skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't think that's a fair characterization. Sprig's business model was somewhat novel. It had limited menu items (like 5 choices), prepared in advance and deployed in a fully loaded truck. Nothing was made-to-order. The truck just drove around from business to business and dropped off three #4s, two #1s, etc. It only served peak meal times.

Honestly I'm not quite sure why the economics were unfavorable. It should have been cheaper and faster than any other kind of delivery food.
I'm not sure why you don't see it, but elegant code and math go hand in hand.
> src/Grouchy/MessageStream.php:17: Class has too many methods: 12. Can be up to 10 methods.

> src/Grouchy/MessageStream.php:66: Your function is too long. Currently using 40 lines. Can be up to 20 lines.

sigh.

One of the annoyances of modern PHP practices is the tendency to write one class, per file, which extends or implements one other class, and adds one or two functions to it. Every single logical abstraction in a PHP project can have somewhere between one to thirty different classes associated with it, and larger PHP projects end up with a thousand or more files. All of this is enabled by composer's PSR-4 autoloading support, so as long as you give your classes the right kind of names and put the files in the right places, you don't have to think about what it means to hit the disk that many times on a page load. Consequently, there are more and more harebrained caching schemes showing up to kind of paper over this architectural problem. And tracking some unexpected behavior through that many different pieces just suuuuuuucks.

I fully get that god objects are bad. But metrics like these are making complex PHP projects worse, not better. PHP is not, and should not be, Java. Java has already shown us what the end result of these practices looks like. Let's not do that.

I desperately want a good code analysis tool for PHP: something that can look behind whether there's exactly one space before a '*' in a comment block and into deeper things like, "hey, on this line over here you tried to call a function that doesn't exist in the class the variable is supposed to be referencing".

Some further reading:

Aim small, miss small: https://www.deconstructconf.com/2018/stuart-halloway-aim-sma...

Composition over inheritance: https://github.com/jupeter/clean-code-php#prefer-composition...

Small functions considered harmful: https://medium.com/@copyconstruct/small-functions-considered...

(There were a few other minor misbehaviors in this tool's output, but I'm less disappointed by those.)

edit: Sometimes I forget to mention the things I like about a project. The output this produces is super clean and easy to navigate, I liked it a lot. The dashboard presentation at the beginning of the output is super cool. It's a great idea to have a single thing you can drop in that sets up phpcs and similar tools with reasonable defaults. The developer for PHP Insights probably didn't make any of the decisions that resulted in line counts or function counts being part of the output. My disappointment was only that I got my hopes up that it was something different from what it was.
Facebook is a scapegoat, in the Girardian sense, a place for the entire media to foist its sins on to, in order to purge itself of responsibility: https://jakeseliger.com/2018/11/14/is-there-an-actual-facebo....

It's also a rival and a source of succor for media companies; in some ways, media companies have a child-parent relationship with Facebook.
An aptronym.
Well let china do this and end f humanity down the line will be a problem - remember the hiv crispy babies - CRISPR gene editing in human embryos wreaks chromosomal mayhem

And nature seemed not update the landscape since 2015: https://www.nature.com/news/where-in-the-world-could-the-fir...
This looks good. Glad to see more microframework coming out of Java with emphasis on performance, memory footprint, and development ergonomic. Will try it out.
The crazy part is that it’s an unnaccoubtable company making these decisions around managing speech - decisions with will have a significant and tangible impact on the 2020 presidential election.

Wouldn’t it be nice if there was some sort of mechanism for a community to collectively decide what the rules should be, and then make sure they are followed?

It might be a messy process but hopefully this would be a slowly self-correcting mechanism.

Then the broader community could ensure that the companies and other entities that are a part of it follow the rules which have been collectively and democratically agreed on.

I feel like there’s a word for this sort of thing, and it’s on the tip of my tongue ....

Hint: the word is (democratic) government.
Build a Chat Room App in 20 Minutes
Can you elaborate on what you mean by nagware? Are they OS notifications, "ads" in the tray or the Dropbox app?
Criminals are a minority population (by number and temperament, not by race or anything). There structurally can't be any unbiased mechanism for effectively protecting minority populations or the criminals would use them.

Look at the taxes-are-theft crowd; they think the electorate consistently delivers a mandate to brutalize their finances. They aren't totally wrong. They'd love a mechanism to avoid arrest if they don't pay taxes.

So fine or otherwise, it is probably systemically optimum.
I guess introduce non-essential paid features but I still wonder how that can cover the cost of channels uploading 1.5GB files ad infinitum. https://telegram.org/faq#q-how-are-you-going-to-make-money-o...
Dropbox Transfer follows the same encryption protocols as the rest of Dropbox. While at rest, all Dropbox files are encrypted, but end to end encryption would severely limit the functionality of heavily used features like previews and search.

We're always looking to improve and certainly open to suggestions (we have a feedback form on the Transfer page just for these kind of suggestions that the Transfer team actively monitors!).
I've often wondered if professors of a field (or PhD holders) are uniquely the least qualified to teach their area of expertise. A person who both cares enough about a topic and has an intuition such that they can understand their field, cannot convey their understanding of the material to students without the same care/intuition.
I've held a friend's Panasonic, but that's as close as I've come to one - never used it, navigated menus, etc.

