skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I can understand the concept of "how the work affects readers" in terms of, say, literary value (for lack of a better word) of a novel, or poetry.

It's much harder to translate that idea to essays or educative works, though.

The art of war is basically a text book, so it's as literal as you can get. Biases should matter about as much as reading the package leaflet of some meds, or a math book.

It's pretty obvious that the reason it's popular has more to do with the ancient and exotic origin, the suggestive title and the opportunities for the reader's self image it provides than for its actual content -at least in the West. But considering this effect anything other than an expression of ignorance, and actually judging the work for its unintended ability to cause such effect, feels... I don't know,a travesty. Almost as superficial as judging the book for the covers' drawing or its usefulness as a doorstop.
The Politics of Epistemic Fragmentation
I would say 10 fingers is optional if you can manage the other two.

Fun fact I type with 3.5 fingers at a reasonable speed and without looking at the keyboard. I never have problems with wrist pain. I tried to teach myself to use all 10 fingers and within a day or two was experiencing very noticeable pain! I switched back to my ad hoc method and haven’t looked back.
Ultra-processed food took over your shopping basket
It's really a different situation. The ruling party is basically above the law in the US, thanks to presidential pardons and control of the impeachment process.
Hypothetically, he might have remembered his real password but the Government didn’t protect the bit-rot capable hard drive and it is the hard drive that is now bad. May be sector level checksums and probabilities rule them out but it is possible in the grand scheme of things
I've seen some grandstreams that'll run a ringer.
Skin Monitoring Apps Fail to Detect Melanomas
Yeah, you highlight a good point; I really meant the substituted FLYs and HEMIFLYs (and Bromo-DragonFLY in particular). The empathogenic benzofurans are much shorter-lived.

Among the the empathogenic benzofurans, the APBs you listed seemed to be "gems in the rough" so to speak; most of the others ended up in flavor-of-the-month "Benzofury" blends and were quickly forgotten about.
Planting Trees Won’t Save the World
I get the attitude regarding it’s February & he probably eeked out one last bonus; but there’s some funny stuff there:

* https://skyenet.dev/robots.txt
* coincidence that it was posted at 4:20
* https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=...

… maybe it’s all fake, too.
If that’s true, expiration dates are hardly exact. A bag could go bad well before or it could be completely fine well after the date. Unless there was some sensor to detect whether something had gone bad I don’t see how preventing use of something you’ve already paid for is a good idea or even legal
> I don't believe there was any wizardry on there.

A lot of that wizardry is not really user-visible. Ensuring that chips spend more time in sleep mode, coalescing events so that wakeups happen together, ensuring that there are no components passively draining power, etc.
The difference is that most countries at least pretend to care about fixing issues, or deny they exist in the first place. With Israel the answer is typically a more blatant “we know and we don’t care”. This obviously attracts more condemnation, in a vicious circle, and enables people who oppose the existence of Israel on ideological grounds.

I keep hoping that both sides of the Israel/Palestine issue will start boxing a bit smarter... but it never happens.
Peat Could Protect the Planet
One of those funds famously blew themselves up in 45 minutes, with causes including reusing an old feature flag rather than defining a new one and a complete lack of code review or incident response procedures. In all my (admittedly anecdotal) knowledge, it may be true that the top funds have the top software engineer quality, but their skills are put to use writing software that's absolutely terrible.
Yeah. Some type of non-linear pricing would be a nice solution, but it would be tough enforce. Once you realize there are lots of fake companies on Google, you realize the domains would all get owned by dishonest people willing to lie and cheat to beat the system.

Another option would be to set a fixed price for ownership transfers and to forbid charging more than that in the ToS. It wouldn't stop squatting, but it would suck all the value out of it because I could negotiate with a squatter to buy a domain and turn around and report them to ICANN so the domain gets revoked and dropped back into the pool.

The biggest problem is that everyone involved, including ICANN, has a lot of incentive to create pseudo property with a limited supply so they can all participate in the rent seeking that comes along with limited supply property.

Even though they'd never admit it, domain squatters are great for ICANN, the registries, and the registrars. The squatters demonstrate domains have value and the (fake) limited supply creates a gold rush style urgency where no one wants to wait until tomorrow to register a domain because a squatter might grab it first.
If I rephrase the title to "Why are the results of software engineering so bad?" it makes it easier for me to point out the most obvious problems, in my experience at least.

The alternative to nearly all software solutions is "bunch of people do that thing" or "hire costly expert." Software is usually a combination of transitory, relatively quick to implement, mostly opaque, and very inexpensive in up-front costs in comparison to the alternative, which both reduces the perceived risks as well as makes it unusually attractive as a means to achieve some goal. That combination also lowers the bar for what qualifies as "a goal," providing a much larger universe of possible actions available for those who are establishing the goals.

