skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Couple of things:

1. Don't read the slides. We can all read. Give us additional context that the slide doesn't have. But...

2. If the slide communicates clearly and concisely what you need to say, don't keep talking for the sake of talking. Stick to what you need to get your point across. And...

3. As with all presentation and public speaking skills, figure out what your story is. What narrative are you trying to tell? For example, if your presentation is on the efficacy of an experiment, tell us a story about it. How did we start this journey, what happened along the way, and where are we going? Why should I give a crap about your presentation? And how can you get me personally invested in your success?

Some more context on the last point, which I actually think is the most important one. Tell a story and make me care!

Here's an example. I was at a meeting where the ad tech team was giving a presentation on their progress toward quarterly goals. The slides were essentially numbers, and the presentation went more or less like this:

"About 1.5% of all users clicked on ads in our app. This quarter our goal was to increase ad conversions by 25%, and we actually increased it by 32% for an additional $X hundred thousand dollars in revenue. Next slide, please."

Zzzzzzzzzzz... BORING! Who gives a shit? Nobody but the CFO cares. We all get paid our salary, not some percentage of the profits. A few hundred grand in revenue means bupkis for me and my team.

Make me care! That's all I really want. I want to care about what you're talking about.

So... here's the real story. You put up a slide with only one number on it: 1.5%. Then you say:

"Only about 1.5% of our 600,000 active monthly users clicked on ads this quarter. We made $X million dollars this quarter based on ads alone -- and that's just the start! With only 1.5% of users engaging with ads, there's nowhere to go but up! With a little more investment into our ad tech roadmap, we believe we can increase that to 5% within one quarter, and 10% by the end of the year. That represents a 10,000% increase in investment! Our ad sales team will be thrilled, the ad partners will be chomping at the bit to give us even more ad revenue, and our bottom line will skyrocket! One-point-five percent! Can we get to 10% in a year? I say yes. Yes, we can. Let's do it. Next slide, please."

This tells a story. It grabs you by the cojones and says, Hey! This is exciting! We have a HUGE opportunity in front of us! Not just incremental gains of 25% to 32%, but an enormous opportunity to not just double or triple but potentially 10x our product. That means more budget, more projects, more engineers, more hires, and more more more! You -- yes YOU! -- can be part of this incredible journey."

And that's a way better story to tell.
> Why would he contact the buyer outside of Amazon?

You can't sue the buyer by serving Amazon.
Because public is only OK if it's done by Republicans. I know this sounds flippant and partisan, but what's the serious counterpoint? Spend publically on war, on tax cuts (1), on anything favored by conservatives: it's a natural function of government. Spend on anything else: it's usurping taxpayers rights to make their own choices, and reducing efficiency because everybody knows that individual Americans spend their money more wisely than the government.

(1) yes, i know that the riposte: "tax cuts are not expenditure, they are giving money back to tax payers, where it originally came from".
> What you say is true about the public option, because it incentivizes insurance companies to dump expensive patients onto the public dole, while charging ever increasing premiums for those who either don’t need healthcare or are self-rationing because of things like co-pays or high-deductibles.

Can you explain why this is supposed to be true? The benefit of a "public option" is supposed to be that it would theoretically reduce costs by eliminating insurance company profits. The government insurer would presumably still charge premiums and set them based on actuarial risk, so why would it disproportionately attract high risk patients? It's not as if private insurers would be allowed to cancel your policy after you get sick and dump you on the public insurer.

> It’s not true for single payer systems, who across the world pay less than what we pay in the US. Without special pleading, you have to explain why they’re able to do it and we cannot, otherwise it seems that you’re ignoring the evidence.

The explanation is simple. With single payer the government is a monopsony buyer, so it "negotiating prices" is really just equivalent to price controls. Price controls can certainly lower prices, but they do so by creating shortages.

In medicine the primary cost isn't the unit cost of manufacturing the pill, it's the R&D cost of developing it and performing clinical trials. So the shortage is of medical R&D. Price controls reduce the supply of new medicines -- that is what other countries do to have lower costs. They piggyback on all the money paid by patients in the US and used to develop new medications that are then used all over the world.

So the US pays more for drugs because the rest of the world isn't paying their fair share of the R&D and we're subsidizing them.
Enough that's a nice bonus but still a minimal part of total compensation. IRS treatment of ISO/NSOs is part of the problem but the real issue is lack of liquidity. If you do make the equity significant at least give your employees the option to periodically liquidate to reduce the risk of them paying tax on money they'll never see.