I had a Minolta 7Hi originally - fixed lens, but sophisticated for the time - then Olympus E620 (FT), and then the EM-5 MkII (mFT). So my experience has consistently improved, but isn't very wide.

With FT and mFT cameras, the Olympus menus for a long time (and perhaps still) have an unfortunate default setting of the 'Super Control Panel' being disabled. Almost everyone enables this excellent feature, but that requires some deep diving into the standard menu system, and sometimes some conflicting settings need changing. But (!) once you've done that, I've found navigating the settings & controls to be blissful.
Yes. And its twin, -fdata-sections.
If you are into this you may also like to see a similar model facebook used for foveated rendering (Nov 2019):
https://ai.facebook.com/blog/deepfovea-using-deep-learning-f...
readers may also be interested in Benter's paper "Computer Based Horse Race Handicapping and Wagering Systems: A Report" -- https://www.gwern.net/docs/statistics/decision/1994-benter.p...

> This paper examines the elements necessary for a practical and successful computerized horse race handicapping and wagering system. Data requirements, handicapping model development, wagering strategy, and feasibility are addressed. A logit-based technique and a corresponding heuristic measure of improvement are described for combining a fundamental handicapping model with the public's implied probability estimates. The author reports significant positive results in five years of actual implementation of such a system. This result can be interpreted as evidence of inefficiency in pari-mutuel racetrack wagering. This paper aims to emphasize those aspects of computer handicapping which the author has found most important in practical application of such a system

Arguably the paper describes the state of the art from three decades ago, applied to betting on Hong Kong horse races, not market price movements.
If you subscribe to an interpretation like the MWI, then yes, you would say both results occur, not just one. But you aren't basing that on decoherence; you're basing that on your chosen interpretation. Decoherence, by itself, is equally consistent with a collapse interpretation that says only one result actually occurs.
In my experience, most who build fat images with the compiler chain and everything do so because they're simply not aware that multi-stage builds are a thing now.
The other responses are good, but I'd recommend reading a book about improv comedy[0] (or better yet, trying it out yourself). They've got a lot of specific techniques that are meant to stretch your creative muscles. I did a bit of improv when I was younger and I still use those techniques all the time twenty years later, because they work!

Reading about the exercises is interesting but unless you actually try them out they are just a curiosity. I think the muscle analogy really fits when it comes to creativity.

[0]I like "The Improv Handbook" by Tom Salinsky and Deborah Frances-White
One example argument I find interesting is that people actually have equal rights to our environment and our commons.

So if we are to have such institutions as private property and similar rights to exclusivity, those excluded should be justly compensated for being excluded.

Edit: To clarify. Take John Locke, he argues that when you mix your labor with nature you should have right to the result of that labor, but that you can only take from nature what is not needed by anyone else.

One could also extend from that argument that one should not have the right to destroy that which is needed either (think pollution). So be it land value taxes or carbon taxes, you can argue that some compensations is just.
> I am firmly of the opinion that content is more important than form.

This is quite possibly the stupidest thing I have heard this year. How could you possibly have come up with something that brain-dead? Is this how you normally are, or did you have to reach deep into your mind to find the most inane thing you could possibly say and pollute Hacker News with it? Goodness, I hope so. I don't even want to think about the possibility that you are this clueless in real life. I pity those that have to interact with you.

Delivery matters, and content does too. IMO sometimes the information you're conveying can make up for form-many disagree, however, and I'm sure you're aware of this. But there are no absolutes here; sometimes form is more important than content. (And to round out this comment, I thought the one being discussed was fine as I mention in another comment. I'm sometimes accused of being too harsh myself: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23354453)
That's for maximum bandwidth. You can go farther if you want with slower speeds.

Anyway, I looked up the Ubiquiti LiteBeam AC Gen2 since I wasn't familiar with it, and I think OP might have the wrong impression. It's a LiteBeam, not a LightBeam. The LiteBeam is just bog standard 5 GHz 802.11ac with a high gain antenna. That explains the data rates.

Given that, there seems to be no disadvantage to using the 60 GHz solution if you're close enough to the next building where it's still faster (probably close to 2 miles). It's only ~$200 more, which spread out over a building is basically nothing.
Show us on the doll where the mean mods hurt you, asdf21...
Yes aware of that - and they were being pushed around. BD was not part of anything when it started for over 15 years.
This looks really neat, but it seems like a really bad time to be in "workplace" repair when so many are working from home due to a pandemic. I just found out I'll be stuck at home until at least 2021.
was thinking the same thing for the past few days! not going to rehash all that is going on, but, i came to realize that we needed good moderation on social medias. we needed it a long time ago.

now we blame the "cancel culture" because some are going into other's social media past to dig out stuff. but here's the thing. i saw most of these platforms grow. there were no good moderation.

instead ignorance and absurdity were often supported and even rewarded!

we wouldn't be here if good moderation had happened. now, we are struggling with who to hold accountable for the missed opportunity for moderating what went on social media. the damage is done.

we needed more moderation like we have here on HN!
I don't disagree with your cited point but your citation (vox) is generally awful, this article included. Why are they using a BLM approval poll from January of this year to make a point about people not caring? They choose to bold that citation and then use the more recent statistic unbolded later. Seems pretty deliberate on their part.
You need more data to input besides just the price time-series. Successful human traders balance and synthesize a myriad of data sources to make decisions.

