skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You've just highlighted some historical facts. There's people (e.g. myself) that find most history profoundly boring, and instead are interested by future, politics, psychology. The conversation between Peter Thiel and Eric Weinstein on the latter's podcast was extremely profoundly interesting and hugely elevated Thiel as a deep thinker in my mind. Just an example.
When I was in my 20’s I went to interview for a job as a carpet cleaner. They gave me a spiel to learn (everyone needs the “deep fiber treatment”) and then some paperwork to sign. But, reading the fine print, I discovered that I was to use my own car, I was to pay for the gas, I was to pay to rent the equipment, I was to pay for the cleaning supplies, I was to do all the work, and at the end of the day I was going to get a ten percent commission.

That was the moment I understood capitalism. Intelligence is not what makes you rich; neither is hard work. What makes you rich is skimming a large percentage of the value of the labor of a large group of people. That’s how you end up with billions of dollars. Not by being smart (although I’m sure it doesn’t hurt) and certainly not by being scrupulous. By having leverage. By owning the means of production.

Now as developers or techies we own a little bit of the means of production in the form of skills we have in our heads. But believe me when I say that they’re coming for that too in the form of intellectual property, software patents, and noncompetes. All of those things depress wages because they take the means of production out of our control. It’s really important to be able to see this. Money is a form of power and power is about leverage. Not intelligence or hard work.
There are so many dirt cheap (even the cheapest Gaterons are actually 20 cents) key switches that this is like saying "I find blue handled pens write better for me than green handled pens". Maybe it's true of the pens you tried, but there's little correlation.

I have everything from Topres to Zealios... my current daily is using switches that cost 30 cents.

The quality to price ratio in mechanical keyboards is completely and totally non-existent since other manufacturers came to the scene, and honestly we'd be seeing even better values if mechanical keyboard users weren't so hellbent on shoving money into things and assuming it makes them better.

-

I overheard someone saying they wish there was a more expensive version of a certain budget keyboard the other day.

When asked why, the person didn't really have a reason. They just wish it wasn't a budget keyboard so they could like it (read: show it off).
This is why I pay for a couple of my local "papers". Thankfully I live in a section of New York (Halfway between Poughkeepsie and Peekskill) with loads of them. I'm sure a lot of mediumly populated places have at least one. Even my town of 600 has it's own paper - that I don't subscribe to because they distribute them to most of the shops in town.

Even if they have a political slant (which (a lot|most|all) of them do), it's easy to ignore that coverage and focus on the truly local news. Also, tons of local gossip.
Well, among other things, English had a word for "brown" long before it had a word for "orange," which as the video described was previously seen just as a shade of red or yellow. Brown is just a more prominent color in nature.
>Becoming rich and maintaining that requires a commitment that eats into everything else.

But if you're rich, you can just hire people to maintain that commitment for you.

And if you're rich enough, most of your money makes itself through stocks and investments anyway.
I think they were contrasting the first test (a more specific test of a leaf function, i.e the innermost parts of the app) with second test (a less specific test because it fails when either the outermost or innermost part is broken) and saying that to diagnose the second kind of test failure, you can make note of the fact that the more specific test is failing as well and start your debugging in that innermost part of the app (the leaf of the callstack).
No love for Winamp 5? It has enough of a media library to be useful. With the default classic (Winamp 2-era) skin, it loads fast enough and is snappy enough for me.
This is my intuitive conclusion as well (with no data to back it up). My goal ever since I finished school was to hit a certain income number and then find ways to convert advancement into working less, not being paid more. So far so good. I like to think I'm reasonably intelligent.
As my sociology professor noted, "These are the three most common ways to become rich, in order of decreasing probability: fraud, inheritance, luck. In particular note the absence of hard work." -- Or intelligence, I would like to add.
DNSSEC Keysigning Ceremony Postponed Because of Locked Safe
Talent and intelligence don't help you much if you don't use them to work hard.
well, let's call it a side effect of living in a society which you cannot escape
Can I ask you what your opinion on LMMS is? It seems to get recommended a lot and I wanted to use it to get into DAWs at some point.
Some of us in the US are preoccupied with money to an annoying degree, but it is often a product of our economically precarious situation - not greed. If you don't have enough money life is very bad here, maybe even worse than other wealthy nations.
What is rich? Not many people are born in the top 1% -- by virtue of most people being born in the other 99%.

