skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
On my part I don't consider all inequalities to be fundamentally reducible to a single dimension, so the primary reason I would consider that "inequality is not intrinsically bad" is not so much that it can be "great motivator" [to innovate, if I interpret that as mainly a way to get more money] than that some characteristics are just both plainly dissimilar and impossible to sort, sometimes not even for single individuals considering their taste, even less so for a whole population.

Now it is still interesting to measure a correlation between the income and the ability to work from home and the practical impacts in our current organizations and in specific situations, but this has to be qualified and interpreted very carefully, because I'm not really sure that the conditions for some are specifically worsened in order to be specifically enhanced for others - at least in normal times. Actually, I'm not sure the conditions are even always necessarily enhanced for those who work from home, for example working exclusively from home might be a bad idea for some people; and some companies may have the idea that working from home forever is the new normal, even without pandemic constraints. In that context, that would be one less choice for the workers, compared to a balanced situation. But that has to be completely contextually qualified: it would seem fair to amortize and compensate even otherwise neutral characteristics (not affirming that WFH ability is usually completely neutral) if they become huge disadvantage in specific situations. Because why bother living in a society otherwise?

So it boils down to choice (and I mean root choices: if you have the choice and choose a work occupation that you find extremely fulfilling, but that you can't practice from home, then usually the lack of choice on the work at home subject is only very secondary compared to your original choice of this activity), and in that regard maybe it should be read as a (potential, and very indirect) symptom of real problems rather than a problem on its own: I agree that the ability for individual choices that matter will be greatly improved by e.g. accessible good quality education and health care systems, and the US seems lacking there. The thing is that even if that does not change at all the wage vs. WFH correlation, the overall situation will still be enhanced if that improve the ability for people to chose their job.
I write python scripts to control my devices, and made a web page to trigger these scripts: https://github.com/printfinn/smart-garage-rails.
I run this website on a Raspberry Pi in my home, it's been working fine for half a year.
It's written with Ruby on Rails, and one good thing it provides is that you don't need to worry about privacy, because it doesn't need to be connected to the Internet, only inside you home net.
This is a much more productive answer to the node dependency tree question than I'm used to encountering, and it's much more in line with most large modern systems are tending to address security from >1th party sources. Wall it off, require explicit permission, worry more about the security of the sandbox and less about the security of the dependencies. It doesn't address everything (and it becomes a lot riskier when you do give permission), but it's a far better proposal than shouting about how many dependencies are common in the JS ecosystem without any additional steps.
Indeed, it should be possible to simulate all the "required" physics on a computer. (Not that it's necessary.)
> Our theory says that if we want to decide whether or not a machine is conscious, we shouldn't look at the behavior of the machine, but at the actual substrate that has causal power. For present-day AI systems, that means we have to look at the level of the computer chip. Standard chips use the Von Neumann architecture, in which one transistor typically receives input from a couple of other transistors and projects also only to a couple of others. This is radically different from the causal mechanism in the brain, which is vastly more complex.

This riles me up for so many reasons. Transistors (and computers) are capable of emulating more complex systems. Looking at a transistor you will not understand why your mail can'd be delivered, nor will you understand consciousness from an individual neuron. Consciousness is related to behaviour, and both are related to survival and the environment. AI's don't have such an environment as of yet so they can't be conscious yet, but they could be. There is no magic dust in the brain.

> As long as a computer behaves like a human, what does it matter whether or not it is conscious?

If it walks like a duck, ... But seriously, why should consciousness be so special as to require a quality that can't be observed through behaviour (understanding that it is non-physical, non-observable)? P-zombies are just a thought experiment, and a bad one. Why should consciousness exist? To protect the body, to self reproduce, to exist. It exists to exist and evolve. And this is done by behaviour, by acting in a smart way. How would p-zombies come to be, if not through fighting for survival? Without the evolutionary mechanism there is no explanation for consciousness, and the evolutionary argument is sufficient. Consciousness is the inner optimisation loop, the outer one being evolution. They both work for survival, for their own sake.

An AI could repeat the same process by evolving as a population of agents cooperating and competing between themselves. They would have to be inside an environment that is complex enough, and they should be subject to evolution. It will be a consciousness, just not a human consciousness, which is tied to our environment, which is made in large part of other humans.
The entire thing is on Github:
https://github.com/gravitational/teleport

Quickstart:
https://gravitational.com/teleport/docs/quickstart/

To quickly answer your question: if you rename teleport client "tsh" to "ssh", trying to use it without a certificate will trigger SSO workflow. The alternative is to issue "tsh login" CLI command in the morning.
> And Howard Hughes was also motivated by legacy and unquestionably brilliant. Intellectual brilliance and drive can coexist with psychological vulnerabilities and erratic decision making.

