skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Did you read the comment? The presumption of that statement was a bad credit to start with.

Aka. bankruptcy vs bad credit, not compared to a good credit score.
A friend of mine also likes this podcast. I guess I'll really have to get around to checking it out now, thanks for sharing.
Same thing happened to Microsoft with browser selection. This does not really change anything. Google search results are just better.
I read that as well. But Amazon does have a good return policy with respect to that, and if you read recent reviews it seems like the problem is mostly over.
Thanks for sharing. I am aware there is no small amount of cases where the cloud offerings do save money in total.

But to be fair, for most projects the complexity that Amazon's services carry with them is absolutely not justified. Sure I can learn to work with 10-20 Amazon services but even me as a senior guy who knows his way around pretty much anything you throw at him, that's precious time spent not helping the direct business needs but basically making sure the house won't collapse.

And a lot of smaller companies like to merge the "programmer" and "DevOps" titles into one person because of course, that means one paycheck and not two. And as you said, they get angry that you can't become a pro sysadmin in an afternoon.

I suppose I am just trying to say yet again that many companies reach for BigCorp tools when they really ought to be fine with 2-3 DigitalOcean droplets and 1 dedicated DB droplet, plus 1 extra for backups.
The best response to that is malicious compliance: make the changes, but in a way that's as reasonable as possible, and as obnoxious as possible to the people who have actually requested the change. Like, have the acknowledgment line on the syllabus be: "ᴅɪsᴄʟᴀɪᴍᴇʀ: ᴛʜɪs ᴄᴏᴜʀsᴇ ɪs ᴛᴀᴋɪɴɢ ᴘʟᴀᴄᴇ ᴏɴ ᴛʀᴀᴅɪᴛɪᴏɴᴀʟ x-ᴛʀɪʙᴇ ʟᴀɴᴅ." or something like that. If the other side objects, you can stand your ground and point out that they are being unreasonable.
The first time I saw this phrase I thought it was going to describe something like software branch prediction, speculative execution, self tuning algorithms, or heck even Bloom filters or hyperloglog. That was a direction my first mentor and I used to talk about and it’s one of my regrets that I never did much in that arena.

My brain wants this term to mean something else and I become momentarily excited every time this topic gets reposted.
In my experience, self-perceiving myself as being less orthodox and more creative than my peers, is that making a bunch of changes is aggrevating to your peers. It often disrupts their workflow, it causes them to have to learn things again, and worst of all it can lead to unintended consequences because you didn't understand why things were being done the way they were and the pitfalls of your clever solution. Alternatively it can be the case the creative DOES have a better solution but for some reason such as communication people cannot understand WHY the solution is superior and reject it perticularly when the creative is fairly new or in a fairly junior position.

The creative finds themselves in the position of either underperforming their peers through overconfident cleverness, or overperforming their peers and in the process threatening their peers because they have depreciated the knowledge of their peers while positioning themselves as the only ones who know the new system at least in the short term. So regardless of how well they perform there is reason to try and beat them down. The creative employee has incentives to try to downplay their creative instincts or at least to limit their creativeness to their personal workflow where it causes less disruption.

Additionally if you take two engineers of equal ability, one by the book and relentlessly uncreative but never breaks anything, and one which breaks as many things as they improve coming out about even, the former is almost always preferred simply because the latter causes a lot more stress and distraction and more need for training. There is a cost to creativity that often goes unaccounted for and a creative solution has to be meaningfully superior to be worth implementing.

Probably the only consistent reasons I've seen creatives being favored is 1: Outright superiority perticularly when conservatism has gone unchecked for too long 2: Collective boredom and a desire for staff to learn different ways to doing things to round out their skills 3: Management wanting to put pressure on complacent mediocre employees who "go through the motions". In many cases an employee exceptional at following directions and process can be genuinely more useful.
Self-hosting applies more to data. If I've got the bits, I can deploy them (or channel them) elsewhere. If I don't, I'm SOL.

Self-hosted services -- Web, Mail, messaging, etc., -- remains more complicated. I really wish it weren't, I've been watching projects for a decade and more now to make it less so. I'm thinking that this won't happen.

Simply based on skills distribution, some sort of federation or clustering at the level of 1 admin per 100 - 100k users is probably necessary. That's a scope at which regional or interest-based community hosting becomes viable. At the same time, it means thousands to millions of individual service providers, a scope at which at least some mechansisms of mass surveillance (state, capitalist, non-state actor, criminal) become less viable.

Concentration is its own risk.
I've run AZ's Man Against Horse... it's possible that I've beaten a few horses, but honestly, not sure. It's a pretty fun event....

There was a really great RadioLab episode about it the other day: https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/man-a...
>Yet, without that external context, if someone were to watch Breaking Bad and was told it was a biopic

Reminded of exploration of similar idea in Galaxy Quest https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0177789/
An incredible contribution to the topic.
I've been considering getting a vasectomy recently, and this thread has been a huge help in granting perspective and context.

