skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No one's saying that two people can't make a "consensual exchange of value" of legal actions. I can't make a "consensual exchange of value" by paying a mob hitman to kill someone that I don't like.

This is a good thing, and this is not antithetical to a free society.
Yeah, you want to watch out for those "rouge" developers!
تحميل لعبة PUBG Mobile 0.17.0 للأندرويد أخر اصدار مجاناً
“The person that sits in the chair generally used by the head of the accounting department” :)
If you want people like me to buy it, you've got to cut the cloud out of the picture. Give me something that does inference on the device. Sure, give me an easy way to send selected videos back to you for training data, and feel free to push optional updates to the camera with updated models, but I'm not giving you a raw video feed of my home or business.
It’s amazing that anybody believed these cryptos were any kind of hedge against the market. It was pure speculation. Always was.
Is this ONVIF compatible?
Estimates of Covid-19's Fatality Rate Might Change
>If your argument is that DCA is investing a lower amount, and is therefore lower risk

That's not what I said, in fact the study does the opposite.

>then the answer is that a lump-sum strategy investing the same amount as DCA is both lower risk and higher return...

The problem is that argument only holds true for positive risk premium scenarios. Obviously LS has a potentially higher rewards, because if I bought 100x at $1, and it goes to $2, my reward will better than buying 10x at $1, 10x at $1.10, and so on. Since LS has potential higher rewards, when risk premium is positive, then the reward / risk will also be better with LS. This is a tautology.

The study's evidence only supports these cherry picked cases (positive risk premium scenarios). The market doesn't always have a positive risk premium... it can be also be negative! (like right before a market crash).

You could argue that the risk premium is positive given long enough time frames, or that the market is more often in a positive risk premium state, hence LS is better. But even this is debatable, as no matter how many years of evidence you give, past performance is no guarantee of future results.

If I cherry picked the Nikkei 225 as my case, by comparing LS invested in Jan 1990, vs DCA from then to any timeframe afterwards, DCA would of been less risky than LS at every time frame...

All in all, DCA is a inherently less risky strategy. The study even says so...
Essentially all of the events you mention plus a good amount more are either in an active product development pipeline for vendors we work with or are actively being worked on internally on devices we are building.

It's a tough space.. margins on these hardware devices are thin already, and sometimes negative as they are simply loss leaders hooking in users for long-term saas payments, so in our case, it's cheaper to build it in-house.

Good luck, however!
No, there exists third possibility: balloon technology.
Look i enjoy pissing on npm packages just as much as the next brogramming hipster but...

'imagine if the car you drove to work had more than 291 parts'

Well... Imagine it has less than that number of parts!

Or imagine an apple containing less than that many distinct chemical substances!

Not the best example...
Fed to pump more than $1T
Drunk a.k.a. Horny
There is good chance that narrative re-emerges as Bitcoin proves to be consistently non-correlated. I can see that.
Dogecoin creator to crypto faithful: “cool your jets”
It is more proof that she is not being coerced into testifying by this imprisonment, meaning it is unlawful to continue imprisonment. Most prisoner are in prison to pay their debt to society, Manning is in to coerce her to testify.
> I'm not even sure you know what those words mean.

I don't think you are doing your case any favors with such rhetoric.
Game entities really don't fit inheritance very well though! Even if using an OO approach it's far more flexible to compose. Otherwise it suffers from the classic large inheritance tree issues of lots of state and functionality leaking up the tree to common base classes. As an example the Unreal Engine used to have a heinously enormous base class called Actor. Another is that all the game entities in EVE Online actually bring the AI code with them. You can make it work but it's in spite of rather than because of inheritance. Anyone teaching students it's useful is doing them a great disservice.
> Choosing a technology because you can start working on a new application quickly is the wrong way of thinking about your tech stack.

I think being able to have a default toolbox that will allow you to get up and running quickly so you can find a proof of concept or really start to formalize the problem your app addresses and the solution it provides, along with a quick feedback loop, is very valuable.
Nice! Friday beers & happy hour just got better. Getting the bartenders attention can be so frustrating when its packed.
i upvoted, but you wont get many others because your title needs [video] and [2013] in it.
This is the weirdest "US is special" argument. You can pack a hundred samples (blood/swab/whatever) in a box and send it to whatever lab in a major US city, in a matter of hours.
If there's a way to undermine the country through zealous interpretation of the law, better be sure ACLU will be at the frontlines. Terrorists need rights? ACLU can help. Border security too tight, caravans need to cross illegally? ACLU to the rescue.
Is there any way to access the "raw" sensor data from the Soli device in a Pixel 4, even with root? As far as I can tell, the best an Android developer can access is some pre-calculated gestures. I'd like to play with using this for other applications, not just snoozing my alarm more easily.
When taking inflation and the time value of money into account, it was a loss.
I like your approach to problem solving - it's very similar to mine and in domains I also think about.

