skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Disclaimer: There are plenty of people who know more than I do about economics... There are also plenty of people who know significantly less.

My understanding is that situations like this are solved by printing money. (Yup, good ol' inflation.) We (the US) will probably have to; the value of the dollar is skyrocketing compared to other currencies, which makes it hard for us (the US) to conduct business internationally.

What does this mean? Now is a great time to take on debt, or to shift debts to pay off debts more slowly. (For example, pay off your car loan with a home equity line of credit.) Why? In periods of high inflation, the real value of your loan's monthly payment goes down very quickly.

Why do I think we're going to have high inflation? A lesson from the depression is that forcing people to pay their debts during deflation kills an economy: Wages go down, so a higher percentage of a paycheck goes to debts, which then cuts demand for services, which further lowers wages.
Tom Preston-Werner chose to include Prisma 2 in his new RedwoodJS project and it's been a pleasure to work with.
Yay Honda!

I've never been in a car that had a better designed interface than my '91 Accord. I'm sure they're out there but if a budget car can have such a pleasant interface there's no reason they all can't.
Stop. Buying. Shit. From. Amazon.
> If you don't mind my asking, what part of your life is still messed up because of this?

Employment!

I tried to go the crypto consultant route in recent years and was told by many people via Twitter/Reddit private message that they can't or won't go with the company I helped start simply because of my criminal background.

I spent most of last year job-searching. I interviewed well, but many companies rescinded offers after my background check concluded, even when I told them about this incident up front.

In 2011, everyone joked that I'd be fine. "The government will probably follow up with a job offer," they insisted. Instead, I was rendered unemployable by most of the companies that desire the skills I possess.

The silver lining is that some companies restrict their background checks to a time-gate, which means it's not totally impossible to make a living. But they're the minority.

> Is it directly related to the charges or is it the outcome of spending time behind bars?

My sentence was probation and a short duration of house arrest, community service, and paying Sylint $9,370 (which, at barely above minimum wage, took a few years). My probation was terminated early for good behavior.

The problem has less to do with the courts and more to do with background checks.

People make mistakes. Especially young people. (I was 21 when this happened.)

Learning itself is a messy process that often requires making mistakes to be successful.

Punishing someone in perpetuity for having not lived a perfect life is a problem that society hasn't yet solved.

We have hacks ("Right to be Forgotten") to try to alleviate some of the symptoms, but with the advent of the Internet, there is now a public, immutable record of your most embarrassing fuck-ups. And I don't think we were ready for that.
The physical dial and nobs and the tactile feedback when human drivers get from operating them is much better than touch screen controls. I applaud Honda's the design, as well as some German automakers' design in the same vein.
Was he not coming primarily from a design perspective?

Design =/= usability?
The problem is not "having touch interfaces", the problem is "having touch interfaces for critical systems".
The "right tool for the job" is a myth (EDIT: exaggerating; clearly it applies in some cases). Languages don't work together very well, so you need huge, thick boundaries between them, such as serialization/deserialization. Data types don't match up, GCs require special data formats and don't line up with the GCs of other languages, other runtime weirdness, etc. At minimum, you need lots of copying/transformation of the data.

Have a gnarly problem in a Python program that Haskell would be perfect for? Too bad. You'll spend more time figuring out how to transform the data and get the Python code to call into Haskell than you'll save by using the right tool. And in the process, the overhead, complexity, and bugs introduced in this process turn the right tool into the wrong tool.

And that's the reason why C is so important. It actually does work with pretty much any language, because it has a defined ABI, simple data types, minimal runtime, can work on any data formats unmodified, no GC. Very few languages have this superpower.

C++ mostly has that superpower, but some features don't entirely work with unmodified structures (RTTI and virtual functions both require adding magical fields to the class structure). Rust seems to have this superpower (does dynamic dispatch a different way than C++, so can always work on unmodified structures).

The JVM is an interesting case and the ecosystem of languages built on it do work better together because they have the exact same runtime (GC, etc.).

To summarize: we'd all like to use the right tool for the job. But we can't, except for the languages that go out of their way to make this effective, and that list of languages is very short.
I tend to ignore what the Eclipse foundation is producing because of their poor development of the Eclipse IDE; they do have a point though when they mention true open source. VS Code is excellent, but is backed by a for profit enterprise, the same enterprise that now backs the Atom editor.

There are a number concerns pending when our development and infrastructure eco systems are open source but controlled by for profit entities.

Or perhaps there is no concern, let's type our code with VS Code, Stash it on Github, attend daily updates and video conference to discuss as a group on Team, and deploy on Azure.
Lunar Landing Research Vehicle
> "Touchscreens are a cost saving measure, not a feature."