Even well into my twenties I still don't really have any interest in kids or long term relationships for that matter. I've never really been good at them and attribute a lot of that to my parents making fun of me at a young age whenever I was "dating" someone etc.

The biggest factor for me is having spent years getting my financial life and mental health in check. The idea of doing something like having a kid and throwing both of those aspects of my life into oncoming traffic seems unwise. I've also had good friends seem to fundamentally change in very negative ways after having kids. Some have already been divorced and largely will never have a life they enjoy again.
You can find celebrities if you want. The paparazzi does.

Your other example of hiding property in a divorce is actually an argument in favor of not allowing this. IANAL but is that legal? If it is legal, and you want to say morality is up to the individual, then it's not an argument either way.
Digital puppets using AR (augmented reality) some apps, companies
All of which, I guess, says that if student loans can be trivially discharged in bankruptcy, then we should expect that non-government loans will quickly go away, and government loans will start to have a ~100% default rate

(or this judge's decision won't become universally applicable, or the law will be changed to circumvent it)
until the surveillance biz/govt system collapses

Absent opposition there's no particular pressure on it that would result in collapse. Sure, the inherent contradictions would lead to malaise, economic recession, and depression, but those are fairly normal parts of the political cycle that are easily spun and can always be blamed on a politically impotent minority or stock antagonist.
You don't do anything about that in this context. The queries you write must target the database you are going to use.
>Americans are so obsessed with milk that the mere thought of not drinking it is seen as abnormal and weird

Simply refuting that milk is (only) for children proves obsession.

Great.

I think the parent comment to yours was uncouth, boisterous, and silly. I don't think his point necessarily was.

To roll that individual into 'American Obsession' is extraordinarily silly.

All I can find to say : "European superiority complex".

We individuals have different opinions from one another, over here in the colonies, to the surprise of many.
There are some good articles/tutorials on raywenderlich.com. https://www.raywenderlich.com/android/articles
It also has a great unofficial name: the penguin operator.

<()

See? Penguin!
The clerk has to use some kind of online system to connect the new sim to the customers phone number. The system would obviously require the clerk to authenticate himself and could require him to enter the passport number or other document ID he checked to verify the customers identity.

If later it turns out this was a sim swapping attack you can verify if the clerk entered a valid document ID. He can’t do that without having been presented a proper document, so you can tell if he checked.
Please share a better way that can work.
I use the term in the sense of the common phrase "know enough to be dangerous".
Ancient Tree with Record of Earth's Magnetic Field Reversal Discovered
Well that's the point, isn't it?
That's only how it works at Google if the "they" is sufficiently organizationally close that you actually care if you break them (and you'll only even know about it if you're close enough that you run their presubmit)
> Whoever invents a cure for cancer will have the market cornered and make a ton of money. Drug companies have tremendous incentives to do that.

Where to start ...

1) Cancer isn't one disease, it's hundreds. If you live to 110, you will die from cancer.

2) Pharmas don't want a cure. They want a daily dose for 40 years like Rogaine. That's how they make money.
a) Yes. Joel had a very well written blog that was very popular with developers (I miss your blog Joel!).

b) Yes. Back then his customers were developers.
Somewhat jokingly, somewhat seriously: I wish that laws and changes to them were organized and published like repos and pull requests on github.

It'd be such a lead forward in transparency if 'bugs' (loopholes), authors, and proposed changes were out in the open -- and the history and reasoning behind them equally public.

In theory I think this is the way many countries legal systems already work: the case law and regulations are technically public. But it's generally only accessible (in both the sense of retrieval, and also in the sense of understanding the language) to subject experts.
As you also mention iOS I highly recommend Paul Hudson's books at https://www.hackingwithswift.com

His 100 Days of Swift (and Swift UI) are also quite good to work through. He is widely known and respected in the iOS development community and works hard to keep it all up to date (all updates are included if you purchase his books).
It does change something: You can now choose Google, instead of having it foisted upon you as a default.
I'm very sympathetic to Georgism, but you all seem to have taken a wrong turn somewhere and ended up in a discussion about the real estate ownership anonymity.
From my perspective I feel proponents of AA are doing the bait and switch.

I think a lot of 'AA' in practice is similar to what is done with Harvard admissions either by deliberate design or poor incentives. For example say a business notices an incorrect distribution of employees and then decides to introduce the steelman AA policy in order to try and fix this disparity. Businesses prefer to measure outcomes over process so you end up having either implicit or explicit racial proportions as goals instead of having the 'steelman AA' process being the goal. This ends up leading to explicit racial preferences and the strawman AA as the implementation.
I think there might still be a way to implement it, something like allowing the court to revoke or annul the degree?