Tax issues aside there are many startups whose equity is incredibly valuable on paper but the stock is trading for a third of the FMV on the secondary market, if there are any buyers at all.
You are missing the point. It is not about being healthy. You are always worried about the "what if I have to go see a doctor" situation in America because you don't know what it will cost and you definitely don't know what kind of issues you will have to fight through with incorrect claims, incorrect bills and what not. If someone can address that here in US, I am willing to keep the current system as is.
Original six frigates of the United States Navy
Ah sorry, my bad, I skipped over that. Here's an idea - you could start a "fundraising" of sorts and if you get enough you could purchase a developer profile to publish to TestFlight.
> I don't think "it doesn't cover the whole spec" is fair grounds for criticism (though out-of-the-box generator errors are another story)

A spec is useless if it's not fully implemented by any library. Also, I'm fine with imperfect FOSS, but it's frustrating to not know that implementation is incomplete or what exactly is missing. You end up doing trial and error.

All I'm saying is that OAS generators are not net time savers, which you supported yourself by saying that sometimes fixing an implementation is up to the user. That's not a criticism of any person, just a fact.
Computer hardware included everything from magnetic platters for hard drives to crt displays to the silicon wafers.
Maybe The Lounge (https://thelounge.chat/) could help ?
First of all, huge TY! I used iBochs on a first gen iPad and successfully ran Linux, Windows 95, and DOS on it. I’ve tried a few times to modernize that code for current iOS releases, but was unsuccessful. I did spend a bunch of time back in the day building a nice UI for iBochs so would be game to help do that for UTM. My contact info is in my profile if you are still looking for folks!
I feel this would be better if they didn't include the exact amount you would get each month. There are energy policies that impose a tax on your energy bill each month. At the end of the month the total pot collected is distributed evenly to the consumers. Large energy consumers get back less than they paid in tax and frugal energy users get extra money. There is no chance of the bankrupting the government because the total amount paid out is equal to whatever was collected.
That can happen anywhere, through any medium (e.g. bricks in a box instead of a PS4 from Best Buy). It seems amply evident, despite the recurring horror stories on HN, that most customers are having a pretty decent time of using Amazon.

In any case, isn't the author's scenario pretty bizarre? I had no idea that Amazon served as a mechanism for selling one-off small scale used items. Further the author mentions that it would be cheaper buying and selling than renting...only this is precisely the risk you need to factor in buying and selling (which could have been a fake cheque, getting rolled during the exchange, etc).
I support climate change and the extinction of the human species so I think the future is looking really good.
Catastrophic climate change isn't expected to lead to extinction of humanity though, and very few people with any sense would characterize it that way (I'm sure you can find a few)

What is expected is: increasing, and increasingly damaging weather events yoy. Destruction of a bunch of viable agricultural land, and abrupt change in more. Destruction of a lot of low lying infrastructure close to water. Secondary effects include mass migrations and health crisis in some populations affected by previous. etc. Things get more expensive and painful all over.

Almost all of the policy making in this area so far, globally, has not been evidence based (or even evidence acknowledging). That's the real thing to change.

There isn't a clear cut answer to any of this, just risk management and mitigation. But the action so far has been almost entirely "delay, this is hard". And so the problem, and probable impacts, gets worse.

It's a little like a nation-state version of ignoring your credit card debt because you don't want to think about it. And then arguing around the dinner table about how bad it is without anyone having looked at a statement in years.
How do you get to it? The version of the site I got on my phone was completely unusable (buggy even if I had my mobile browser view it as a desktop site and zoomed completely out)

Edit: I was unfair. Just tested in Chrome Android and it worked fine, and Firefox Android and it worked mostly fine with some minor bugs (mainly clicking on menu icon does a text selection). The complete failure was in Firefox Previous, which is incomplete and completely reasonable not to test with.
The argument in this case is that the potential for misuse outweighs the potential benefits.
Here's the catch:

"(b) California residents who are 18 years of age or older and receiving benefits under the Medi-Cal program, the County Medical Services Program, the CalFresh program, the CalWORKs program, or Unemployment Insurance shall not be eligible to receive a universal basic income under the CalUBI Program."

So I don't really see what the point is. If you're targeting technological unemployment why make it so that people who have unemployment insurance are ineligible?
Healthcare (as some other sectors) is full of inefficiencies and removing or, at least, reducing them cannot be seriously labeled as "elimination of an industry". I don't see how job market restructuring in healthcare industry due to proposed transition to the single payer model is different in its essence from potential significant job market restructuring across various industry sectors due to automation trend.
Right, but the keyword there is 'nudge'.