That's why there are so many high-end phones with lots of buttons.
Customers often don't have much choice. Most people don't make car buying decisions based on the head unit.
Much as I like that book and want it to be true - some argue that Value investing is as useful as Technical Analysis - which puts it at just a bit more reliable than Chicken Bone divination.
What do you think those "processor microcode updates" are, then? They don't have anything to do with micro-ops, or really have any influence over the core micro-architecture. It would be way too slow to make that programmable.

People have this common misconception that the programmable micro-code is what your CPU is actually executing, and x86 somehow translates into instructions for it, and this was really just because of a conflation of the terms "micro-code" and "micro-op".

Admittedly, Intel isn't the best at this term either. They have several places in the Architecture Manuals where they refer to the "micro-code synthesizer" when they mean "micro-op synthesizer"; this really has nothing to do with the micro-code ROM.
I'm sure the fish would see them as an unnatural barrier and an annoyance, but I don't speak for the fish or think so much of their perspectives.

Speaking personally as a human, there are few other vertebrate animals on Earth that can remotely pose a serious threat to my freedom, provided I exercise common sense precautions. That's probably why I'm most concerned with the human modifications to the landscape. I am forced to heed them. I'm sure fish would see it differently, although they'd still encounter a lot fewer beaver dams than human obstructions.

See my other comment about how I would feel differently if beavers built dams across highways and shot people crossing them. I might be less inclined to treat beavers as a harmless part of the natural landscape then.

We can make the natural vs unnatural distinction because humans have at least a partial hegemony over all other species now. Not completely; clearly microbes and insects are still out of our control. If there were intelligent alien invaders that started building walls and bridges and cages, I'm sure we'd label those as "unnatural" and "artificial" too, whereas a beaver dam is a natural curiosity. If there were other rival intelligent species sharing the Earth and reshaping it to their own vision, they probably wouldn't fit into the nature category.

It marks a power dynamic, and it's an important distinction. Artificial structures are backed by the power of laws and property rights and other enforcement rules. That gives them a power beyond their material strength. Ants and beavers reshape the earth too, but the only thing stopping you from paving them over are objections by other humans. The other ants would hardly even retaliate.

Edit: I guess the core of my point is that if you want to include a pair of wire cutters in with your bug spray and bear whistle and other hiking gear, so that you can freely pass through chain-link fences, then maybe you will start to view those fences no differently than rocks and fallen logs, just another curious structure erected by another fascinating mammal. I, personally, would never feel so bold.
The reporters care about stories that could bring a lot of attention, and hence advertisement. It's their bread and butter and unless they do so, they will be stuck with "utterly shite art remuneration".

In a world that accepts the whole neighborhoods crawling with mentally ill homeless drug addicts (google Downtown Vancouver East Side, or San Francisco Homeless) covering this would hardly be worth the reporter's time, sorry. Seriously, imagine how an article want would look like, and try to find anything similar published recently. Then divide your search results by the estimated number of crack dens in the areas you searched, and you'll find out that your chances of winning a lottery could be higher.
This interpretation is not compatible with the text of the article:

> If you need a quick refresher on logical True and False, here it is: The logical proposition True simply represents something that is true, like the statement 1 < 5. Any true statement like that by definition implies True. If we can start from an assumption and perform a series of logical deductions and reach True, then we know our original assumption is True, that it is provable. Conversely, any statement we know or can prove to be wrong (such as "bananas are a myth") implies False. If we can reach False at the end of a series of logical deductions from an assumption, our assumption is incorrect.

Showing that P implies False is a valid way to show that P is false itself. But showing that P implies True isn't a way to show that P is true. If you run things in the other direction, showing that P is implied by True really is a valid way to show that P is itself true, but showing that P is implied by False is not a way to show that P is false -- everything is implied by False.
One headline is:

Focus on your data – not on complex SQL queries

Looks like just another SQL DSL trying to make you not learn SQL. TS's structural typing and plain SQL can get you far into a simpler/robust system IMO.

Also, the "introspection" part of Prisma seems very crippled, Postgres has so many useful features for writing application code that it seems wasteful to just treat it as dumb data store.
That must be the case. Because otherwise it would be sad and pathetic to have a whole forum full of wannabes sitting around playing pretend running companies and worrying about equity dilution and gossiping about minutia in the lives of wealthy venture capitalists. That would be just unbelievably tragic, right?
Just curious, how is this different from Caffeine?

http://lightheadsw.com/caffeine/
We modified our infrastructure to deploy an EU data center
I can't find any evidence that RDTSCP is microcoded. That would defeat the whole purpose of a high-performance counter. Any source?
>I don’t want to end up on Hacker News again bitching about Catalina.