With the lowered bar of what constitutes a goal, given that the overall costs are perceived to be so very low, the decision maker feels unburdened enough to choose goals without vetting the decision and its consequences against the standards that would be applied to "hire a bunch of people to do that." You've taken what used to be a decision that carried with it all the forethought and examination that one would usually apply to purchasing an automobile or home and replaced it with a decision that has no more consequential cost than to decide whether one wants fries or carrot sticks with a sandwich.

As with the choice of fries, it's not the single instance of such a choice that lays you out on a cardiac surgeon's table but instead the repeated accumulation of what seemed to be inconsequential decisions to get fries. If you asked someone if eating fries with every meal could set someone up for a heart attack they'd most likely say "of course, that's obvious." But our patient did not encounter the situation in which they had to make the decision as to what side they will have with every forthcoming meal, and all the forethought answering such a question would entail. They only made one little decision whose importance was as fleeting as a single meal. Until it wasn't.

This effect on decision-making, with regards to software, almost always spreads to the entire organization (and often beyond, to infect customers and the general public as well). The CEO, the VPs, the Directors, the Managers, not to mention the programmers themselves, all make decisions and set goals that meet the lowered standard (or at least a standard lower than what should or used to be the standard).

When you lower the standards for decisions and goals, you get results commensurate with those standards.
Google Podcasts
See also: contract of adhesion.
That's what I thought, but now more and more features are being disabled either entirely (as with the SQLite interface in WebKit) or for unencrypted sites, which — correct me if I'm wrong here — includes web pages you've archived on your local filesystem. Maybe <canvas> will survive that, despite its use in browser fingerprinting, but camera access and appcache are already nuked, and the only interface that let you do custom realtime DSP on audio streams from an unencrypted origin is deprecated.
It prints to stdout so you can of course grep your "gh issue list" (or at least the 3 fields that it displays: number, title, labels), but since it silently truncates output to at most 100 records, this doesn't seem terribly useful to me.

It doesn't even print a message or use a nonzero return code to indicate the output is incomplete. What's the point of running "gh issue list | grep foo"? There's no way to distinguish between "there are no 'foo' issues" and "there's 250 'foo' issues (but they happen to not be at the top of the list)".

Code search seems to be out of scope for the CLI. (It arguably doesn't even do issue search -- just basic filtering on a couple predefined fields.) But that's no problem because I've got all my source code on my machine already! I can use grep, git-grep, or any other tool I want (ack/ag/rg are popular).
Here's a different approach. I'll refer to women as the "diverse" group but this should vaguely apply to other categories like race or sexual orientation. I'm male, and I'm writing as if you're male, but you don't actually say and this advice might either be unnecessary or irrelevant if you're not, so please make allowances as appropriate.

Make sure that no one at your organization is creating a hostile environment toward women. The hostile environment may be invisible to you, and you might not find out unless a woman trusts you and tells you. Text analysis editing whatever tools on your job ads are pointless if your existing female employees are leaving because of this. Conversely, if you have a lot of women already, it will be easier to hire more because they will recommend their female friends, and female applicants will see women there and may feel more comfortable.

Make sure you have female management, ideally as executives with real power. That way current and prospective female employees have some basic assurance that the environment won't be totally hostile and that gender-related complaints might be taken seriously.

Here's what you can personally do:

* Publicly advocate for policies that make it easier for women to exist in your workplace. This does not mean making it hostile for men. There's the obvious stuff like making sure no one has an inappropriately sexy screensaver, but also: if your company has t-shirts, are there any with a female cut? are female bathrooms as accessible and clean as male bathrooms? does your company make no-questions-asked allowances for primary caregivers of children, often women?

* Make an effort to be trusted by your female colleagues as someone they can complain about gender bias to. You can do this by publicly advocating for policies that support women and by working toward some gender parity in hiring like you're doing here. Then, ask these women how things are really going. Be prepared to be unpleasantly surprised, but definitely do not disbelieve them as your first reaction.

* If your executive team is mostly men, figure out if that can be changed in the near future. Maybe that team is growing too, and you can encourage them not to instantly hire one of their close male friends. If the executive team is heavily male and that can't be changed quickly, then encourage the executive team to be aggressively outspoken about avoiding gender bias.

I hope this helps.
Sorry if I come across a bit strong. I am a something of a history buff, and the liberty that some Chinese historical shows take is shocking to me. I am like you, curious about different interpretations of familiar events.
If your password itself was an admission of guilt then would that count as testimony and protected under the Fifth Amendment?
How to Sell
I think you are working from a false premise.

Modern astronauts are many things, monkeys in a can is not one of them. They have many roles and skills ranging form engineering to teaching and many things in between.