Your syntax is very convenient thanks for sharing.

And finally, I assume you're familiar with Scott Wlashin (of F# for fun and profit & "Domain Modeling Made Functional")[1][2]. If not you 100% should read it as it is right up your alley. It's the intersection of Functional Programing and DDD/EIP. (I have no affiliation).

[1] https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/ddd/

[2] https://www.amazon.com/Domain-Modeling-Made-Functional-Domai...

[3] https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/rop/ (Railway oriented programming)
> And no, Sun,

Now that's a ship that has sailed.
> Our solution can also alleviate privacy concerns since we only store short video clips on the cloud for alerts corresponding to user’s events of interest instead of for every motion detected.

Do better: allow the owner to store everything locally instead of in the cloud.
It's a satire... The whole post is a satire. Just read on, it gets more and more ridiculous. Of course it's all made up.
Earnestness is difficult to fake indefinitely. At some point, you’ll either be revealed or have acted for so long that you actually become earnest.
There are many, many, many sophisticated models out there, with a gazillion parameters you can tweak. This is a simplistic-but-revealing back-of-the-envelope calculation.

The numbers are brutal. Actual number of cases are hidden by Governments, and distorted by testing and lack of testing, but the number of deaths is usually known.

This shows that the current number of infected and infectious people is about 10 thousand times the number of deaths.

Please, play with the figures.
> They're not thinking in terms of HTML elements.

That makes sense, as the term originated with UI development that predates HTML. It's a fairly precise term (although there are variations on dropdown styles, they're all unambiguously dropdowns).

There's nothing wrong (and a lot right) with using the term if you're not talking specifically (or knowledgeable) about web interfaces. Even when used in relation to web interfaces, the meaning remains clear, even if the technical HTML terms differ.
How would you define nice?
I think it should be a web-browser based platform for a few reasons:

- ease of development

- leveraging gains in the platform development

At this point, the web is already the biggest app store the world has ever seen. FFOS succeeded in one of the most difficult areas of building a new platform -- getting companies to write progressive web apps that ran on the phone. I even spent time writing little utilities, a tinder clone, and an instagram clone for the platform.

There are at least 3 big companies with huge dedicated teams to making that platform better and faster. Slowness can definitely be an issue but that's a lot more solvable than a dearth of applications or a lack of open interest in improving the platform. Optimization is a long-tail problem, and it's clear by android's dominance and the progressive slowing of apple software every year that you just have to be good enough, but hardware goes a long way to help.

Even more than this the biggest problem was the market FFOS was aimed for didn't give FFOS time to go down the optimization path. You can mask inefficient software with beefy hardware, and I actually had two firefox phones that worked wonderfully -- the Flame[0] and the Fx0[1]. Those two phones only scratched the surface of how powerful the hardware could be, and I didn't have any of the problems you mention. I still have 2 (!) FX0s in my closet somewhere.

[0]: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox_OS/Flame

[1]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Archive/B2G_OS/Phon...
That is just a polite way of saying 'idiot'
Universal healthcare? Too expensive.

$1.5T to bail out wall street? Sure!
I think a much more obvious question is why wouldn't they just write down what they meant instead of obfuscating their intentions?

You are literally looking for something that isn't there, because it is not written down.

I would love for a lawyer to chime in, because admittedly this is not my wheelhouse.
I've got a programmer joke for you:

AncientShell#> echo day.length
So, I've been sitting at my work computer for, what?, 4 years with QCAD and FreeCAD installed and have never thought to try either of these.

Going to give that a go today, just got to work at 05:40 so will let you know how I go later.
Or you don't really know the problem space quit yet and an application that helps you get up and running quickly allows you to figure it out in a short amount of time. Maybe you find out that your preferred tech stack is not adequate, at which time you can change it.
hi it's me caltrain, serving santa clara and growing 2x in 15 years

https://nationaltransitdatabase.org/california/peninsula-cor...
> A nice person is one who tries to get you to like them. They want to be friendly and [amicable].

Most people who have ever talked to me in a professional setting would probably describe me as "nice".

I don't give two flying fucks if people like me. I'm not trying to be friendly or amicable.

I'm nice because I'm not weak.

I should elaborate.

There are a lot of shitty people in the world, and they come from all walks of life. Having grown up in a low-income family in a low-income area in Florida, I learned very quickly that the worst humans have one trait in common: They cannot help but confuse kindness for weakness.

Enter me. I'm a direct communicator. I will stand up for my beliefs and values. I will enforce my own personal boundaries, as well as anyone I'm working with, to the best of my ability. (e.g. Want to co-opt a meeting to drop something on a team member, without consulting them about their schedule? Hell no.)

I choose to be nice not because I want to benefit more from a transaction. I choose to be nice because it subverts the expectations of the shittiest humans while making life more pleasant everyone who's not shitty. Game theory 101.

