skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't think people become more virtuous by saying a few words and doing nothing. If you say you care about the environment but do absolutely nothing about it, you don't care in any way that matters. It's just a social signal without any impact on the world. Buying a Tor sticker doesn't promote privacy. Buying and running a Tor node does.
If all one has is CNN, MSNBC, Fox, and NPR then NPR feels like a (somehow calming) ocean of truth. I think starting circa 2013 there were a few huge stories which made people realize that the "hard-hitting" journalism they were reading wasn't all that hard-hitting. Snowden revelations, all that money in the cayman islands, then the whole lot of nothing being done about either.

Below is a comment I made a year ago on HN about my favorite NPR story:

------

Growing up I though of NPR as a bastion of the left but the older I get the more cynical I become. Your take reminds me of the most infuriating story I heard on NPR about Amazon Seasonal workers.

They spotlighted a retiree couple would supplements their income with it in the winter and drives south to gamble in the summer and it just sounded like a profile of a charmed life, somehow I imagine that isn’t the case for most people who work there...

They have monthly fundraising drives where they ask listeners to pay up for fearless journalism but a lot of it sounds like it was written by and for entrenched industries.
https://www.marketplace.org/2017/12/21/business/holiday-seas....
Open Dynamic Robot Initiative
I love it when someone tries to tell me what I should like or do. I don’t care if you like Apple or not. I happen to like them, not everything of course, but overall yes. And you’re advocating limiting their success? They, like all of us, can succeed or fail in America. They are successful because people like their products and software. Duh. Jealousy does not suit you very well. Don’t get me wrong, I like Android and Linux too, I’m an expert on Linux myself. But there’s a reason I use an iPhone, iPad Pro and MacBook Pro. It’s called convenience and productivity. And I like it!

Who basically invented the App Store? And now you don’t like that they make money on it?

Your whole article just strikes me as sour grapes.
> The people who are hired for nepotism are seldom concerned with the fact that they were chosen because of who their parents were.

Nepotism is personal and hidden. It isn't a rule everyone knows about, but something done on an individual level. If people could spot nepotism as easily as they could spot race and knew about confirmed corporate nepotism as easily as they knew about diversity initiatives, it would carry a greater stigma.

People see the race question on the job application. I have never seen a form ask about family members.
Open-source, low-cost, quadruped robot: sophisticated robotics available to all
When the App Store launched, 30% was a huge improvement to the rates extracted in the walled gardens the mobile carriers were running.

Ten years ago 30% was entirely defensible. That it hasn't budged at all is a little weird. If it had notched down to 25% and then to 22% with a hope on the horizon of 20%, I think a lot fewer people would be so salty.

In-app purchases are a tricky one, for game-theoretical reasons. With in-app purchases your base app can be a loss-leader, and in an ecosystem where 'free' is allowed then you make more money with in-app purchases than you would with a monolithic app. We are already overusing in-app purchases, if Apple made them cheaper then everything would be in-app purchases. In-app purchases also make QA harder, so whatever curation power they have is diluted and usually not in a good way.

My heart says in-app purchases should have a lower tax, because Apple is doing less of the work. But my brain says that the opposite is the case.

What is really hurting the people I know (which admittedly isn't many) is that upgrade prices aren't really a thing in the App Store. They don't even have bundling options like Steam. Which means you have to cobble something like it together via in-app purchases.
I'd love to hear a bit more about the differences.

I've spent my adult life in research environments (academic, nonprofit and industrial R&D) and while much of the activity seems entrepreneurial (particularly grant writing), the overarching structural differences between building something for profit vs. for the public good makes a lot of aspects of building a business a bit mysterious to me.
Indians can beat lockdown blues with a long-distance pet
Building a Hexagonal Grid in CSS
Done! Well, at least 4/5 of the HBR criteria. See https://www.kioma.us/products/mask and please support us with a purchase!

I'm a YC alum in the healthcare field, and this respirator mask is a project I spun up with friends.

We designed and are actively selling a home-grown full face respirator that addresses 4 of the 5 criteria in this HBR article: Protection, Scalability, Comfort, and Reusability. Style is in the eye of the beholder, and some people think our design is ugly ;)

Protection: only full face respirators have proven effective in the field against Covid. Our respirator is a sealed system for 3-in-1 protection, replacing separate mask, googles, and face shield.

Scalability: we designed it for rapid-response distributed manufacturing.

Reusable: it is washable in soap and water. You can also alcohol spray/wipe it. Additionally, the filters are replaceable, and super-easy to do. The filter media we've tested ourselves at 94% 0.3 micron efficacy; however, that is not an independent certified test.