If you are already having headaches and high blood pressure due to your diet, your diet should have been modified long ago. Similarly when people have cardiovascular issues and atherosclerosis, the time to change things was likely decades ago, not after they've already damaged their body so much. Sometimes these 'nudges' help patients, but getting someone to significantly alter their life is very hard.
I think that the correct interpretation is: Statistical robustness tests do not address the problem of p-hacked hypotheses.
Follow-up to “The dystopian world of software engineering interviews”
I said it was a 'usermode Linux "terminal" emulator', never said it was a VM or anything like that. IIRC the dev said he also wasn't allowed to publish it to the App Store and I assume it falls under the same catagory of "not allowed" in Apple's eyes as UTM would've had.
Very minor nitpick, could you change the commit message to be in imperative mood? Thanks for contributing.
Long-Awaited: OCaml 4.10.0
Your instincts are roughly correct, but in case you wanted a couple dozen graphs to flesh it out you'll like this link:
https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emis...

Honestly its much less compliated than internet debate artists make it out to be. #1 coal, #2 oil, #3 gas. Cement and agriculture/land-use are marginal things we can worry about in 2040. For right now, its one two three. Coal, oil, gas. Anyone derailing into other things is failing to quantify and prioritize.

Also as you point out coal is basically already solved, its purely a combination of regulation and cost-curves of the alternatives. Oil can be 80% solved using electrification today, and hopefully over the course of the next 20 years that turns into a 95% solved thing via improved batteries or fuel cells or both.

The last 5% of oil is, as you point out, jet fuel. It is by far one of the hardest pieces of the puzzle to solve. I think the short version is that the price of air travel is going to have to double to both dramatically reduce demand for it and to fund carbon-offset measures for what remains. Of course you can never tell upper middle class people this, they lose their shit at the thought of not being entitled to vacation and be tourists anywhere they want as much as they want.

The third part, gas, is going to be harder than coal and oil because its so damn cheap right now. We can speculate a lot about what could replace 50% of it, but the other half is a lot tricker.

However, again, this is a prioritization and timeline constraint problem. Solve coal NOW. Solve oil over the course of the next decade. Gas we'll circle back and see what we can do in like 2035. We'll have our hands plenty full solving for coal and oil now.

Its already completely technologically and economically feasible to get rid of 95% of coal, 80% of oil, and 50% of gas over the next 10 years in america and 20 in the overall world. That will reduce us from ~40Gt/year down to around 5Gt/year. Then we figure out how to phase in negative-emissions tech.
Ask HN: Should you use a fake landing page to validate your idea?
This has come up in HN comments before [1] [2] but I'd like to hear people's thoughts specifically on this topic. Should you use a fake landing page to validate your idea? Specifically landing pages that look like they're for completed products with prices included not "coming soon" pages.

Is it too unethical to study how customers respond to your product without telling them it's not real first?

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22110004

2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22382691
My favorite story to tell (favorite in a horrible way) about these kind of issues is this: After an accident ~15 years ago, I had an open wound that wouldn't close because it was infected with MRSA which had lodged itself in the hardware that was screwed to my tibia. I was wearing a wound vac--a device that was attached to the open wound and maintained a constant suction to pull out any bad stuff. It was there to keep the infection from spreading long enough for the bone to heal so they could remove the hardware. I had a weekly doctors appointment at the local hospital check on the condition of the wound and change the dressing on the vac.

I was very careful. The doctor was in network, the hospital was in network, and my copay was, I believe, $30 for each visit, covered under my insurance. One day I showed up for my appointment, they led me to a room where I waited 10 minutes. Then the doctor came in, and it wasn't the guy I had been seeing for the last three months. He told me my doctor had taken ill and he was covering the appointments. He asked me how I was doing, and had the nurse redo the dressing on the wound vac. Then we were done.

A month later I received a bill from this doctor for $1900 because he was out-of-network, and while my insurance covered out of network at 80%, they covered it at 80% of the in-network rate. The doctor billed out of network patients at about twice the negotiated in-network rate (a fairly common occurrence), so the 80% coverage was actually 40% coverage, and I owed the other 60% which came to about $1900 for 5 minutes of work (the nurse who changed the dressing worked for the hospital so her work and materials were covered in network.) And the kicker was that I didn't know a different doctor was going to be attending me until he walked in the door.

If you think that maybe your "max out of pocket" will save you, it won't. If the insurance lists a "out of network max out of pocket" it only covers expenses at a negotiated in network rate. Any amount your out-of-network doctor bills that is over the insurance company's in network rate is effectively unlimited. Despite having a $2500 in network max, ad a $5000 out of network max, and a very good health plan. I left that accident with about $35k in medical debt.

(An interesting side note, when it came time to remove the hardware, I went back to the same hospital/trauma center and doctor who had installed it--though a different hospital from above. A day before the surgery I went to the hospital for the pre-op stuff. At the end of the process, the hospital admin met with me to take my payment. I was expecting a $30 copay or similar, but I found out that while the hospital was in network six months before, they had dropped their contract with my insurance company a month prior and the pre-op was going to cost me $800. So of course I cancelled the surgery, but I was still on the hook for the pre-op work. Today every time I visit a medical professional of any kind, no matter how many times I've visited them before, I ask about in network coverage.)
> And physics and biology would still disagree with you. This warping of reality to fit some unscientific narrative is getting out of hand.

