skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hopefully, one of the things that we price in going forward is the volatility in the price of oil vs alternatives, especially those that can be produced domestically in a way decoupled from international events. That includes natural gas and especially renewables. Remember that just a 6 years ago, oil was north of $100/barrel [1], and recently it's close to zero. Wind on the other hand has had a steadily reducing LCOE[2][3]. Solar's LCOE is also steadily reducing [3].

Volatility has a cost. With oil, it's one that the US and other countries hae historically tried to dampen with various industrial and political methods (the national strategic oil reserve, military/political "influence" on foreign oil producers, subsidies for domestic production), but seems like the current situation is beyond those methods' ability to control.

1. https://www.macrotrends.net/1369/crude-oil-price-history-cha...

2. https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/08/f25/LCOE.pdf

3.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#...

4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#...
Inside the repo there are examples that help to understand how it works:
https://git.sr.ht/~rabbits/orca/tree/master/examples
If you want to migrate from Heroku, you may find it useful
Well, more than one person hasn't understood my critique, which indicates that the problem may have been my communication. :)
I have had similar experiences. Even if the future-proofing is very inexpensive, they'd rather waste more work un-doing the future-proofing than the total amount of work that went into it in the first place, because it's "unnecessary".
Services Repassage
C'est d'une grande importance d'opter pour les bons services repassage qui seraient à la base de toute entreprise de repassage qui place le client au cœur de sa structure.
> It is becoming increasingly clear that the level of panic associated with COVID-19 is absolutely divorced from the ground truths.

No, it's becoming increasingly clear that people are incapable of telling the difference between their personal health[1], and the health of society as a whole.

The risk of COVID to me is low. The risk to society of me going about my daily business as if nothing has happened is high. There are social adjustments that do little to reduce my risk, but decrease overall risk, and unsurprisingly, people who don't understand, or don't care about the difference between the two, push back on them.

And now we get to look forward to a torrent of people who will be complaining that the horse didn't bolt because we closed the barndoor.

[1] You are pointing out a few anecdotes of people not going to the ER when they should. I don't deny that a few people are making that mistake. But if we're going by anecdotes, I can point out a million and one anecdotes of people not taking basic health precautions - that I don't even need to go to a newspaper for - since I can see them out of my window.
The article says "Uber brought in $3.54 billion in revenue in the first quarter, up 14% from the same time last year." so they did and more than last year before incurring loss.
I'm not comparing a wooden stick with a high end hammer. I would think a competent carpenter would have a decent enough hammer, but not necessarily the shiny cool x-titanium-3000(tm), because any difference, if they exist at all, would be well into diminishing returns territory.

At the end of the day, the wobbliness of the table is a result of whether the carpenter cares about table wobbliness more than which hammer they use. However, it may say something about the level of craftmanship and competence of the carpenter if they got suckered into buying a well advertised x-titanium-3000(tm) to compensate for an unwillingness to put in the effort to master core carpentry skills.

Another similar analogy is an audiophile buying gold plated HDMI cables for better sound quality, oblivious that the reality is that the signal going through said cable is using a digital protocol with error correction.
I sometimes wonder why it’s so difficult to find people like that.
T-shirt Premium Tee($ 17.99 ONLY)
Nope. It was not possible to trade at negative.
>There also wasn't this huge epistemological divide running right through the middle of the country; people were generally working from a common understanding of reality. Not so, today.

Everyone was watching the same network news and reading the same newspaper. Once niche news sources started to become widely available, everyone went to the news source that gave them the news how they wanted to hear it. Over time these news sources grew more and more polarized as they continued to cater to their specific niche audience (some sources are certainly more brazen and intentional with this approach, but it happens naturally if you aren't actively working to stop it). There is only so much polarization that can happen when we all agree on the same basic set of facts. But now we are all stuck in our own bubbles, only listen to news that reinforces our world view, and we continue to spiral further and further into polarization.
Not so, refresh the page to see how large the second download is (much smaller)
Are we constructing a police state? How do we wind down emergency measures? These are completely valid and vital questions we should be asking right now, especially since the balance of the discussion almost exclusively falls on the side of expanded and unquestionable police power. History shows that emergency and "temporary" measures end up being permanent and irrevocable. Look at the Patriot Act.

I am interested in public safety. And it's really frightening how any well-intentioned critique of lockdown ends up with responses like yours that sound like "how dare you consider that, you inhuman, dangerous fool!"
What is an esolang?
Mass shootings in the US - table.[1] Only one in the 1970s, and that was a family affair. Far more since.