Comfort: it is cooler, dryer, and more comfortable to wear for long duration. My daughter has rock-climbed in it for several hours, to give you an idea of how comfortable it is. The design saves the nose and cheeks from the pressures of partial masks and googles. Cold air is cycled in and through by wearer's own respiration.

Style: Well, we can't win them all :) Aesthetically some people like it, some people don't. We do our best, but we prioritize function/safety, scalability, and price point over style.
> I don't know why you're worried about sears because either they are unregistered and illegal or registered and covered under the firearm sale ban.

Exactly.

> Adjustable stocks are arguably a concern because they make building rifles shorter than 26 inches easier.

You could just not put stock on. An AR-15 with a 16in barrel is 30in with the stock collapsed and cannot be much shorter without the stock because of the buffer tube.
The organizational part is just one of the many advantages, and arguably the least relevant of the bunch as it's only relevant for huge projects requiring dozens of developers working concurrently
Gnome Shell UX Plans: The Bigger Picture
I didn't mean to say that I have had absolutely no interaction with any existing Apple or Google service or technology. I'm neither a fundamentalist nor a hermit.

Rather, whenever it is my choice, I prefer to select products and technologies that don't belong to Apple, Google or similar companies.
I don't like how the liability for finding hate speech is being shifted from law enforcement to private companies. If you want to make laws restricting what people can say, social media companies shouldn't be the ones enforcing it, law enforcement should be. Pass a law requiring all content flagged by the police to be removed, don't pass a law requiring social media companies to act as the police, with millions of dollars in fines if their rulings don't line up with law enforcement.
I think Jason Fried does a good job of explaining what's wrong with it in the post:

[...] at Basecamp we help people for all sorts of reasons. We apply credit to accounts for all sorts of reasons. We provide hardship exceptions for all sorts of reasons. We discount our software for teachers. We provide free versions for first responders. We extend trials for those who need more time. We extend payment terms occasionally for those who can’t make ends meet this month. We make exceptions because people are exceptional. We take enormous pride in helping people out. And we’re damn good at it.

If we had to push our customers through Apple’s system, we couldn’t do any of that. Apple’s rules prevent us from servicing our customers, yet Apple gives us no choice but to submit to those onerous rules or not be represented on their platform. [...]

This reflects my experience as well. If I can help customers with their billing issues, it makes my company look really good – we get an opportunity to provide exceptional customer service. If their subscriptions are managed via Apple, we don't really get that opportunity; instead, we're just one of many apps that can't make exceptions.

Apple is far less likely than the company that builds the app to care about the sorts of individual customer reasons for needing a trial extended, account credited, etc, that are mentioned in the article.

Yes, lots of companies are bad at customer service. But some are really good! (you can tell by how their customers gush about them.) And with forced in-app purchases, the good ones don't get the opportunity to do their best work.
One of them was convicted, and the other wasn't. Sure that's not proof of anything, but it's more than just the netflix documentary that says he did it.
If the people in underrepresented groups are anything like the females I knew in the military, most of them will hate that they were treated differently. The females had lower physical fitness standards, but competed for the same promotion slots as males. Most females I knew resented the fact that they were put in a position where their male subordinates would always question whether they were actually qualified to be in charge, or if they just happened to get promoted earlier because it was easier for them to get high physical fitness scores.
The paradox of tolerance applies to speech too. In a society with free speech not all speech can be tolerated, these that oppose free speech should be censored. It is similar to the idea that the GPL is based on.

> is clearly good for one group of people and terrible for a very large group of other people

That was the case for abolishing slavery too.
> the first amendment

The article is about freedom of speech, not the First Amendment, and I would like to remind self-centred navel-gazing parochial Americans that they're not the same thing.
Minnesota Freedom Fund received $30M+ in donations, has only spent 0.2M on bail
Thanks! We've been working hard on developing our new workout videos, especially since everyone's been stuck at home with little to no equipment recently. Soup can curls look a little funky, but are still effective!
I like what you wrote here. I think you're right
Banning someone from an internet forum or project is one thing.

Trashing a person's reputation and character through a targeted internet campaign (hello Twitter mobs) is another matter.
Regardless of my opinion on the topic, how can you start off with a premise so obviously faulty as "evil === incorrect". You can be one, the other, both, or neither. Unless you're saying that, even without the additional adjectives, an accusation of "wrong" is always the premise of the argument, which is maybe even an even more extreme twisting of reality.
Some unprepared wannabe who got himself killed because of how unprepared he was is your hero? Weird choice.