More than half of the top 1% was not born in the top 1%.

Only 1.2% of children born into the top 1% out earn their parents [1].

The elephant in the room is luck. Being born rich is an element of luck, but it's not everything.

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/aparnamathur/2017/05/04/poor-ri...
Yeah, this has been one of my less annoying MacOS upgrade experiences.
Highly intelligent, but partner choice is what cemented our wealth. I'm not sure being super smart is anything but a liability, honestly. I had terrible social anxiety for most of my youth and into my 20s. I managed to mostly break out of it by recognizing the bad patterns and working to break them. Demons? I got 'em. But am living proof that people can change.
I think there was a news/gossip item back in the day that MS offered him 1M/year and Borland/Inprise refused to even come close to matching that. Their loss.
The CED saga reminds me of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, as in a "trilogy in five parts". Nevertheless, I love this guy and really enjoyed listening to the story of the CED.
Copying successful technology is a goes-around, comes-around cycle. In 1780-1850, the USA was the premier pirate, stealing the world's premier technology and know-how, from Britain. By 2050, the Chinese will be fighting the very same battle with someone else (Nigeria and Angola maybe?), and bitterly bemoaning IP theft in the same terms.
Orbital debris covers stuff large enough to be monitored by U.S. Combined Space Operations Center’s (CSpOC) Space Surveillance Network (SSN). It also covers stuff too small (from about 5mm to about 30cm) to be monitored by CSpOC but large enough to pose risk to human and robotic space missions. This smaller debris would be monitored by ODPO.

https://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/measurements/radar.html

> NASA's main source of data for debris in the size range of approximately 5 mm to 30 cm is the Haystack Ultrawideband Satellite Imaging Radar (HUSIR). The HUSIR radar, operated by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Lincoln Laboratory, has been collecting orbital debris data for the ODPO since 1990 under an agreement with the U.S. Department of Defense. HUSIR statistically samples the debris population by "staring" at selected pointing angles and detecting debris that fly through its field-of-view.

> The data are used to characterize the debris population by size, altitude, and inclination. From these measurements, scientists have concluded that there are approximately 500,000 debris fragments in orbit with sizes down to one centimeter.

https://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/faq/#

> 3. How much orbital debris is currently in Earth orbit?

> More than 23,000 orbital debris larger than 10 cm are known to exist. The estimated population of particles between 1 and 10 cm in diameter is approximately 500,000. The number of particles larger than 1 mm exceeds 100 million.

Orbital debris is already causing damage. Here's some examples from Hubble: https://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/measurements/in-situ.html

The photo gallery shows other examples of impact damage as well as examples of debris: https://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/photo-gallery/
My guess without reading the article is, that money bores them ?
Well, actually i made zero assumptions. Theres tonnes of markdown editors that work in the browser in real time. I assume the wiki syntax is not that much "heavier" to work with, if it is its another lol for the wiki team.

And by PHP i mean if this rewrite is done partly because of speed, why not build the parser in a compiled language? Its just silly that you have to work with PHP as its one of the worst languages out there in terms of dx and features.

I assume its 2020 where clients are "fast enough" to handle a syntax transformation like markdown -> HTML
I am repeating smart comments from other people but there are some reasons why such astounding results happen:

Let's look at the article
>Like how much the difference between my income and yours, for example, is based on our relative IQs.
...
>But Heckman's research reveals something else entirely. Innate intelligence plays, at best, a 1 to 2 percent role in a child's future success.

