by all of these countries as a national security imperative.
Uber/Lyft offer an option for someone who is already carrying the fixed costs of owning a depreciating vehicle to come into the market part-time and do some driving for income.

They also don't have to commit to set hours.

These should have the effect of increasing the supply of drivers (not to the full extent of all ride-share drivers, of course).

They also don't have to front the capital cost of a medallion.

Ride share prices are sensitive to market demand in near real-time rather than being set by the taxi commission (in some long-term relationship to supply/demand).

Combining those effects, I can easily see ride share prices settling somewhere below taxi rates and still leaving profit for all players.
People wanting a more reliable job can work in any field with reliable jobs. I dont understand why you picked the most prestigious ones. Aren't they more likely to be farmers or nurses or teachers?
I think that the autotranslation between languages must be expensive in terms of resources, especially if you use with large data
"Grant me chastity and continence, but not yet."

A right knave's prayer, but then Augustine was a right knave until his saintly mother finally set him straight.
I used to train at IBM, which of course meant a whole lot of PPT. Analytics of the sort described here would be helpful for discovering what slides provide the most mileage for a given presentation.

If you spend 1/2 hour on one slide, and then 2 minutes on a string of 5 consecutive slides, it says a lot about how the content impacts the presentation flow. And it would lay bare if there is any rushing towards the end of each segment.
RocksDB is excellent! MyRocks (https://mariadb.com/kb/en/library/about-myrocks-for-mariadb/), a storage backend for MariaDB based on RocksDB was so extremely promising for massively cutting back on disk thruput - we never flipped it to being used on the primary servers because it was extremely beta back then. I should write a few emails and check up on that - if I recall correctly it was a roughly 5x reduction on disk writes compared to INNODB.
Pointer Authentication
>You wrote: "if you came of musical age in the early nineties it's spelt Nirvana", so one is entirely justified
to argue based on that.

Of course it isn't justified to make that assumption, here I'll show you:

if you came of musical age in the 90s it's Nirvana, Wu Tang, whatever

if you came of musical age in the 60s it's the Beatles, Motown, Rolling Stones, whatever

if you came of musical age in the 80s it's NWA, the Smiths, Michael Jackson, whatever.

You can surmise nothing about me except I have some understanding of pop history; you are also reading into my first comment a comparison of worth that is a separate discussion and not remotely connected to my original point.

To repeat: argue the point, not your presumption of the person.

As for the rest of your comment, I'd broadly agree with a suspicion of relativism and your summary; but you are leaping from that to an unhealthy dismissal of an entire generation - which attitude is generally associated with the sort of moribund conservatism that all great talents - of whichever decade or century - always fight against to the death.
No, instead we should be representing all the board-room lumberjacks ahaha

Sure, add in some less represented aspects of Canadian life, no problem with that. I just rather it to the fictional sort.
The problem is there is this bell curve thing. Charging rich people more sounds good and redistributory. But the really rich people have more leverage because there are so few other buyers with their purchasing power completing.

End result would probably be like super high income tax with low rate "capital gains" loophole.
If the perps are sociopathic/psychopathic/etc. we can definitely expect that to be a major factor. Sociopaths look for weak, vulnerable people that they can easily manipulate and exert some sort of power on, and kids fit that description quite closely. "Sexual attraction" in its everyday sense would be quite secondary.
Sure they do. Try putting a fake attractive female 18+ year old profile up on Instagram, you'll get bombarded by predators and dick pics there too. Just not _child_ predators. Many men act monstrously on the internet, but that doesn't make them psychopaths, just losers. Something about the distance makes that sort of behavior more palatable to them.
> So how would you better compensate writers for the product of their knowledge and labor?

It's a good question. I think there's a 2 phase answer. But first, it's important to figure out the numbers. And one thing that quickly becomes apparent is on the order of 99% of writers make $0 from IM laws. IM laws instead, regardless of intent, funnel almost the entirety of profits to 1% of holders.

So the question then becomes, how do you better compensate those 1%? And the answer is you don't. The 1%'s current compensation is artificially inflated, and the 99% is under compensated.

Right now IM laws create artificially high compensation for less meaningful contributions like a 500 page book or 50 page pdf in a publication like Nature, and undervalue more meaningful contributions like small additions to Wikipedia or commits to the Linux kernel. I would much rather have the top 1,000 compensated "authors" in the world never write again than I would have Wikipedia disappear.