Id include Nikola Tesla in there as well, just because something doesn't end in a happy contrite Disney-like ending doesn't mean that it wasn't a positive, or a Life well lived that would carry on and inspire so many more to contribute to that end long after either have died.

I personally moved to CO in large part because of Nikola Tesla, and was resolved to do so before Amendment 64 was even a real possibility.
I think one reason that is ofter overlooked, that I didn't even knew was a thing until later than I should, is that out of the box, a beginner can still play around with stuff on Mac after just plugging in his midi-keyboard. Through after locating and plugging in at least one dongle. Professionals will have an external audio interface. Try to do the same thing on windows, and it will be practically impossible to do anything without an external audio interface.

I'm not an expert but as I understand it, it's because of CoreAudio allowing direct routing of midi (and/or/xor?) audio through the system, while in windows, without an external interface, everything has to pass some sort of queue, adding a simply unusable latency out of the box.

This might have caused the "myth" that Apple is better for audio production.
In my 20+ year career I only recall working at one place that provided paid sick leave, and that company only provided two weeks of annual vacation. Even if everyone worked from home the full 2-3 weeks they were feeling the least bit off from a cold, the office would be a ghost town for at least 2-3 months out of the year. Which maybe it should be, but that would clearly defy the common expectations of the world pre-COVID.
Thought provoking stuff! How can someone talk about conciousness existing then, without presupposing dualism?
Don't forget... Microsoft <3 Linux. You can tell it's a top consideration.
Robert Reich and his circle

https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1260255145310339073
> I was with you until the "cast (sic) system"

You will have to take this as second hand information as I am not familiar with the relics of the cast system. But as he relayed it to me. When you go on a date with a girl that would be considered to be in a higher social status than yourself, the first thing the father will ask is how many people do you manage. Being a manager seems to provide some mobility in the relics of the system that is left. This is how it was relayed to me.
It gives you a list of directly depended-upon packages. It doesn't give you a list of _those_ packages' dependencies, or _their_ dependencies, which funnily enough also get installed when you install your direct dependencies.

Plus I forgot to address this in my earlier comment: that visualizer only shows dependencies. By default it doesn't load any dev dependencies. You can confirm that for yourself by checking out https://npm.anvaka.com/#/view/2d/rollup for example - only the single runtime dependency on fsevents shows up, the dozens of dev dependencies Rollup has don't.

So yes, React Native does ship that overcomplicated graph of dependencies to all its users. I'll grant that at least _some_ of the code in those dependencies gets tree-shaken out.
Instead of "Flutter", use "Flash" and you got the same thing!

Except hot reload
A killer app is something like Rails. Rails made Ruby popular, because it was so good that people who otherwise wouldn't have been interested in Ruby were willing to use it for the benefits they got from Rails.
Body's own marijuana helps us forget traumatic memories
just another crypto pyramid scheme
I'm glad that the next ".Net Core" will be ".Net 5" and hopefully once people start upgrading (those who resisted "Core" will finally come over), should see Linux as a target option more readily. Of course commercial libraries and dragging them by the teeth will take longer.

Most of what I've written in the past 5+ years either targets or runs in linux/docker. It's been a challenge pulling the teams up to spead.
> When I started learning Rust I made the mistake of following the advice to read The Book first. While it's a great resource, it's pretty overwhelming for a beginner to get told "If you'd like to learn this programming language the best way to start is to read this 20 chapter book!" Most people give up before they even get started when they get advice like this. Nobody ever told someone to read a 20 chapter book just to get started with Javascript or Python. Rust's learning curve is no joke but you gotta give the people what they want, and they want to program, not read about programming. Programming is fun and reading about programming is not as fun.

As one of the authors of the book, I wholeheartedly agree that it's not for everyone. Folks should learn in the way that works well for them. I'm glad this resource exists!
Oh no, I do not mean that in a pejorative sense. I have a lot of respect for him and his work. It's a way to understand how someone so thoughtful and intelligent and dedicated can seemingly be unaware of the "hard problem". One day it occurred to me that maybe he just hadn't had the "breakthrough" or "epiphany". It's unlikely but not impossible.

FWIW, his wikipedia entry says,

> He also presents an argument against qualia; he argues that the concept is so confused that it cannot be put to any use or understood in any non-contradictory way, and therefore does not constitute a valid refutation of physicalism. His strategy mirrors his teacher Ryle's approach of redefining first person phenomena in third person terms, and denying the coherence of the concepts which this approach struggles with.

that's specifically what I don't like. In re: the "hard problem" he wants to declare victory without a fight, or a prize.
It's funny, I actually have an undergraduate and graduate degree in engineering - but not software engineering - and I work as a software engineer.