Intelligent people might have a different understanding of success than the author.

Further down in the article:
>But what you can control is how conscientuous you are. How diligent you are. How persistent you are.
>
>How hard you work.

And there's one of our Elephants. For me it seems obvious that working hard can only make you happy if you love your work. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that smarter people tend to optimize for their own happiness, health, well being etc. Or of that of their family and friends instead of "working hard".

Or to put it like @CJefferson
> Maybe highly intelligent people don't care about being rich?

Another Elephant was pointed out very well by @hyper_reality
>but the article doesn't mention the huge role that being born to a rich family and having good opportunities plays

We live in a time of income inequality like no other generation ever before us. Having the right parents is responsible for most of your success.

Overall the article seems to have only one message. "Work harder or you don't deserve success."

That's terrible and terrifying because it implies that if you are not successful. Then it's your fault for not working hard enough.

At this point we should go back to the start. Smart people are more likely to understand how incredible rigged this whole thing is. So smart people avoid playing this rigged game. They don't compete with you over financial success, they are playing a different and more fulfilling game.

I don't know if you guys had this, but when i was in school there were always these stupid "games" in the break, where the bullies would call anyone who didn't participate as a looser in terms of the game. It never made any sense to go to other people do something and say "I got your", "You lost", when they didn't even play the game.

This didn't change when we grew up and it makes sense to handle authors of articles like this one like we did back in school. Ignore them, play our own games, don't invite them for it.
When I was a teenager learning how the web works I used the free version for MAMP for this. It was super straightforward, as I recall. Open it up, choose a folder, and serve. I think it even included PHP.
It kinda makes sense.

There's a personality trait that measures "working hard" called conscientiousness.

It's stable and hard to impossible to change among adults.

But it's possible that's it's learned in childhood.

So a smarter child will need to exert less/little work in getting good enough grades. So he may develop less of that personality trait, and become less hardworking.

And that shows.

BTW, choosing a more interesting job instead of a higher paying one - like many mentioned here - is directly related to that trait: it's about choosing play over work, basically.
I didn't have any issues until I dived into my archive of DRM-free games and none of them work anymore.
They used to do that. In the Apple Store video Steve put together, he explained that the geniuses would be well trained Mac technicians that could fix most anything, and when they couldn’t, there was a phone they could pick up to talk to a engineer at HQ.

Now, due to cost (although price has gone up for the stuff), the Geniuses are no longer trained at HQ, and there are now lower level “technicians” that can’t do much more than give you a new phone.
1. Because wealth depends on your social network. Humans are a social species, the more social you are, the better status you have. That's how business works. Intelligence is often the inverse of being social.

2. Even if one is more intelligent, he/she is not that much more intelligent. Of course intelligence matters, especially in certain fields, but overall intelligence will not allow people to gain an edge, or at least not an edge that will make a big enough difference.

3. Wealth and status stems rather from certain moral values, rather than abilities. Of course modern society tends to value new ideas and innovation, but human societies, in general, still favor a certain set of traditional values that make it harder for intelligent people to get favors. And in general, innovation breeds change, and change always brings its share of problems. You can look for anti-intellectualism.

Not to mention that intelligent people don't really seek wealth at all, they know it's much preferable to seek recognition from their peers.
Because money is not the only worthy cause.
This is mainly a lapse. Thanks for highlighting them, they do awesome work!

They are also not quite what Sealed Rust is about. RustBelt is about formally verifying Rust and improving the understanding of the language.

Sealed Rust is mainly about the industrial adoption process. It's not meant as a replacement or competing project, quite the contrary: RustBelt existing is a huge motivator and a major stepping stone to build on.

We are also personally in touch through the Rust project.
Should we be thinking about this a bit more broadly?

Why aren’t more highly intelligent people more accomplished?