Also, as the great Dr Henry Jones jr. said, “it belongs in a museum!” That thing was responsible for many deaths over the years, and would be better suited as a safe attraction to visit by all the white suburbanites sick of how fake their existence is. Maybe with a plaque stating how many rescue missions had to be sent out because of novices not knowing what they’re doing.
Brian Douglas is the one delivering that MatLab video linked at the bottom of the article. He's got a ton of deep control theory lectures on his own channel, too - https://www.youtube.com/user/ControlLectures/videos
I measure values by how much you are willing to give up. How much of a pain in the ass will you endure to get privacy? How much will you sacrifice to lessen your carbon footprint? Will you march in the streets and get tear gassed in order to protest for your social activist movement? Anyone can say they believe in anything. It's your actions that have an impact.
I don’t think either of those run on Linux.... did you mean “windows” rather than “pc”?
I think your nepotism example and "preponderance of talent and success is hard to quantify precisely" are nice arguments and give me something to think about, thanks.

But when you say "I'm not sure if meritocracy makes sense"... you are really saying that instead of trying for meritocracy, they should just use skin color?

How do you feel about the idea of blind auditions for orchestras (auditions where the candidate cannot be seen, only heard)? These were originally done to eliminate the possibility of discrimination.

I think orchestras could also qualify for "preponderance of talent and success is hard to quantify precisely"... should they eliminate blind auditions so they can choose performers based on skin color+gender?
As you point out, cost has very little to do with the bulk consumption of natural materials, and seems tangential to the topic of discussion.
I don't see how that meaningfully changes the metaphor? Imagine, idk, someone who likes to very carefully design their apartment vs. someone who hires an interior designer to do it for them. People that love to tinker with their cars vs. people that don't.

Some people like to very carefully craft an experience on their own and some people are happy to have someone else do that.
>> Those statistics dont factor in the absurd amount of attention liberal media paid to Trump throughout the election. His antics, and the attention it garners among their target market, are great for their bottom line

>Yes, this has nothing to do with money, and everything to do with the free press (or in your words "liberal media"). That's entirely my point.

Nahhh; corporate media is very much concerned with money. No amount of academic research, statistical results, or empirical results can help you make sense of the world if you can't make assumptions based on common sense perception.
As if Google/Android or any other phone is different/better...
> They are religions by any measure but your arbitrary goalposting.

The argument was "people are believing in imaginary things, in billions and for centuries". For billions - or so - and for centuries - or so - arguments to apply, the religion ought to be major.

> The "billions" qualification comes from your specific interpretation of this statement to mean a single religion.

Oh, so now goalposting mean not a single example, but a combined group :) in comparison to one specific - and rather located in time and geography - government program.

Frankly, at this point I don't see much sense in more hairsplitting. Points were made, anyone can think for oneself from these.
I guess this isn't usable outside of AWS? It's unfortunate that it's tightly coupled to one particular provider.
I would dare say the causality is reversed here. Once your company reaches a certain size, NOT having a diverse executive team will very quickly get you labeled as racist and will cost you dearly. Nobody cares about a mom and pop bakery, but imagine the outrage in the media, if Apple or Google did not pick their executive teams based on the diversity constraints.
Wow, code signing. Not much CDMA in my country, J2ME here. Why limit to manufacturer? Third party store is even cooler, found one portal [1]:

> Downloads:

> Since Mar.31, 2004: 4,189,079

> Last week: 209,952

Possible trace:

> On-Device Portal technology emerged in 2000 [2]

[1] http://web.archive.org/web/20050429230232/http://www.getjar....

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On-Device_Portal
I like the idea of using special syntax to denote the type — $T signals that it is a higher-order placeholder. It means there's no ambiguity to the reader or the compiler.

It also means that for a function that requires no type constraints, nothing more is needed:

func WorksWithAllTypes(val $T) {
...
}

I don't like the type constraint syntax, though. I think it could be done like this:

func Max(a, b $T Comparable) $T {
...
}

The idea here is that we only need to annotate the first instance of $T; all others will implicitly share the same type constraint.
I’m not advocating for either side. I’m presenting the Tibetan side as one groups’ position. I’m not a member of that group, nor do I argue on their behalf.

You are the interlocutor making claims that need proof; namely you take a stance and then demand others justify their own stance if it differs from your own.

I’ve asked repeatedly for you to link just one primary source for your claims. We’re all still waiting?
I worked at a large insurance company in a previous life, this was their stance as well.

They will deviate if the field is hot enough and it translates to money for them. They were paying FAANG money to AI/Data Science fresh out of college.

The McKinseys/Gartners/etc of the world talk about the coming advantage...exec hears it and they become more open to these "critical sectors"
Fair warning: this is a rabbit hole reaching the Earth's core.
> Whether you agree with e.g. internet mobs doing this sort of thing or not, it's usually perfectly legal and happens all the time.

It might "happen all the time" nowadays, but that doesn't tell us whether or not it's sustainable or just. Moreover, I'm very skeptical that it was ever normal historically, at least not for any portion of our history that was worth repeating. I'm at least a little bit skeptical that it is "perfectly legal"; more likely that it hasn't been well and widely tested in court because it is in fact novel.