> Every single person I've ever met has a dark side. You find it eventually. Watch out for the people that hide their dark side as long as possible. Or even worse, pretend they don't have one.

> No one is perfect. Everyone has anger, fear, sadness, shame, and a host of other negative qualities.

If someone is hiding their "dark" side--unless they're also something super terrible like a serial killer or sexual abuser--chances are they only do so because they've learned through painful experience to not be vulnerable. People can and will take advantage of them.

Which means: If you find someone who is "hiding" their "dark" side... they're actually showing you their own insecurity, and thus some of their dark side.

If they continue to hide it from you, maybe you're coming across as judgmental?

People are complicated. It costs nothing to just be nice.
Sorry to be pedantic but that isn't quite right. I do use the same technique myself quite a lot with the options pattern.

However it is worth keeping the following in mind. The compiler will check that in your code that these properties are present and assigned correctly. However at runtime nothing is guaranteed especially when dealing with the DOM.

One of the things that I don't like about TypeScript (I have written a fair bit of it) is that you believe you have type safety when it is really type hinting.
Not according to his latest statement.
No, that's not the definition of a currency.

Money has different functions, where store of value, unit of account and medium of exchange are the popular ones. And they have different properties, such as acceptable, fungible, durable and divisible and others (properties also differ.)

The big point is that these are subjective, and exists on a scale, and they vary from community to community. Cigarettes can be considered a currency in some prisons for example.

> Bitcoin is not really a means of transaction except for illegal ones where people are willing to accept the high fees.

I never mentioned Bitcoin. There are many other cryptocurrencies with low fees.

And I've bought VPNs, VPS, domains and computers with them, purchases that are completely legal.

> The US dollars value is guaranteed by the US government

The dollar will only hold value as people believe that the government can manage the dollar correctly, so my statement still holds. There's nothing intrinsically valuable with a dollar note.
I wouldn't just normally post to a youtube video, but this seems rather relevant https://youtu.be/YJYFlI4ytbU
I would like an invitation, please
not that I'm agreeing, but doesn't the burden of truth lie with the one who made the original claim about AirBnb not caring about laws historically?
> Do you know what they all have in common? Taking advantage of people's weak economic situation.

I don't agree with this characterization. If anything, these companies provided a way to extract value from under-utilized assets. For example, most people in the US have a car anyway. It's required. It's not a luxury. Taking Uber as the example, to work as a taxi driver previously required you to do strict shifts in a car that very much looks like a cab (that you may not own anyway). While many Uber drivers do it full time, some don't and some started off part-time because that was an option.

I'm more critical of AirBnB as I think the communities around AirBnBs suffer the externalities as people essentially run unregulated hotels. I'm not a fan of that at all.
Yeah I read this and raised an eyebrow. Imagine having this many bones in your body >.>
CDC and WHO websites in the late 1990s
What do you think the marginal cost of verification is, and how many users will Twitter have to verify in order to make this work?
> You're not the arbiter of what's reasonable doubt.

You are attacking a strawman, and boy, you are attacking it hard. I never said that I'm the arbiter of what's reasonable doubt is. I said that this is scientific concensus.

> You should spend some of your own time researching both sides of the argument [..]

At one point in time, there actually was a debate and I did research both 'sides'. But there are no two sides to the argument anymore. There is the scientific fact of climate change, that's it. There's nothing to debate about it. Let me put it that way; do you think you have to seriously argue with someone who says that the earth is flat? Because that's where you're currently standing, from a scientific view; denial of antropogenic climate change has about as much standing as a flat-earther. It might work as a hobby or a party-gag, but certainly not as an informed basis for policy decisions.

> To me, it comes down to some basic scrutiny.

It doesn't really look like that, to me. Because all of your points are either irrelevant or disproven. They instead sound like the typical sound-bites of deniers of antropogenic climate change.

> 1) Earth has been hotter in the past.

Yeah, so what? At some point in time, Earth did not exists. How are any of those two things relevant to antrophogenic climate change?

> 2) CO2 levels were much higher in the past.

See above.

> 3) There is evidence that CO2 lags temperature increase, thus isn't causative.

This is an old one, often explained. https://realclimatescience.com/2019/04/does-co2-lead-or-lag-....

4) Solar output is highly correlated with temperature fluctuations.

Yeah, this is an old one too; https://climate.nasa.gov/blog/2910/what-is-the-suns-role-in-...

To quote myself;

> Now, if you go ahead and actually produce valid criticism on the current climate models and their predictions, have some valid credentials with regards to climate modelling and have some credible research to show for, I'll take everything aforementioned back and put on the dirty diapers myself.

What you bring up is not valid criticism of the models or the approaches of climate science but often and long discarded interjections that border on "But if the earth is round, what's keeping them on the ground on the other side of earth"?