You seem to be completely ignoring the generally agreed-upon scientific consensus that gender and sex are not equivalent; sex is biology, and gender is mostly performance. A transwoman is a woman (gender) even though they're biologically male (sex).
Anki specifically is a spaced repetition [0] [1] flashcards app, similar to supermemo.

When you review a card, you can mark it as "Again", "Hard", "Good", or "Easy". The new interval of a card will depend on the grade, so it might be like 1day -> 2days / 3days / 4days, and so on. "Again" resets the interval to 0, like a new card.

The documentation is "open source tier", because anki is open source. It should be better, I agree, but something something you get what you pay for. Anki is free on pc/mac and android, but not on ios.

As someone who has used it for the last 2.5 years, I can wholeheartedly recommend it. In fact, I've written at length about it [2]. However I think the manual is pretty good [3] (for anyone who's curious).

Feel free to ask if you have any specific questions.

[0]: https://s3.amazonaws.com/andrewzah.com/studies/Pashler.Rohre...

[1]: https://s3.amazonaws.com/andrewzah.com/studies/Bahrick-et-al...

[2]: https://andrewzah.com/tags/anki/

[3]: https://apps.ankiweb.net/docs/manual.html
US has really strong laws for consumers with credit cards. The consumer is presumed right and it is up to everyone else in the chain to return their money first thing. Then the other party has the burden of proof for arguing against the chargeback.
Driving up fossil fuel prices would be a good way to kick the habit. Stop giving them easy capital in loans, investments, low interest rates, and cheap insurance to fund their growth. You know, a financial tourniquet.
Mercury is cool. I translated a simple Prolog program to it once, and it was a head trip. Hard to get my mind around, but also helped me see the connection between functions and relations.
The place the suitor lives is a perfectly fine venue... make the fraudster travel.
No, I appreciate the call out. My intention wasn't to be negative, but I really was in retrospect. I will be more mindful in the future.
You can’t purchase such a profile. Apple doesn’t ever give them out.
iSH actually uses a semi-JIT to emulate an x86 CPU — it doesn't run ARM64 code. It basically creates an arrray of function pointers to snippets of pre-translated code. It's not a full JIT like UTM, but it's an interesting workaround for iOS' restrictions.

Official description: https://github.com/tbodt/ish#a-note-on-the-jit
Discussed at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16684973
We need an improved IRC protocol and modern open-source clients, now more than ever.

Just make a cute, free client and people won't care about the underlying tech.

Most of the better IRC clients throughout history have been paid, but when Microsoft Comic Chat was bundled with Windows, IRC got an influx of tons of new users, in an era with generally fewer computer-literate people than today.

That kind of resurgence can be repeated today if somebody can make a free IRC client on par with Discord's functionality.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Comic_Chat
Also not free, has banking ramifications, etc.
>I really don't think anyone is holding a gun to the project owner's heads and forcing them to use Discord.

This is not related to what I said at all. No one is being forced to use Discord. But Discord absolutely is forcing the project owners to get all the other contributors to accept the discord terms if they want to use it. That is the entire reason they make users accept the terms before they even sign up. Some users don't care about being forced to do this. Some users do, and if the project owners want to accommodate those people then yes, they need to change things. None of this is really up for debate and you seem to understand it well, so it's unclear to me what your point is. It also is very strange to me that you're now blanket objecting to these type of requests when you mentioned before that it's easy for the project owners to just say no thanks.
What does your moral compass say? Do you need ethical validation from strangers on HN, most or some of which you don't know?
that's basically my question: can you, within bernie's proposals, do that or not or not?

if not, i think his proposal is not that great.

if you can keep your private health insurance? well, that is a great plan and i would 100% agree with it.
We are in violent agreement.
You'd be right, and that's a sentence about halfway down. And should you decide to perform robustness tests on a p-hacked hypothesis, you might be convinced that it's more robust than it is.
An elephant's story does not end when it dies
How were they able to read eBay's SMSs sent to your phone number?

A number of online services I use send SMSs as a form of 2FA. Apparently this is not entirely safe.
Is my dead mother going to come back from the beyond again to give pro-isp propaganda?
Thanks! If you’re interested please fork the project on github and make a PR when you’re ready. I want this project eventually to be community run so I’m not going to be “in charge” of anything.
fwiw mine is about $20k with a $5k oop max, for a family of 2 in California. This compares to a worst-case ACA cost of about $65k.