Ends up on Hacker News again bitching about Catalina.
ScyllaDB: Observing Data Changes with Change Data Capture (CDC)
Since peaking in 2015 Mazda is not growing. They are steadily losing market share over the last 10 years. They make attractive cars, but they bet on pretending that they are a "premium" brand and priced themselves out.

https://carsalesbase.com/us-mazda/

https://www.autonews.com/sales/mazdas-complicated-journey-pr...
Deaths are partly unavoidable, but they're also partly avoidable because if hospitals have ICU /ventilator and bed capacity the death rate goes down. Once they're overrun then the death rate spikes.
It is possible to have conference calls with e2e encryption.

Many conference calls are implemented using what's called a Selective Forwarding Unit (SFU) and the sending clients send multiple resolutions (either independent, called "Simulcast" or dependent, called "SVC"). In that case, the adaptation is done by the server in selecting which resolution to forward at any given time. This is fairly common practice in the industry. For example: https://github.com/jitsi/jitsi-videobridge and https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-aboba-avtcore-sfu-rtp-00 and https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc-svc/.

For those types of conference calls, the server only needs to know the sizes of the various streams and which packet is for what stream. It does not need to see the decrypted media, so one can implement e2e encryption for such types of group calls. This is less common in the industry, but is possible. For example: https://support.google.com/duo/answer/9280240?hl=en

(I used to work at Google on WebRTC, Duo, and Hangouts, but now work on video calling at Signal).
If they used CC (not debit), then any payment would mean creating a debt, so yes, they would have to pay to the bank. Because bank already paid in their name.

That's why you don't pay large sums with CC, but with invoice + bank transfer, and have a limit set on your cards, when you do.
> Normally we use Teams or Slack for internal communication

> to run Zoom in the browser [...] I have to use Chrome instead of Firefox.

Just a note, Slack and Teams calls also won't work in Firefox. It's really annoying.

Hangouts works fine in Firefox though, somewhat unexpectedly.
They're probably cheaper at the small scale - big panel big price - but at the large scale might not be so cheap: Now you have a point of failure for each of those dials/buttons, the housing is more complex/expensive, you need to make replacement parts for all of those buttons, etc. More training for repair technicians, more parts they have to keep in stock. Possibly more damaged phones because each button is a weak point in the phone's housing.

Screen costs trended down pretty aggressively over time so over the course of a couple years it probably ended up being cost-effective even if it wasn't at day 1. If you're already throwing a relatively sizable high-quality panel into your phone making it a bit bigger may not be as much of a bump up in price.
I'll just add that mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras mostly became serious tools once electronic viewfinders became good enough that they could reasonably replace optical viewfinders for the most part. (Still not as good but a reasonable compromise given the smaller and lighter bodies they make possible.) As the say the LCD back can provide useful feedback--and are occasionally useful for specific situations when shooting--but at least for handheld shooting they're not often used for framing the subject.

And, to the original point of the discussion, these cameras also have lots of physical buttons and dials which are nice to have when they're properly designed.
The problem there is that they try to parse voice as natural language -- if they instead made a simple programming language with a consistent format.. you'd be able to process the voice locally (speech-to-text has been mostly effective since like the 95s) and actually make it memorizable and semi-explorable.

And if you added a semicolon-keyword like "over" for radio, you'd avoid the issue where it waits a minute to see if you finished, making usage agonizingly slow.

But we somehow still haven't reached the point where people/corps finally realize that we simply can't parse natural language effectively
Whats interesting about Honda going with a dial, is that they designed, what I thought, was a pretty brilliant absolutely positioned touchpad for Acura. Have peopled used these, what is there feedback. It seems much more natural, intuitive, and fast compared to a dial.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScWOFtlLCyI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcKa9apjOX8
That would seem to require significantly more upload bandwidth & compression capacity from clients, which is often not broadly available to consumers. I guess you could drop down to the lowest resolution only when sending to the service if you have a bandwidth challenge, but that seems less than ideal.
This is merely a mistatement of fact. Lying is what the poors do!
I lost control of our bank accounts to a phone scammer
What is clickbait about this? It's a pretty interesting story.
What? We’re producing too many qualified researchers, and we can’t create more slots because it’s too hard to find qualified researchers?
Looking for Work
They're the only option for lots of stuff rn
> The server is one of the "ends" in "end to end".

Not in the phrase "end to end encryption", which is specifically used to refer to schemes and services where the service provider does not have the ability to access the communications (a-la Signal).

If that wasn't the case then any site with TLS would be called "end to end encryption".

> The law didn't contemplate that you would use a service but not want that service to access your data.

This law in particular does. The only restriction (relevant here) is that TCNs must not result in the creation of a "systemic vulnerability". The meaning of this term is not outlined in the legislation -- my understanding is that it is meant to mean something like "backdooring OpenSSL and thus making most of the internet insecure" rather than "backdooring all communications using a particular service provider". If that understanding is accurate, then it's a meaningless restriction.
> So on my seven year old Nikon D3s I can use buttons to focus and change the shutter speed, aperture, ISO, WB, focusing mode and focus selection point all the while keeping my eye to the viewfinder.