It's also possible that an explicit restriction on telling employers that you once had a degree would work, since we do have other cases where we restrict what people are allowed to ask and tell in job interview situations.

Another possibility is that the court could ask you to promise not to disclose your degree in exchange for granting you bankruptcy relief. Nondisclosure agreements are a thing, so this seems like it's probably legal?
Yes, but it's not only because of being more social and open-minded. Sometimes it's the ultra-introvert-ultimate-problem-solver, or someone who is involuntarily being depended on by everyone by being caring all the time. Ultimately it's someone deemed useful for other people.

On the contrary, someone with "I'm frontend so I don't care what backend is really doing"
or "If it is in production then it's SRE's responsibility" attitude don't go anywhere.
This. As far as I know, on HN downvotes are supposed to be for non-constructive comments and a moderation tool more than a "I disagree" or "I dislike this" button. That is probably why you only get the option to downvote after you gained >1k points.
The entire point of surveillance is to shift security between groups. The security cameras around my house make it less secure for those that try to steal from me and more secure for myself, my family and my possessions.

Mass surveillance is often used in ways that don't promote general welfare.
A Sudoku Solver in APL (2012)
I really enjoyed this lecture about low back pain by Dr Austin Baraki - its causes, risk reduction and management. It's a really good, accessible introduction to the modern biopsychosocial model of pain and is well-worth an hour of your time: https://soundcloud.com/user-344313169/episode-82-dr-baraki-o...
So, during the bankruptcy take back all the material possessions, except those needed for basic needs of course (we're humans after all!), take back the material benefits accrued from the education .. oh wait, they're bankrupt, they don't have any: Either none were accrued or someone else has made off with them.

When you repossess a house you can't take back the nice memories of living there either, nor take back the potential someone has from benefiting from that shelter. Maybe the owner raised children there, perhaps we should allow the bank to take possession of co-housed dependents in such situations ...
I'm an engineer. I'm creative as hell even outside of the domain of my work. I'm also able to analyze situations and problems with consistently unerring, narrowly focused detail. Four years of training in certain types of cognitive processes does not preclude someone from learning how to use another less rigorous (by definition) method of thought.

This article was shit from the get go, here's a list:

The title was shit:

>Why are engineers so narrow-minded? New research has an idea.

The research is not new, the research he and the hbr.org article are citing is from 2007. It's also important to mention the findings are about the perception educational environment itself not and not in the workforce. If there was new research I couldn't find it links to the papers.

The very first sentence of the body was shit:

>I could make a viable argument that engineers are swiftly destroying the world.

Yet he neglects to do so, and also fails to mention that it's the people using the technology that are destroying the world, not us.

The second sentence is even worse:

>Naturally, I won't, as they can be very sensitive souls who stream uncontrollable invective like many people stream Netflix.

So in order to make himself immune to any reasonable argument that he knows would refute his weak-ass claims he just says that all engineers would be critical of it anyway - shut up and accept him and the psychologist findings as gospel.

The worst part is that the older research isn't bad, though I'm unable to find the newest research that should be easily viewable inside of the hbr.org article (seriously, where is it???), the older stuff seems reasonable, it's the zdnet.com writer's snide asshole commentary inserted everywhere while pulling bits and pieces from the research to come to incorrect conclusions.

This drivel seems to be ending up on the front page more often. Please stop upvoting it.
Does anybody know if this can be done in Windows (not WSL)? E.g. is it possible to open a named pipe (?) through its name, and work with it as a sequential file?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21848860
What would you say to those who were Jewish or another type of 'undesirable' in 1930/40s Germany, or one of the millions disappeared by the USSR secret security, or one of hundreds of thousands of Uighur peoples being oppressed/killed in modern day China?
> I find it hard to believe that you actually think this is why every single indigenous person is asking for the acknowledgement.

A large part of it is that in the US (which is where this professor is located), the preferred nomenclature is "American Indian" or "Native American". (According to CGP Grey [0], the closer you get to a reservation, the more likely it is that "American Indian" or just "Indian" is the preferred term) Either way, "Indigenous Peoples" seems to be more of a Canadian or Australian thing, and I've never seen it used to refer to people in the states. This would imply that the request isn't actually coming from the tribes in question.

And IMO it would be unreasonable to include for the same reason that a discussion of set theory would be inappropriate in a history course covering the "New World" in the 1400s, even ignoring the fact that the term is wrong.

0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh88fVP2FWQ
I would call it a bit more utilitarian personally. Philosophically there is some value to that attitude in theory but only if everything else is known about a concept such that origin is irrelevant.

If someone finds scientific and mathematical proof that say an antibiotic formulation is impossible for a prokaryote to develop resistance to it doesn't matter if it was done by a respected winner of a noble prize, funded by a meat industrialist who wanted everyone off of his ass about antibiotic usage, or a crackpot who stumbled upon something right for utterly wrong reasons. If it is right the origins don't matter.