Terrorism in the United States.[2] Other than 9/11 and Oklahoma City, few non mass shooting incidents have killed many people.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_S...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States...
Good correction. The most common GPL licensed vi clone, then.
Well, let me avoid "floundering in ambiguity". I'm not "espousing a theory" I'm stating well-attested facts: slavery in American was not theoretical, the KKK are not theoretical, redlining is not theoretical. Someone else in the thread has linked to a article about the FBI investigating white supremacists who are following today a "historical goal" of infiltrating Law Enforcement. That's not theoretical. So there are "ongoing racist plots", it's no theory.

Furthermore there are also emergent properties of our policing strategy that lead to problems as well.

FWIW I have no fear that my "position", as you put it, in the "race debates" can stand on its own.
If you're trying to do justice to the concept of negative freedom, then what definition are you using? To me, it's about being free to be left alone and go your own way, as opposed to being provided for (eg freedom from hunger, or whatever).

I would classify a public defender as a mitigation of an impingement on negative freedom rather than a bona fide positive freedom. There are surely other countries where you have less of a chance of being harmed by the courts, because they compensate for their general infringement of freedom by giving you better protections to defend yourself from it.

> The US just happens to be the most negatively free country.

The US has some of the most draconian copyright laws in the world. Are those outweighed by something else, or should we dispense with this notion of "most" ?
I think the author is overreaching, or rather, this is how natural language works for all fields of discourse (um, "fields", am I using a geography metaphor?)

The author mentions a talk by Maggie Appleton (which I've not heard, so maybe she's being misrepresented [1]) where she asks "Aren’t metaphors just a frivolous distraction?". But it becomes impossible to talk about anything, software included, without using them. To the point where I question whether it's useful at all to think of them as metaphors.

How else talk about what a string or a file contains without using the word "contains"? Is "she had no more ideas" clearer than "she ran out of ideas"? (And wouldn't the former be a metaphor of possession, as if one could "have" ideas? Maybe it's better to say "she was idea-less"?)

How would you say "he reused this variable name" without a metaphor of resources? "He chose a variable name that was also the name of another variable"?

----

[1] edit: I've now watched Maggie's talk, and her point is that metaphors are useful and indeed inescapable.
>There also wasn't this huge epistemological divide running right through the middle of the country; people were generally working from a common understanding of reality.

This is mostly a myth. Conspiracy theories for example, often taken as an example today of how flimsy reality is, always had an immense impact on American politics. Many American presidents were committed believers of conspiracy theories, Nixon was openly paranoid, of course with an extremely political bent.

The absurdity of the cold war and its influence on division in politics and what is actually real or not is well documented in just about every film made in the era.

Insofar as American politics actually is more divided today I wouldn't even frame it as a bad thing. It's just the result of vastly different people wanting vastly different things and having significantly more opportunity to express it. This desire for consensus among moderates is just an expression of another age-old American tradition, fear of the upper-middle class of everything that is political.
Yeah, the whole thing looks to be basically an ad for agencies that have registered with them.

Nice for the agencies, not all that useful to this crowd for data collection. Alot of the numbers are just way, way off from industry standards so it makes me wonder where they got them.
you might post this on indiehackers.com
The article mentions the US Civil War in it's third and second to last sentences in the last paragraph, and that's the only place. I expanded on that by a considerable amount.

Right now I feel like the Civil War is an apt comparison since we have state governors making pacts between themselves to act a certain way regardless of what the federal government says to do.
5G is most certainly a weapon. If nothing else, it is a steroid injection to the surveillance state.
With online news and the rapid news cycles, we're living in how The Onion presented 'Live poll lets pundits pander in real time': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFpK_r-jEXg
Didn't mess with it yet, but I'm assuming these fire when the cursor hits a bang character (!)
Ha I'm literally typing the post as we speak! Thanks :)
Let’s hold off on the idea that the California government is going to fade into nothing. From the linked article:

“However, the report concludes that the projected deficit as a percent of general fund spending “is modestly smaller than the budget deficits faced by the state in 2003 and in 2009,”

Also, I suspect there are a lot of Californians right now who trust their state leadership a more than federal leadership. (I am one of those people.)
Just to be clear, the epidemic only "burns out" when somewhere between 50-90% of the population has immunity. Almost certainly closer to 80%+ unless we discover that a significant portion of the population is resistant to infection due to genetic differences or possible cross-immunity with other milder human CoVs.

By suppressing the transmission of this virus, we have failed to build immunity in most of the population. As a result any serious lifting of suppression measures will lead to moderate-severe outbreaks.

On balance, I believe that the most effective method is to resume life as normal, and focus on encouraging the at-risk to shelter, along with providing them appropriate government support. Whereas the approach we've taken has destroyed our economy in a very real sense, which will increase mortality even in the absence of a global food crisis.

The suspension of elective surgeries on a broad basis was very clearly a mistake, but unfortunately it's the type of mistake that no-one will admit was a mistake.