Sure, and you could do that with an SLR from the 90s too, as I recall.

Camera manufacturers are very innovative when it comes to capabilities and new features, but incredibly conservative when it comes to user experience and form factor.
Not everyone carries a phone, let alone a smartphone.

Not everyone wants to.

Geotagging pictures is a very important use case for a professional photographer, and relying on the user to provide GPS through another device is not advisable.

Also phone location services may not work very well without a cell signal, and not everyone takes photos only within range of a cell tower.
"Somewhat" is not really good enough given the stakes. You cannot "feel" your way through a touchscreen interface and you cannot rely on muscle memory. You will take your eyes off the road to see where the button is and "aim" at it. And a bumpy road just makes it worse because it only takes an accidental light touch to trigger some random function close by.

Even a 17" screen or great UI won't fix the problems, they will just ameliorate them.

The are functions that just fit better into a touchscreen experience, and some that should have physical buttons even if it takes regulation to make sure of this.
I can assure you that PFD (primary flight display) interfaces are very much safety-critical. And they will be touch interfaces.
C++ should only be used as a last resort. It's complex, development is slower, the tooling is poor, some universities have stopped teaching it. It's very hard to hire good C++ devs, and they are typically not cheap.

I manage a c++ team btw. Our app has to be fast.
I'm suggesting people should Google it because a list of singular examples does not indicate widespread usage. It's a case of "you need to see for yourself" to understand how this term is actually used in the wild.

The problem is people are trying to find definitions for things that Hipaa literally doesn't define. You won't find a definition for "end-to-end" because Hipaa doesn't actually define it. "end-to-end" is an implementation detail. Hipaa does not define or green-light implementations.

This is both a blessing and a curse of Hipaa.

On the blessing side, it means companies can use tools they see fit and follow industry best practices as long as they can demonstrate the compliance of those tools. This is great because it means companies don't need to wait for Hipaa to explicitly say "you can now use TLS 1.x" or "this widely accepted algorithm is cool for disk encryption".

On the curse side, it means there's no explicit guidance and a lot of leeway. It's on individual companies to demonstrate their implementation patterns are secure.
It doesn't work anywhere near as well as you think. Crowdsourcing is worse than the traditional model, for many reasons.

A huge issue with it is that the creative bears all the risks of chargebacks and payment processor issues. Chargebacks can eat up funding tremendously quickly, and can lead to being banned even from the service that manages patronage for you. And using services like paypal is another existential risk; paypal can freeze or ban you. If anything a publisher's check is more stable.

There's also issues with how much earnings can fluctuate for small creators based on whale donors. People who donate large amounts each month can really hurt small creators if they withdraw. Selling books for example kind of limits the impact of any one sale since all are the same price.

Oh, and patron stuff is bad overall for creativity. A lot of it is porn, a lot of it is just rewarding successful people already, and the demands of self-marketing and maintenance take a lot of time away from the artist to make stuff. It's the same with "indie" culture, it wound up being spamming things like harem gamelit or series books, because that's really what the financial system rewards now.

I think eventually it's just going to implode.
Brooks Brothers converts suit factory into medical supply producer
I'm not sure that opt-out makes a meaningful difference in whether it is likely to end up in court. I don't expect that Napster giving artists an opt-out form would have saved them, for instance.
No, at most it sounds like retaliation.

They did not follow health guidelines until the person complained and then they still don't follow them but instead claim to follow them. Why just claim? After the 14 day phase the guidelines don't suggest any quarantines unless people show symptoms.
The Volt had the worst of both worlds, though -- touch controls that weren't even a screen.

I own a Tesla 3 as well, and I mostly agree-- I have 0 need to adjust most controls manually, the auto stuff works really well.

But I don't think voice controls are a good 'fix'. I still wish the car had a physical glovebox button and physical wiper controls.
I don't think it does anymore. You have to activate the screen and slide left to get the camera. The volume buttons still work for the shutter though, which I use all the time.
Critical driver systems (i.e. steering, signaling, acceleration and brakes) aren't controlled by touchscreen in any car I know of either, so if non-critical systems are beside the point, what is the criticism here? Or are you thinking of some particularly extreme cars that are even more reliant on touchscreen than the Model 3?
I share your feelings. I had to buy a newer phone and I pinned the 3 buttons to the bottom of the screen where I used to have the buttons on the bezel. The screen is at least 2 cm / 1 inch too tall anyway. The alternative is swiping to go back, which is unusable.

Sometimes the buttons disappear but bringing them back is not as complicated as I feared. Of course it's worse than having them. I'd take a 3 cm shorter screen and 1 cm bottom bezel with buttons.
Will SQL Server databases be supported at some point?
Dark Sky has joined Apple