In practice however we don't and the source hints at other aspects including conflicts of interest. Perhaps the hypothetical universal antibiotic technically works but allows viruses to proliferate and fill in many ecological niches meaning overuse is still bad even when disregarding digestive bacteria. And perhaps the hypothetical meat industrialist knew that abd covered it up.
What happens once the training data includes these adversarial patches? Wouldn't the AI learn to detect them accurately?
>Well, it's not like the healthiness of foods is what guides the average American.

point me to the national culture that prioritizes food healthiness. Given that 'Americans' are so obviously not prioritizing that (apparently?), i'd like to see the opposite country, one where every individual prioritizes the health consequences of each and every meal.

Extra credit for countries that eat healthy from imported food, and not just coincidentally healthy due to their local crops and harvests enforcing it as the cheaper and plentiful option.

I won't hold my breath.

Lots of anti-American sentiment around here. It's too bad that I seem to be the only one in this thread who thinks that these broad national generalizations of identity are actually hugely bigoted diatribe that has no real connection to the reality that we live in..

Guaranteed if I said something like "Germans all do.." i'd be flagged in minutes. I don't do that because 1) such statements are almost always false and 2) it's disrespectful and outside of what can happen in actual civil discourse.

All I ask : Let's try to keep in mind that these big bad nations are actually full of individuals, all with different ideas and concepts of how to live our lives.
Why do you think the Central Valley in CA is a desert?

I agree that CA agriculture needs to be more careful with how it uses almonds, but the Valley is not a desert, it's a great place to grow crops.
The video doesn't make clear what the myth was susposed to be. Steve Wozniak designed the Apple I, Steve Jobs joined later, that's not really a secret.
When it says Harvard, I assume it includes the entire Harvard network, including BI, MGH, BWH, etc. in which the case it's not that impressive. I'm pretty sure any lab at the Broad is way more efficient than the average lab in the Harvard network.

And Calico is not playing games to get published, like the typical lab in academia does.
Exceptions are pretty much the perfect example of (bad) magic actually; unannotated, dynamically dispatched nonlocal control flow that can execute code (ie, destructors) in completely unrelated contexts on the way past. At least 0x5F3759DF can be boxed into a function and commented in one place.

> Go's definition of "magic" is somewhat akin to a 15th century peasant seeing a lightbulb.

This is very true and well put though.
As a guy using a 10-core Xeon workstation with 64GB 2666Mhz DDR4 ECC RAM and a NVMe SSD capable of 2.8 GB/s read and write... I have to tell you that I only partially agree.

I've noticed my compilation speeds got dramatically better (compared to a MacBook Pro and an old-ish i7-3770 desktop PC). And it can handle even the sluggishness of Slack just fine without you noticing a lag, which I view as a huge achievement.

However, one thing my very detailed system monitors are telling me every day is -- 99% of all software we use every day is not parallel enough. So I have this amazingly powerful CPU that only (1) Git garbage collection, (2) PostgreSQL restoring a big backup, (3) Rust compiler and (4) [partially] Elixir compiler can saturate to its full potential.

I'd say that if everybody buys the new AMD Threadrippers and PCIe 4.0 motherboards, RAMs, SSDs and GPUs, we'd all be collectively fine for like 10 years.

The software however, it badly needs more parallel processing baked in it.
What is the basis for your claim that "experts" have no idea if banning will work? The posted article was written to counter stories about efforts to limit dollar stores and encourage full-service grocery stores. The story's tool is a paper [0] by economists who analyzed data and found that access to full-service grocery stores does not make a meaningful difference. So those experts (economists) think they do any have idea if it will work, they think it won't. It fits the author's and their publications conservative, small-government beliefs; I can't speak to the quality of the paper.

Anyway, my comment was in response to disdain for experts in favor of parents. That sort of anti-intellectual mindset can hit the road.

[0] https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/134/4/1793/5492274
“Telega” literally means “cart” in Russian. In crime jargon it also means “written complaint” or (very rarely) “telegram”. I appreciated the name.
I'm hoping that people start saying "duck it!" in place of "google it!" (Not going to capitalize google because it's practically genericized and them losing the trademark would make me happy.)
Interestingly, it works great without Javascript enabled. :-)
How the Police Use Facial Recognition, and Where It Falls Short
I think a problem with this line of reasoning is that people forget what we used to do before we had certain conveniences. If Uber disappears, people would just read a book for 15mins or plan everything to take the extra time into account.

Another problem with this line of reasoning is that people assume that they can always utilise 15m in a productive way or that not doing anything is not productive. How many times do you need a break everyday? How many times would a 15m break to relax and refocus or meditate actually benefit you rather than trying to force some work?
“13 Minutes to the Moon” by the BBC World Service.