The emphasis on money is fine but I think a more productive conversation is why do we find super smart/intelligent people not doing notable things? I think as a society we owe it to each other to push the boundaries of what we are gifted at/in as a way of contributing and building some concept of legacy. Again money is a single metric which many people either don’t care about or hit a local maximum on but what about the other possible metrics?

Thoughts?
Well, as opposed to your average RAD medium, in Delphi you could even sprinkle pieces of assembly in the middle of your Pascal code.

So you could basically do anything with it, all the time not worrying about aligning buttons on a form because it was piss easy.
The agricultural revolution enabled larger population sizes but it also resulted in a bigger workload per individual. Hunting mostly consists of walking with some high intensity action but also some rest every now and then. Farming requires physical effort 16 hours a day and if someone else owns the land most of that effort doesn't even benefit you.
If intelligence was enough to build modern society then we wouldn't have needed years 1AD thru 2020. We could have skipped straight to the internet age when the likes of Socrates and Confucius walked the earth.

Assuming we reward people in fashion correlated to their material contribution it is clear that intelligence isn't the critical measure. We do and should reward based on a best-effort guess to estimate how much someone materially improved the lives of others. An intelligent person might be able to do a better job but it isn't obviously better than any other personality attribute.
What if you enjoy what you do and get a sense of gratification from working alongside other people and being paid for it?

When I spend my time at work, I don't actually feel like I'm selling my time; I feel like I'm actualised as who I am, what I am, and doing things that matter, and the company shows its appreciation via my bank account.

Some of my coworkers are wealthy from previous employment in finance industry, but they still work here because they enjoy it, it keeps them connected with everything.

One guy in particular implemented hedging and arbitrage strategies over various cryptocurrency exchanges - he automated his wealth generation - but he's still with us working on machine learning when he's not out sailing.
Zero, one, two, Freddy’s coming for you
Because you need to have the capacity for intelligence, and the capacity and desire to be good at business (accumulate wealth).

No one asks why there aren't more highly intelligent people with massive "successful" families.

It's non-transitive
Top EuroPython 2019 Talks
Because we don't live in a meritocracy where we give more power and wealth to the smartest people (by whatever flawed measure of intelligence). We give more power and wealth to the luckiest, most selfish, and most ambitious people.
I've referred to it, and been understand as entity-attribute-value, or EAV.
I watched this with my SO last night. We have a very small cross section of shared media interests (notable ones being star trek and grand designs). One of the few youtube videos I’ve put on that she got excited about was Tech Connections video on rice cookers. I mean, I know I really like his stuff. Even though I’m deep in the weeds with most of his topics and already know it, I still find pleasure in hearing advanced topics explained from base concepts with such clarity. He knows his business and it shows.
Have an open mind, bit don't let your brain fall out.
Apps I Pay For
What an insightful comment. Housing, Health care and College costs are out of control which are needed if you want to stay in the middle class.
You would need general AI for this.

What is in reach of current methods is EDM. The function that produces a dance beat is a lot more tractable. It's a pure signal processing problem, not a linguistic one. I think sooner than later we will see a startup churning out chart-topping robot beep boop bangers. It seems like this is the Hegelian endpoint of music.
I have completely given up trying to understand the mentality that surrounds work in the US (At least service work).
They do, and, thanks to GraalVM’s Substrate compiler, the same technique is also available for Clojure directly on the JVM. I imagine you’re going to pay some cost in both cases, perhaps in different places. (I imagine with Cloture it might be at development time, but once your program works the compiler won’t break it—-with Graal you don’t notice a thing during development but the compiler breaks plenty of programs.)
Zocdoc Is Hiring a Senior Data Engineer
The fuck ?!?
Hah! I've been using/committing to that lately. I think the GitHub repo is where quicklisp pulls from:

https://github.com/slburson/fset
I've done all my developing on a MacBook. This makes sense now. Thanks.
It does not seem easier to me to use Java libs from ABCL than Clojure.