We postponed absolutely important surgeries as a result of this, even in areas like, for example, my county in Central California, which has very low prevalence of COVID-19. Here in California we "only" suspended elective surgeries for a month and now have a backlog that we're still working through.

So, just to say it explicitly: the fear that "things will never be normal again" is unfounded, at least in those who are operating off a mental model wherein COVID-19 is 10x as deadly as we previously thought.

The fact that we chose a strategy of indefinite postponement was our mistake. Because now people are beginning to realize that if we "go back to normal" then "the lockdown was for nothing". I consider this to just be a sunk cost fallacy, I believe quite frankly that ultimately the lockdown "was for nothing" (that is to say that, at the time it may have been justified based off the projected numbers, but with what we know now we should know that we only shot ourselves in the foot).

TL;DR: I believe that we need to resume normal operation of society, and make strong efforts to protect the at-risk. Trying to indefinitely postpone exposure to COVID-19 is a loosing battle. We've adopted a strategy of indefinite containment/postponement that relies on hunkering down and waiting for a _temporally unbounded event_. Given that lockdown-associated damage increases the longer containment is maintained, we are trading off a linear component of damage for a speculated future improvement in outcomes due to vaccines/a game-changer treatment. That to me is eminently foolish.

Most decision-making heuristics don't just try to blindly increase expected value (decrease expected loss) but also factor in uncertainy. In general it's acceptable to trade off a little EV for a lot more uncertainty. (Unfortunately in the case of the lockdown, I believe we incurred -EV along with far more uncertainty, for a net loss across all dimensions)
There was nothing wrong with the parent comment. It would have been better to describe some of what's actually in the book, but it was still helpful information, obviously well-intended. I'm sure you didn't mean to bully js2 into deleting it, but please don't post like that to HN. There are kinder ways to ask for more information.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I've been WFH since March 3rd due to a persistent cough I had from a cold I had the previous week. I really need to replace my recliner as my workspace...
Promoting the idea that no one is complaining because of apathy is an interesting strategy.

"We didn't censor, people jusy don't care".
Dokuwiki, MediaWiki, Confluence.
Both Dan Abramov and Andrew Clark (co-creators of Redux) were indeed hired by Facebook to work on the React core.

However, Dan and Andrew haven't actively touched Redux library code since mid-2016. (Dan occasionally drops into an issue to comment, like his suggestion to not ship a `useActions` hook for React-Redux, but that's it.

The _current_ maintainers (Tim Dorr and myself) do not work for Facebook, and Redux has never been a Facebook-sponsored project. We're an independent open source project.

We chat with the React team frequently via Github and Twitter and such, but that's just OSS collaboration work.

See https://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2018/03/redux-not-dead-yet... for more details.
Yes, but how much will you pay? Bike rental like Jump or Lyft hasn't ever been profitable, nor should it be. It should be viewed by cities as a way to manage their street capacity, and like bus service, should not be expected to be internally profitable. This was the model of Motivate (Citibike, Bay Area Bike Share) before Lyft acquired them.
I don't understand how "backend" is a metaphor for orientation like "up", "back", "forward". It's a term that etymologically comes from "back" but has no semantic connection to the word.
Except the claim was that there are more than one strain and the author is responding to that. The burden of proof lies in the one making the claim that there are multiple strains. The author has no burden of proof.

This would be akin to one person making the claim: "Unicorns are not only real, but are causing a global pandemic" and then someone writing an article titled "Unicorns aren't real, STFU". The second title doesn't have the burden of proof and we wouldn't be having this conversation if these were the titles of the respective articles.

Why is the unicorns title an accurate analogy? Because the science doesn't expect there to be multiple strains in the same way the science doesn't expect unicorns to exist. I'm using the same vernacular here that we use in science. I didn't say "unicorns don't exist" but "we don't expect unicorns to exist". This is how we say things.
Yeah we can all probably agree on goals and outcomes.

My guess here is each person has an audience in mind and an applicability.

The dog whistle of saying the "American family" is being destroyed. To a conservative it means something about a god fearing hetero family. To a liberal it means anyone wanting to be in a consensual monogamous relationship.

Healthcare should be good and affordable. "For people like me." or "To everyone, even an illegal."
Except... they kind of did. Prohibition created revenue opportunity for gangs and organized crime. Ending prohibition removed this revenue, replacing the speakeasy with legalized and regulated bars and liquor stores, effectively cutting off this revenue stream.

Sure the Mob didn't magically disappear overnight, but it began a decline they never recovered from. Replacing that revenue stream isn't as easy as "just" finding another racket, there is a lot of difficulty hidden in that "just".
> It's really sad that in 2020, 10k+ engineers can't make a photo, video, post and message sharing website that is not a pain to use.