They perform engineering and procedural review.
Carry out public outreach that inspires scientists and engineers of the future.
Manage operations during launch and in space operations.
and are involved in most parts of approval of new equipment they will be using.

Yes they have a PR role, but getting photographed on the top of a rocket is a very small part of that.
> like using the countryside to pasture livestock as they’ve ‘done for generations’ is an inalienable birth right

I understand (and share some of) your sentiment, but it's worth correcting you to say that ranchers (usually) don't feel that grazing rights are an "inalienable birth right". Instead, they feel that grazing rights are a property right, and they should not be deprived of this property without compensation. What may surprise you is that courts frequently agree with the ranchers' interpretation!

Most people don't realize that when a ranch is sold, the grazing rights are sold along with the private land. They have market value, and they are attached to a particular property. Banks treat them as collateral, and maybe more importantly, the IRS treats them as assets for the purposes of taxation: https://famguardian.org/publications/propertyrights/estatax.....

So yes, everyone must adapt, but it's not nearly as simple as the ranchers simply being wrong. The way the US West was settled created a system where private individuals really do have a (some sort of) legitimate property right in the use of public lands. Unless you are willing to give up on private property altogether (personally, I'm more sympathetic than most to Proudhon's "Property is Theft" argument) a more nuanced understanding is necessary.

Here's a good (and reasonably balanced) article that gives more background about the issues: https://www.perc.org/2016/01/21/managing-conflicts-over-west.... The first third is about the Bundy case, the middle about the how we got the system we have, and the last part is about where it might go from here.
The GP's point was that, if the bar for the 5th amendment is that you may be required to provide testify against yourself as long as the government already knows the piece you are required to testify about, it's not clear how that wouldn't apply to you being required to admit your guilt when the government has sufficient evidence that you are guilty.

I'd also note that giving the government your books is required by financial laws as a condition do being allowed to do business, it's not testimony or your general obligation of cooperating with an investigation.
Almost every single answer there now is some sort of /r/thathappened story of someone telling about how they were either:

A) Smarter than someone else
B) More Generous than others

It really just feels like people awkwardly trying to humblebrag but without the humble.
It all depends on the person, who they look up to, their history, their biases. A selfish person that values space travel may ignore all other sources of information, but the astronaut saying it may cause a moment of reflection.

Now, is this ideal? No, we are a strange-strange species.
There are a few issues... First, the people writing the checks aren't concerned about the material quality or the craft discipline output. It's also not so different from manufacturing... you can have a hand crafted oak cabinet with dovetail joins and meticulous material selection, or you can have a flat pack cabinet from Ikea. Both have value, and quality is considered a measure of value that meets or exceeds expectations.

Building an aircraft has many layers of bureaucracy behind it, and the cost that goes with it. In the end, software is practiced as a craft more than an engineering discipline. And that's okay. It's usually when politics and management decisions override the needs of the software/product that things tend to go sideways.

There are also more than a handful of software developers that don't really care about the quality or maintainability of the software. Let alone learning and using the methods for interfacing with said software.

Just the past couple days, I was looking for a React + Material UI template to work from. Many looked great, but actually following the code was a byzantine mess. Mirrored trees of files are my biggest pet peeve in front end projects. Let alone not even using the methods available for use and extension. That's just a recent example.

I've seen others, where a given set of methods is copy/pasted across dozens of case statements... Worse still is when you see a schema design that makes no sense and/or variables that are lost and meaningless, that everything around it loses all context. Such as the passwords having the variable w23 and the value is stored in the "Phone2" table under "extra1" columns.

Managers give lip service to "quality" and "testing" but when push comes to shove you skip testing to ship on time, and have to deal with bugs several years into an initial 9-month project timeline.
Extortion specifically? How about the Bezos extortion case?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/21/revealed-the-s...
Meh, that’s like half the budget of the databases on our dev environment.

We have way too many fucking copies of our DB.
Ask HN: Office space for equity in my startup?
Someone offered me an office space (~1000 square ft) for equity in my startup. How could i arrange a win-win situation for both of us considering he will not commit anything other than an workplace. How should i price the leasing terms and what % should be fair?

Background: have not incorporated yet and i am pre-revenue, without MVP and without PMF and without employees. All advice appreciated!
Yeah, man, so much for them. Just like "so much for the lumberjacks, they can't cut down a sequoia". Sometimes the cost someone imposes on the rest of us is too much.
I got really lucky. Bought my car 4 years ago. They said it included a 3 month sirius subscription. It still works to this day. My wife bought a car a couple years ago with a 3 month subscription and it ended on day 90 :(
Possibly, the other half is convincing management that some developers are really worth 2-3x as much.
> "I forgot" is generally not a valid defense.