Some Java:

public class Main {
public int addTwoNumbers(int a, int b) {
return a + b;
}
}

Calling it from ABCL:

(defun void-function (param)
(let* ((class (jclass "Main"))
(intclass (jclass "int"))
(method (jmethod class "addTwoNumbers" intclass intclass))
(result (jcall method param 2 4)))
(format "calling addTwoNumbers(2, 4): ~a~%" result)))

Calling it from Clojure:

(defn f []
(prn "calling addTwoNumbers(2, 4): " (.addTwoNumbers (Main.) 2 4)))

Note that the Clojure version creates the object, and the ABCL version doesn't do that for you; you still need to instantiate a Main yourself.
That's the couriers problem then. If a signature was required for a $4k item it's contingent on them to get it into the receiver's hands. Your neighbor saved you and the courier a great deal of money. Apple would have filed a claim and sent you another $4k iMac that UPS/Fedex/DHL would be paying for.
Startupcredits.io – spreading the love across startups
That said, getting rich by working hard if you don't have talent or intelligence will be a lot harder. So I guess you need a bit of all of them.
No you’re not the only one. I’ve been running Catalina since the early betas on all my Macs and haven’t had any problems.

I’m sure that people do have legitimate issues, but Catalina doesn’t seem nearly as bad as some previous releases, such as 10.5 Leopard (or Leper as we knew it).

I don’t even mind the security pop-ups - it’s reassuring that not everything has access to anything without my say-so.
Oh also, I apologies for double replying, but I really don't like the idea it's German vs Japanese.

Since I was in Trier after Christmas, and learnt they have the oldest university in Germany, except for all the times it didn't exist. It's not claimed "Trier had the first university in Germany", but "Trier has the oldest university in Germany".

Others dispute this claim, since they want the claim for the university their heart inclines towards, but Germans - surely a species of Westerner - are still capable of entertaining and uttering such claims of continuity-through-discontinuity.
Especially true in America where upward intergenerational class turnover is 10-25%. Or higher. Need to find my source
This site is best viewed with Netscape Navigator
A schema is a way of designing data structures such that they are efficiently organized and easy to use.

But that leaves the obvious question: use for what?

Structures, whether it's databases or object graphs, exist for only two reasons: to do stuff and to fit into a pattern of rules you've decided to use beforehand. Without either of those, there is no way to judge a schema. We could talk about generally organizing data. That's set theory and normal forms. But that wasn't your question.

I would design the schema for a three-microservice widely-distributed high-performance application far differently than I would a local checkbook app for my brother. You gotta have more information.

Apologies. I am unable to help.
yes, that's likely, but then, nevertheless, it's important to take care of being correct when criticising something
Amazon can’t end fake reviews, but its new system might drown them out
> This is an important effort, but it's weird (disconcerting?) to me that something so fundamental as a formal language specification (for a language that advertises safety as a key feature) is being bootstrapped not by the core team, but by a third party. It doesn't feel like that's something you only need "collaboration with" the core team about. I can't think of anything that's more "core".

This may be a misunderstanding about what Rust core does: it's a project steering committee. The specification work would have to be done by lang and compiler.

The Rust language specification is notoriously informal, as many of the current investors in Rust don't care _that strongly_ about it, at least not in the rigorous sense that certification needs. Major features are built by those investors.

Sealed Rust is an initiative to collect the stakeholders in having a proper specification happening.

Rust has always evolved on stakeholder needs, with those stakeholders providing the work either through staffing engineers or by funding engineers on the relevant teams and often relies on outside engineering/contribution. This is not _as_ different.

So, see it this way: we want Safety Critical Rust to happen. For that, we need some form of specification. We're willing to get a specification funded and contributed in a way that is useful to the project and doesn't tie it down.
I'm just wondering what hilarious thing the guys at Microsoft will put on those HDD's and mail back. The Source code to Hover maybe?