> You have no factual basis for asserting that the temperature change is 'massive' nor that the speed of change is 'unprecedented.'

Yep, I do. There are many studies about it, i.e. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/20530196166880... just to pick one. The change in atmospheric composition and temperature is unprecedented. Usually, these things take place over hundreds and thousands of years (yeah, there are super volcanoes and asteroid impacts that wreck havoc. But do you really want to compare humanity with a cataclysmic event?).

> Feel free to backup this claim.

This is pretty much self-evident, there's nothing to prove. Res ipsa loquitur.
What are the patents?
Also, some things are commonly recommended to do someone could have the patent to. There was a virtual world I was into a lot in the past and would follow the news on it, and some company was suing them and like 4 or 5 other companies for password hashing. So a method for retrieving a user's account and hashing their password comparing to a stored password hash... Can't find much on it though as was probably about 10 years ago.

Sounds like even patents on implementing two factors or blocking common/weak passwords... Even password resets through email...

Seems like you are likely to step on someone's patent without even reading it or just importing some open source code... unknowingly too. I guess not a huge risk until you are big enough where they'd get a good stream of income from licensing or you fight them off. Like Cloudflare had to deal with a patent troll. Some of these patents are so vague and I noticed some patent trolls use patents that are expiring in a few years since they get traded around. Then some company I heard sued a few companies before their patent expired by only a day or two since I guess even though the patent is expired they couldn't sue new projects using it, but existing stuff filed before it expired in court can still be litigated I guess. Well I guess not suing for current use then, but more the prior use of it infringing over a certain number of years might be another way to put it?

I know some companies tell employees to not read patents, but even if you don't read them might end up getting a patent owner who thinks their patent covers your functions to go after you. I think even someone has a patent on shopping sites where you can select from multiple colors for a shirt or phone, storage options, etc.

Maybe you start a company, get a patent to use to try to protect yourself but not actively going after companies. Then maybe your company isn't doing so well so the investors want you to sell off assets. So maybe a patent troll or shell company buys it up when you never planned on using the patent in that way.

Plus big companies like patents as it's like insurance, I guess there's the nuclear option. So if Apple sued Google over a feature of Android, Google could take a closer look at Apple Maps and say it infringes. So a large patent portfolio could discourage others from suing you. Not sure if that works in all industries but Google and Apple is a good example since a lot of overlapping stuff. I guess Microsoft could also be a good example, if they wanted to sue Google over Google Docs being similar to Microsoft Office maybe over a certain feature they believe they have a patent to then Google could turn around and say Bing infringes on something possibly. Then I think some tech companies rather sue OEMs like HTC and Samsung maybe instead of directly going after each other.
Because the people that pay for campaigns already have healthcare. The more money you allow into politics, the more politics is about money.
Sartre is one philosopher from one movement (Existentialism). "Academic philosophy" also doesn't really mean anything. The two main schools of thought in academic Western philosophy are analytical and continental. They have essentially nothing to do with each other. Sartre is associated more with continentals, but this is an anachronistic association. Even then, he is one thinker among thousands.

This is akin to eating a potato, disliking it, and swearing off all vegetables.
I think the fact that both of these are terrible examples is part of the joke. They have so little to do with making the point the author wants to make (satirically) that they're almost a non sequitur.
Just to note, the full interview transcript is here[1] and the reply to

> It comes to your desk. Do you veto it?

he replied with

> I would veto anything that delays providing the security and the certainty of healthcare being available now. If they got that through in by some miracle or there`s an epiphany that occurred and some miracle occurred that said, OK, it`s passed. Then you got to look at the cost.

Unlike on hackernews politician's statements shouldn't be read charitably and in the best light possible because not saying "no" is a clear signal to a lot of the folks listening to the interview. I think reading it in the light of "yes" is fair, but he at least waffled a lot more than was warranted.

1. http://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/the-last-word/2020-03-09
> I'm reading FOIA.gov right now, and don't see anything yet, but are there any explicit deadlines for a reply or automatic penalties for dropping requests on the floor instead of replying?

Technically, 20 days, but that's a farcical joke.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_(Un...
What? It's not like people have to walk to a PCR machine!
Education and medicine, in particular, are fraught with corruption and value extraction.

How does a $2 trillion education loan bubble form if colleges aren't pushing worthless degrees? How are medical emergencies the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US?
That's thinking really far, good stuff. The trading company (Ameritrade for example) insures up to a certain point. Ameritrade wouldn't let you make that trade if you don't have enough capital to back that trade. Lets say you somehow managed to do that trade, and you declare bankruptcy. I think then Ameritrade would have to cover that cost. Then if they can't, then Ameritrade declares bankruptcy. That's as far as I reasoned.
Diff in receptor use between SARS coronavirus and SARS-like coronavirus