I think we should 2 phase the transition away from IM laws. I don't think we should abolish overnight, as that would be very disruptive to the families of folks in the IM industry. I have no sympathy for IM lawyers and IM business folks, but I do think we should have a transition period where we perhaps switch patents from an Intellectual Monopoly system to an X-Prize style system, and perhaps then phase it out (or keep the X-Prize style system, if it seems to be effective). Then in phase 2 the progress of the arts and sciences will flourish so much, I'm not too sure if you need any sort of system to artificially inflate the value of intellectual contributions at all. Creativity of billions of people will be unleashed. For a single example, if I didn't have to worry about IM laws, I (or many other people) could build a viable alternative to Google search in a year. I think the Internet has fundamentally changed the economics of the world by making many more markets feasible. There are so many markets and opportunities now, that if you lowered the cost of product development (which eliminating IM laws would do), I could see an argument where it's feasible that everyone who desired could have a natural monopoly, because there would be so many markets to choose from.

> IP is simply the means of enforcing the value of books. If you deny it without proposing a viable alternative, you're denying the value of writing itself.

IM is one idea. There are plenty of alternatives. When a janitor cleans a room, do we then give that janitor the right to charge a royalty for every person who enters that room?
The storage backend isn't Postgres, and I assume the repeated use of the words "compatible" and "wire protocol" is on purpose, so they can continue to change it.
Just for the sake of disclosure, I'm as partisan as they come, but...

Partisan arguments tend to go poorly on nice civil web forums, and I'd expect to attract the attention of the moderators if I were to start one.
Zhaoxin - is a design licenses from Via, the maker of Centaur
Pair programming isn't intended to be an all the time thing. A great example of pair programming is a new person gets hired and you pair program with them on a ticket so they can ask questions along the way. Having recently joined a remote startup I found this to be pretty essential to getting anything done. It's a great way of elevating programming level as well. You see different ways of doing things, different tools they use, etc.

Introverts are also not being targeted in any way. People who have been at this a while are just very aware that you can get far more accomplished with a team that works well together than an individual developer can. You can be an introvert and still an effective team member. Nobody is fully introverted or fully extroverted.
I think it’s the other way around: somehow we tried to build ourselves a civilization without children at all. I think in most human cultures, children are considered an important if not primary concern. Not having children well into adulthood is a modern privilege—one could even characterize modern childless adulthood as merely an extension of our own childhoods. But by starting to normalize childless adulthood, we’ve made the most normal and natural thing human beings do come across as a weird cultish type of social deviancy.

Logistically, extended families are a good idea. But I don’t think they stop people from putting their children first in terms of life priorities. On the contrary, a culture where parenthood rather than childless adulthood is normal is one where talking about your kids is a universal common ground you can share with other adults. (People need to have lots of kids for extended families to be normal—everyone will have grandparents but not necessarily aunts and uncles). Maybe you’re just observing one of these (sub)cultures from the outside.
So what? A thousand trillion people could speak some way, and it wouldn't make it somehow illegitimate for a village of 100 people to speak a different dialect.

More people in the world eat rice than bread, does that mean cultures that eat bread are wrong?
I would't be surprised if majority of HN views are from outside North America as of now. There are likely more English speakers in Bangalore than in Silicon Valley.
Papers with Code Is Joining Facebook AI
They do mention they may have missed factors in the original article it links to:

> As you can see, there are a lot of different factors that go into designing a garbage collector and some of them impact the design of the wider ecosystem around your platform. I’m not even sure I got them all.
Yeah. Look at how complex something like AlphaGo is, and then compare the complexity of Minecraft to Go. They had four days and one GPU. They never had a chance.
Why not? Care to elaborate?
It has more to do with state grants, which in China are quite big
[Disclaimer: I do work at Cliqz]

There is plenty of documentation on data collected (see first posts regarding Human Web on the tech blog), how anonymization works, why record-linkability on data collected is prevented (and forbidden), etc. Furthermore, source code can be inspected, as well as traffic in the case documentation is not enough. I believe that is a better proxy to assess "morality" than random accusations on reddit or opinions formed solely on a half-baked press releases.

Do we need to refute all miss-conceptions and FUD that might arise due to the fact that 1) we collect data to build our services (search) and 2) we are funded by a media company (VCs seem to be more pure for an unknown reason).