Yet I tell everyone that I'm a programmer/developer. To me, having seen what goes for engineering in other fields, I feel like a small subset of engineering jobs in non-software fields is true engineering. To me, that bar is inventing something worth patenting. I'd say its an even smaller subset in software.

The thing is, I wouldn't say it the highest value work is the stuff that is true engineering. Actually implementing ideas is so much more value adding and difficult in my opinion. Execution and front lines gritty work is incredibly undervalued in every industry. So I prefer to go by developer because I take more pride in that part.
The whole purpose is to make a new PDF that looks like it was scanned. The file size differing from the original is a feature, not a bug.
Nice!

I just started learning Rust for a WebAssembly project.

The people on the Discord server are nice and quick to answer questions.

The ebooks I found online are a bit hard to grasp. At least for a JS dev like me.

I mean, for the basics they're okay, but what I'm missing is how to write "good Rust code". There are always multiple ways to do things (Option/Result, try!/?/unwrap/expect, loops/map/fold, etc.) and I already produced some runtime errors, haha
I’m going to take an extreme position in the hopes it “stimulates” conversation: the best course is $6k direct citizen payments. Business that fail create new niches some of the gritty but solvent ex-employed can try to exploit with new startups.

Also, if the stimulus in the scenario was $4 trillion total, each citizen could be given/loaned ~$12000; by pooling their stimuli payments, tens of individuals and/or large families could potentially have enough capital to take a risky shot on a startup / small biz.
Since we've got yes and no, why not get the third answer:

The question is badly posed and therefore meaningless. If the universe is deterministic, then you cannot have free-will as it is normally considered. If it is non-deterministic, then (by Bell's Inequality, if you want to throw around big terms) it is random, which is also not free-will as it is normally considered. If you have free-will, as we all feel like we do, then the universe can be neither deterministic nor non-deterministic. Something is smelly in Denmark; the question itself does not make sense in it's current form.

I am not actually an analytic philosopher, I just emulate them as a hobby.
Giulio Tononi on Consciousness
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvJyMmw2Thw

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_information_theory
For quick sequence diagrams I really like

https://swimlanes.io/

It's text-based (build on Mermaid if I'm not mistaken) and really easy to work with for simple interactions.

Also because it's purely text-based you can pass around the full context in the URL. This makes it a little awkward to collaborate vs. a true hosted solution, but it also lowers the barrier to entry significantly.
> First, while that's true now, there is no guarantee that it will always be true as technology advances.

True, but what does that mean? We get to watch someone else's dream like a movie because neuroscientists will have figured out how to translate the neural activity into a format that can be outputted as video and audio.

That won't work for every sensation. You can't feel that you're having the same dream as being that person's body.

> Second, neural activity is the physical basis for conscious experience, which, to a physicalist like me, means it is conscious experience,

This is similar to an identity theory of mind, with a focus on information. The problem is understanding how integrated information produces smells and pains. Saying the experience is identical is making a claim that seems mysterious. Why would some forms of information be conscious? Did God set that up?

It sounds similar to Chalmers' position on information, except that Chalmers says there is a natural link between rich information and being conscious that is an additional law in addition to the physical ones.
Sure it exists outside the tech world. It's the meaning of the word "profession." A senior doctor or senior lawyer is respected, despite being a leaf-node.
1023 is the limit. If you can fit within 1023, then a simple MCS policy could work without lock-like implications.

Android works around the 1023 limit by giving each app a set of categories. This works when a file can only ever be owned by 1 app, but becomes more difficult when multiple owners are possible.

E.G. If you want to grant access to the catagory set c1,c10,c20 and c5,c15,c25 then you need to make sure there is nothing running as c1,c15,c20. This is probably doable, but I have not worked out what is does to the effective number of catagories you could have.

> EDIT: Good point about requesting related resources though, not sure how you'd go about that (I'm not even sure you'd actually want that either since you could include '../../../etc/passwd' or something as an <img> tag)

The answer is in step 5. Somehow, the userspace security manager needs to know that firefox is not allowed to use ../../../etc/passwd, but is (maybe?) allowed to use ../index.html.

As I said. SELinux can be an effective component of a secure desktop system. But you need to overlay it with some other security system; and at this point no one has figured out what that security system should look like from a user perspective.
Anyone unsophisticated enough to require you to print and handwrite a signature is also unsophisticated enough to not realize that the PDF size is a tell.
I'm on the fence about this one. On the one hand I don't like it the same way I don't like "Open" signs that never turn off. On the other, if hiring fell under my responsibility and had any uptick in applicants, I'd want to use it.
> Why is that difference acceptable? Why should someone get to make enormous amounts of money while someone else can barely afford food?