Am I the only here who had to re-install Linux after x weeks or months of uptime because the LUKS password was forgotten? It happened to me more than once.

How is it "generally not" (but sometimes yes?) a valid defense when it's a fact that people are losing their passwords?

The internet is full of messages like: "I forgot my LUKS password but remember it had the name of my dog in it" (not advising to do that btw), "Is there a way to crack my own password?"

P.S: I've got backup of all my files and configuration files, so re-installing Linux ain't a problem: theft / flood / fire / full-disk encryption password lost... I wouldn't lose anything.
I could see the index idea working, but there's one issue to resolve: traffic hacking.

What if I create a startup called X, and successfully petition to convert x.com to an index. I'll be on the index, and if I get big enough, I'll be able to win any bid to become the "primary" domain owner rather than a secondary registrant. However, a VC firm that didn't invest in my startup can realize that I'm gaining traction. What they could do is fund another "X" startup that does the same thing and gets listed on the same index.

Their version of "X" could steal my thunder, and they can use the resulting profits to justify their investment in the highest bid for x.com. Under the system that I described, they can still bid for the domain, they just wouldn't be able to blatantly hack attention by listing their website next to mine in the index. I would be the very obvious first name in a small window showing the top secondary x.com's by traffic. Almost everyone would click the first one, and then default my website if they like it. Of course, they can expand the modal window into a de-facto index, but that would be if they really want to see everyone beyond the top 3 x.coms.
> Only 6% of visitors were going to be from China, and less were expected much less due to the COVD-19.

Holding MWC without Huawei, ZTE, BBK, Xiaomi and co. is pretty much meaningless
Supporting those laid off by Macy's – help finding new jobs
Using the same logic, they could subpoena the grave that the body is buried in as the existence of such grave is a forgone conclusion (a shovel and dirt found in the car, a hole in the ground must exist) and thus would not be a testimony. The accused in that case is also a witness in that they witnessed the grave where the body rest. If they lead the police to a different hole then analyze of the dirt can prove contempt of the court.

The rule make very little sense. I would not bet in favor of it continuing for long. The whole idea that the prosecutor is only asking for the container and not the content was extremity transparent to begin with, and judges who have rejected that argument have said just that. In that case the conclusion the judges made is that a request for the container (ie the unencrypted device) is the same as a request for the information itself, and thus should be seen as such.
> Domains are basically property, so why not start charging people fair market value for the physical property they own that's appreciated significantly over the last several decades?

We do that with property taxes. That's the biggest slice of personally owned, likely to appreciate, physical property. When a property is sold, we also tax the proceeds from that, similar to domains.
This is a false problem. If you expect pets having a worse life than now, you could wait for a long long time.

Cats will be much safer. Wolves equal to more saplins alive, thus increase in wolfes = increase in trees, and more trees around, mean cats climbing to safety with just an elegant jump.

Moreover, cats are perfectly able to fight back and they keep routinely german shepperds at bay. An angry cat can scratch a dog eye really fast.

Plus the benefit of 100 coyotes fleeing the area and more bird nests at soil level = Happier cats.

......................

The effect in dogs will be less clear, but will be positive in some aspects at least.

Wolves will put warnings of "do not enter" for dogs to sniff all around the place. Small dogs in wolf territory are not so prone to escape and will remain closer to their human owner. Most dog owners would appreciate that as a good thing.

Dogs close to a human are safe. Wolves will not approach or touch any human with a ten foot pole. Coyotes instead... well is a different history. Coyotes are much, much, bolder and will grab walking dogs practically from the hands of the owner if they have the opportunity.

If you are a responsible owner shouldn't let your dog roam alone in the forest at night. Wolves will not kill them, cars will do.
Small dogs should sleep also inside or in a secure area at night, not chained outside. Irresponsible owners will lose pets, as usual, with and without wolves. This is not the wolves fault.

Wolves in the area mean less dogs lost, killed or severely hurt after being lost trying to chase a deer.

Can fall to mention there that the "but think in the pets!" argument is a litle hypocritical. I don't see any of those people asking for erradication of boars so the pets will be safer. A boar can severe the spine of a dog in no time. A Deer can impale a dog's neck or torax easily also.
I don’t get your numbers, getting one for 400 people is 40M, for thousands it may be 100-999M.

Still expensive, but much less than 40 billion.
It would be nice to see more examples of how to do type checking. But there are some good examples in the Programming Languages Zoo. [1]

[1] https://plzoo.andrej.com/
Encrypting a device to securely wipe it is not unheard of. Similar to running dd over it, but more noise to hopefully remove any lingering magnetic patterns. In such a case there's no need to retain the key.