The answer is no. Cannot recall who said that it takes much more effort to refute BS than to generate it. (That does not go for your comment in particular, that's why we replied, but for many of the comments and some of content of the subredit that you mention.)
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21788357.
Companies are building a lot of new solar factories in China.

"Solar PV capex trending at US$9 billion annually as new GW fabs in China slash investments required"

https://www.pv-tech.org/editors-blog/solar-pv-capex-trending...

China is where the ecosystem of experienced manufacturers, material suppliers, and manufacturing equipment suppliers all comes together now. The rest of the world's solar manufacturers are struggling because the Chinese ones have such economies of scale that it's difficult to compete head-on. (Barring perhaps First Solar. First Solar is still doing ok because it has achieved multi-gigawatt manufacturing scale too, and because its product has advantages when operating in high temperature conditions. Also there are a few other solar manufacturers that can weather the storm because they're part of large conglomerates, like LG.)

Non-Chinese solar manufacturers like to cry "unfair competition" at low Chinese solar prices, but after reading industry trade publications for several years I am skeptical of that argument. To me it looks like Chinese PV companies did get government protection and incentives to establish themselves, but no worse than Western countries give to their own favored industries. And now they can produce good products at unbeatable prices. Not a whole lot different from Japan overtaking American radio and TV manufacturers in decades past, or (more recently) China rapidly overtaking incumbents to become the world's largest lithium ion battery manufacturer.
> I don't interpret this as charging different customers different prices per se.

Based on my experience Lyft and Uber charge different prices to different customers with identical trips. I've tested this by asking friends with who I'm about to share a ride with to request the same trip as me, and compare prices. We've observed differences of 10-20%.

> Knowing what your service is worth to customers so you can extract a greater fraction of this is pricing 101.

Where this becomes problematic is in the age of big data. When a company can build an accurate profile of me, they can extract maximum prices from me. We need laws that mandate what definition of "profile" is allowed to be used for pricing.

I'm not sure why we accept price discrimination at the individual level for airlines and Lyft/Uber. I'm pretty sure people would be outraged if Amazon started price discriminating based on your purchase history.
I'm not sure if you're referencing his post or not, but Sam Altman has an excellent piece about this exact mindset.

I meditate on this idea quite a bit.

https://blog.samaltman.com/the-days-are-long-but-the-decades...
Yeah, the prices are pretty low here in LA too. When I go to the South to visit family, Uber is so expensive.
I thought I recalled that the major setback was the current U.S. administration's trade policies with China. Everything was set to go, but then the plans got trumped.
As others have pointed out, ones experience of having children depends on many factors, particularly personal economics (which after all, translates from Greek as "household management").

If you can afford the expenses associated with having children, and are not completely put off by the idea, there's a good argument to be made that there is no more fulfilling a way to spend your money.

Given this, it would be interesting to hear how pg's take on having children intersects with his other public thoughts on things like UBI, universal healthcare, education, etc.
Are there any Slack chatbots that do that kind of logging and archiving? When I searched a couple years ago, I found several projects... and none of them worked except one (SlackArchive.io, I think), which worked for another couple months after I found it then died with, IIRC, communication from its operators that suggested Slack was cracking down on bots that were being used for this purpose. (Which is not unexpected.)
But he didn't say that. That's your own ridiculous emotional projection. The article contains very thoughtful criticism backed by detailed analysis. I don't think you even bothered to read the full articles (there is a part 1). The final sentence was, "Overall, it looks to me like the Java guys are winning the low latency game.", and that's a fair conclusion.
Agreed. I do remember reading somewhere that the average current full time working mother spends more time with her children than a housewife in the 50s. Children used to go outside and play and have more unstructured time. I feel like there is this whole odd child-centric culture in the US. It is bizarre how many young adults I meet nowadays who have not been left without adult supervision for more than 15 minutes their entire childhood.

Most of my friends are from childhood. For the ones who have children, about half of them have turned into uninteresting people who are incapable of carrying a conversation about anything other than their children. And some of them were extremely interesting beforehand. A few have snapped out of it when their kids have turned 3-5, but most seem stuck forever.

When I go to visit family and family friends outside the US, they all have a bunch of kids but none of them have this disease where they can only talk about the kids. But there's also much more family support nearby and societal norms allow the children to be more independent.
The challenge was to accomplish this without domain knowledge... if you can do this with GOFAI, please go ahead and shock the world.