Too many cooks spoil the stew.

I might even go so far to say that 10 engineers would have a larger chance of success than 10k+ engineers.
The worst part is consumers have also lost because of uber. The promise of convenient, affordable transportation will not be delivered. Uber/Lyft rides will be more expensive than cab rides were because users have to support Uber's overhead.
Seems like a fair comparison, they could have acquired 3 unicorn companies with that money.
Sometimes I feel like even if America had more upheaval in the past, it was at least the type of upheaval that could change things. Now I feel like people are angry and the system is setup such that there's nothing that they can do to change things.
Nobody is suggesting the creation of a police state. We need to maintain lockdowns until we don't. Specifically, we need to develop measurable, scientific criteria for easing lockdowns, similar to how the state of California and the Bay Area counties have done. Once cases reach a sufficiently low level that we can handle the remaining epidemic via testing and contact tracing, then and only then is it safe to start returning to normal. Along with this must come criteria for re-imposing the lockdown -- the moment things get beyond the point where contact tracing, etc. can handle existing cases, then we need to tighten back up.

Government already has the authority to impose these lockdowns as a public safety measure. There is no additional "police state" power being created here de novo.

If you want to reopen the economy now without considering these things, then, yes, that does make you an inhuman, dangerous fool.
Google Plans to Deprecate Cookies
I owned USO and sold it on 4/21. I lost money of course. It seems USO could never go negative according to what you said and I could only go to 0 but I learned my lesson to stay out of futures for good
People always talk about 5G signals not travelling well through walls. I wonder if they also get held up trying to travel through the human brain.
and 3) other people to realize this and capitalize on it for money and/or political power.
Yup. Same boat. I have an i7 3770k that I purchased in 2012 with the intention of overclocking it. It turned out to be a great chip that was stable at 4.8ghz. I use this computer mainly for gaming.

Last month, I started getting some kernel_trap BSODs so I reduced voltage a bit and also the clock speed down to 4.7ghz.

I don't see a reason for me to upgrade my CPU for another few years unless it burns out or something. The only component I've upgraded is my GPU, from a GTX 670 to a 980 TI.

The newer chips may be great for specific needs, but for gaming and light development work I don't see any reason why I need to upgrade. Sure, a quad core from 2012 isn't the hottest thing anymore, but along with my 980TI it runs all my games at 2k without any issues.
CamTwist lets you make custom effects and has an SDK[0], you may be able to interface it with Python using PyObjC[1].

It also has direct script functionality but I think the SDK is more powerful.

[0]: http://camtwiststudio.com/developers-objective-c/
[1]: https://pyobjc.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-07/uber-lead...
Well we're chimps that can barely communicate with one another even when we speak the same language. We'll always have room to improve. (considering that you're the top comment, I think more people accurately characterized your message. Comments are more likely to happen with a mischaracterization and can be selection bais)
The headline overstates the body of the article a bit although it's not really inaccurate.

It is an interesting question to ask, come fall or winter, whether--if plenty at some companies can work from home and life/productivity goes on for much of a year--what does office life look like going forward?

Most companies will still have offices but I wonder if things shift to more of a hoteling type system with conference rooms and other collaboration spaces with people coming in a couple days per week or so.
Can you please compare the speed of https://yang2020.app/events ?

On the mobile web or desktop, either one. (We're running it off of one server, it might get the HN effect, we'll see.)

We have been building our own, open source social networking platform and we have tried to make a lot of things more efficient while doing so. The site I linked to didn't minify any files or optimize images. However, it loads things on demand as needed, and even lazy-loads entire components.

Is it faster than Facebook? We have our own component system, not React.

Here is a site that did minify and combine all files: https://intercoin.org

And here is the platform we used: https://gitub.com/Qbix/Platform (warning: not all of it is documented, but enough, at https://qbix.com/platform/guide).
Key quote: “Cookies are bad and we should find a path towards deprecation. But that's going to take some time. This proposal aims to be an addition to the platform that will provide value even in the presence of cookies, giving us the ability to shift developers from one to the other incrementally.”

The plan to deprecate cookies was also referenced recently in this mailing list thread: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/m/#!msg/blink...
But aren't people getting money through unemployment and the CARES Act? Won't that help them keep the stress level down a bit?
Many employment agreements have a clause that says that if you fail to report to work for X days without an approved leave you're considered to have voluntarily resigned. Based on the language, I assume that's what happened here.
Unemployment taxes for a company scale based on historical claims from that company. More Unemployment Benefits paid out = more future UI taxes paid by that employer. It's meant to be a self-funding system.
If I have to download 5mb of js for every page I visit on my phone I would be out of data in less than 15 days.