That's not what that means — some nations are developing and some are developed. The cost of a burger in a developing African country is a fraction of the cost of the same burger in the US. Labor is cheap there because you could meet most of your basic needs (food, water, clothing, shelter, etc) for LESS money, in real terms, than in the US.

But like I said, the standard of living is not static. Countries develop over time. At one point in time, the US was a poor country, European countries were poor, Japan was poor, South Korea was poor etc. Their standards of living all increased due to global trade. Ironically enough, their standards of living all increased because some people made enormous amounts of money.

In fact, at present, the only way we really know how to turn a DEVELOPING country with a low standard of living into a DEVELOPED country with a high standard of living...is trade and economic growth.

> I guess I need to learn more about this. Can you give me some resources showing that we're going to reach a point where there isn't poverty and exploited labor? It seems like an extraordinary claim.

Sure, there are plenty. Take China for example[1][2]. We have seen household income and cost of living increase over the last 3 decades, owing to break-neck development and economic growth.

It's an out-sourcing hotspot TODAY because labor is cheap there. But given the current trends, we can almost be certain that labor there will be expensive TOMORROW. At some point, the cost of paying a Chinese worker to build an iPhone will be the same as the cost to pay an American in Wisconsin to do the same.

A profit-seeking business will then choose to move to a cheaper labor market, and keep repeating the same cycle...until there are no more cheaper labor markets left because the Vietnam and Ghana of tomorrow will look like the Japan and China of today.

[1] https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/china/annual-household...

[2] https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2018/january/incom...
Lol! I think the best scenario I have experienced with the touchbar is when using Windows-products through Parallells.

Wich is insane considering the possibilities.

I want to never see my dock on the desktop again, and have it on the touchbar. That was almost possible with the other replyers suggestion but still not perfect.
It didn't because declaring it was inconceivable in the Judeo view. But he might well understood he was God.
> the fact that Bay Area headquartered companies pay more in their remote offices compared to other companies.

That just proves my point that companies pay a premium for Bay Area employees because that's where talented employees who can demand a premium congregate, and when they want to hire similarly talented employees in other areas they also have to pay a similar premium instead of downgrading their compensation packages to the local market rate.
> Being compiled to native code is a huge benefit.

It's still just running Javascript. The real difference is that it uses widgets that are native to the platform, instead of a browser engine/DOM.
> the article title only refers to shutting off utilities.

It does not.
Generally the engineers will get less hung up on semantics.

I'm guessing you're more of a programmer?
This is basically what Adobe Reader does with its signature feature.
They will convert TON investments to equity investments. Which is probably what Silicon Valley VCs wanted in the first place. Now Durov holds 100% of equity.

Think WhatsApp back in a day before Facebook acquisition.
Even so, I'll point out that this elite sports teams pay more than just 2X-3X more than average ones.

For all the talk of "talent" in this industry, it doesn't work like a talent industry. Where engineers do earn major salaries, it's usually on account of the managerial element and not the engineering one.

Lawyering is a talent industry, for example. Top lawyers in top firms do earn on a scale as disparate as pro athletes. The top lawyers may manage people, but their high salaries are for lawyering. The creative industries work that way, obviously.

Engineering is structurally more like accounting.
It's interesting to compare responses:

UK police stopping people from sitting on Brighton beach:

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/brighton-beach-police-checkpoint-l...

LA saying you can go to the beach, but you're not allowed to sit down or take an umbrella:

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-12/coronavi...

In Vancouver people are flocking to the beach, but mostly following social distancing, and BC's chief health officer is fine with that (she has said in the past that people should get outside, as the risk of catching the virus while walking past someone outside is infinitessimal):

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/just-how-crowded-are-b-c-beaches-pictu...

I think BC's response is the only one that is based on science, logic and reason, whereas the UK, San Francisco and LA seem to be having a more extreme lockdown that isn't really based on any kind of logic and is just going to piss people off and negatively affect mental health.
When you have this need, you should clearly articulate this to your users, and you should provide flexible options. Not doing so, as is unfortunately mandated for US EEO compliance, leads to poorer quality data as employees who are non-gender-conforming are uncertain or unable to answer the question in a way that reflects their identity.

Collecting demographic data for equality purposes is admirable but still needs to be done carefully and with an eye towards capturing the diversity of your user base. Simply throwing in a gender male/female question can actually make this situation worse rather than better by actively turning away certain individuals.