> And many (most?) would agree that's perfectly fine when someone in authority/in a public facing position does something that's clearly bad behavior.

I don't think this justifies it. Most people don't understand what happens to a civilization when the mob becomes the de facto justice system or why we have an actual codified legal system. Most of these people probably don't understand that the mob could turn against them at a moment's notice (although I think many are coming to this realization and consequently abandoning the "mobs are great!" position).

> What's less clear is when someone rank and file says or does something dumb and it ends up on YouTube or simply somehow offends someone with a big following. The reality is that if you become a liability to most companies, they'll just follow the path of least resistance and show you the door.

People don't even need to do anything "dumb". Mobs come for people all the time for stating unapproved facts or holding unapproved beliefs or for simply being born with the wrong race or gender. This is a national problem (I would even say it's our most significant modern social justice issue--of course here I'm using "social justice" literally, not to be confused with Social Justice the ideology) and we ought to do something about it.
TypeScript: Validating External Data
I'd imagine an issue is that there's just no place to go for it. If a big existing community introduced annotations, I'd bet it could catch on. Imagine clicking through an article from facebook and you automatically get annotations. Hell, on mobile you already have these apps using built in browsers so you don't leave the app. Something like that, where annotations are discoverable, could definitely gain traction. Then there'd be no escaping facebook (or twitter or reddit or HN) even on other sites.
Circular Reasoning: Spiraling Circuits for More Efficient AI
I think they've also done some stuff at different times to displace Facebook from somewhere or other, anyway my bet is as follows:

this is someone's project to get noticed for being innovative and moved on to somewhere else with more money and then this gets staffed with people not on the fast track who will try their best to get out of it and finally it will close down and if anyone has been suckered into using it they will write an article about how Google closed it down and then HN will repeat the ever expanding list of things Google has closed down. Something may have just made me cynical about Google products though.
Good, so we agree that nobody has proved for SARS-CoV-2 that less than 70% of can be infected to achieve the so-called "herd immunity" (even when knowing that different people allow some very lax definitions of "herd immunity").
> We use our personal emails to set up the accounts.

I would object to that. Personal and business don't mix.
They do enforce it, as the article points out. Of course a few things will slip through at the scale of Amazon.
That doesn't make sense to me: 500 millimorts means "50% chance of death." 1000 millimorts means "100% chance of death." Flipping a coin twice doesn't guarantee that you got heads.
It's probably more accurate to check the leaked data than this tool >_<
That's a very unconventional use of the words "uncontrolled" and "simple". The reaction inside a nuclear bomb (fission or fusion) has to be incredibly tightly choreographed down to the microsecond in order to work as intended, whereas a fission reactor is (egregiously oversimplifying) put some fissile stuff next to some other fissile stuff for a while and let it get warm.

The Chicago Pile came way before Trinity. Rock formations have even been known to come together accidentally to form natural nuclear reactors, but I think it will be a very long while before the first natural nuclear bomb.
I agree with this, definitely have seen this with the culture of the early R&D team at Genentech, where a number of the early employees had these attributes right from the beginning. I have reread the book below numerous times, which I recommend, which discuss the dual nature for being both a founder & researcher, having an incredible long-term vision that seems to be almost impossible, but remaining very focused in the short term. "Genentech: The Beginnings of Biotech (Synthesis)" by Sally Smith Hughes (https://www.amazon.com/Genentech-Beginnings-Sally-Smith-Hugh...)
"in proportion to the violent crime they commit"

This comes across as tone deaf when people are talking about victims who were not committing violent crimes. For example, allegedly passing a counterfeit $20.

Furthermore, the violent crime statistics exist in the context of people not being able to trust the police, and to the extent they do, the police not doing anything in response to shootings.

So it's easy to see a causal relationship between police misconduct and the prevalence of violent crime in certain communities. People are trying to penetrate the mindset that it's intrinsic, and say, no, police corruption systematically produces the problem and racism saps the motivation to solve it.

I was just noticing that my Google News feed is reporting local shootings, seemingly in a different world than the rest of the news, but it's quoting the police response as basically saying "gee, we have no leads, we wish people would stop settling their disagreements with violence". With the most charitable interpretation, it's ineffectual and lends support to people saying "gee, why don't we just defund the police in favor of social workers".
Wow complete failure on my end. That does go against my original comment, I just presumed all the studies are the same. Look up "Whitening," it's a common concept. I attached another study. I don't know about the racial tensions, I don't think it's a big issue, but a lot of people struggle to pronounce foreign names so many foreigners use an alias, where I am at least.

[1] https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/minorities-who-whiten-job-resumes...
Is this legally possible without software piracy? Can you link me to instructions? Does apple have documentation anywhere?