I depend on an in-depth understanding of human psychology as one of my data sources. You can't turn something like that into data and input to a model. It is something learned through life experience and study.
> If you have everyone in the US $10,000, no strings attached

What you are missing is that UBI is supposed to replace all existing entitlement programs, such as unemployment, disability, food stamps, social security, etc.

We already hand out tons of money, UBI is just a different way of handing it out money that is more efficient because there is less bureaucracy involved.
Did the simulation require internet access?

What are the tactics Microsoft uses to deal with computers that are offline? Can those tactics be circumvented?
This line: "that the United States, which has reported more coronavirus deaths and infections than any other country"

Is so misleading that it borders on an outright lie. Per capita the US is middle of the pack, not especially great, not terrible either.

See: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality

I also hate seeing stuff like:

"The conundrum is in some ways similar to a decision this week by New York, New Jersey and Connecticut to impose mandatory quarantines on travelers from other states where the virus is flaring, like Florida and Texas."

New York was, by far, the worst hit state. And now they are getting better. That have no place to criticize other states who are no worse than them, they are just on a later timetable.

It's identical to Europe: Europe was hit hard, and is now better. The US is simply lagging behind, but no it's "a stinging rebuke to the Trump administration’s management of the coronavirus scourge."

I fully support the ban!!! Just not the language used to describe it.

This is why people say "Fake News", it's not outright fake, it's just very slanted.
Yup. They are painting themselves into a corner and they're going to be the one blamed in the end. Not a good move.

Mark should have either said "we will only take down illegal content" or "we're going to do what we want to maintain appropriate content".

The first would be much easier because, with the 2nd, they will be the decision maker on everything and will get dragged into every decision that's political (all of them?).
> "low-income, ethnic minority neighbourhoods have historically been over-policed so the data shows them as crime hotspots, leading to the deployment of more police to those areas."

This is wrong. They've been under-policed. And the unwillingness to not lie about that, let alone understand why that is, is why "predictive policing" is disliked. It's also why the rhetorical trick of "systemic racism" is necessary to elide the fact that racism is rare today and justify why politicians are attacking & dismantling functioning institutions rather than fix the underlying issue.

Does anyone seriously claim that suburbs like Beachwood, OH and Palo Alto, CA and Everett, WA would discover a bunch of undetected rapes, gun violence, robberies, and murders if they were "over-policed" like low-income black neighborhoods? No, they don't. Because that would be too silly of a claim to make directly to anyone who has lived in such a place.

There's a humane chain of logic we must follow here. Do we think slavery, red-lining, drugs & drug-enforcement, and the collapse of rising working class wages have hurt African-American well-being? Yes. Does poverty correlate with crime? Yes. Does poverty correlate with African-American neighborhoods? Yes. Ok, so we can admit that African Americans account for a hugely disproportionate amount of violent crime in the United States without disrespecting how black communities got to this point or worrying that this simple, obvious conclusion is driven by racism.

This is trivially produced from well-done statistical research. If you control for either poverty rates or crime rates, you recover the same rate of police use of lethal force for both whites and blacks.

"Oh, well, the data sets from the past may be biased with racism"

13% of the population accounts for between 40-50% of the homicides, year over year. Alright - How large do you think purely unfounded biases account for that? Half? Even then, you have both 1) A LE agencies either falsifying or mishandling data on a massive scale, a monumental scandal in itself and 2)a population accounting for 2x rather than 3-4x their expected homicide rate. Not a huge improvement. I don't feel like the claims of "warped data" deserve this much respect because the people who make them never give the same thought to the much more obvious conclusion - The data is true, but I do.

ML is disliked here because it doesn't lie. Politicians cannot torture or cajole logistic regression to lie because it doesn't have a career, it doesn't need a promotion, it just graphs the truth. But more than this, they dislike it because it indicts them for not doing more, and more meaningful and honest things, to actually improve the lot of African-Americans in this country. The first step to doing that is being honest.
Can do all sorts of things, but when somebody turns up with a gun there has to be some physical mechanism to stop them from seizing control of the local supermarket.

The city can defund the entire police force, but it will have to set up or allow an alternative which will end up the same as the current one if the incentives don't change. Resetting the entire system every time something goes wrong isn't really a viable strategy. It'll work every so often.
There are lots of tiny public companies with dubious finances and wild plans. I mean, you've heard of the S&P 500, right, that has companies like Starbucks that you associate with Wall Street? There's on the order of 5,000 US public companies, maybe more, which means 90% are small companies you've never heard of. The majority of them sound pretty scammy, but so does the funeral home mentioned in this thread. It sounds like a "blank check" company and there are a lot of those you can buy via any discount broker like Robinhood.
Well, they don't need to build out conduits + fiber, only fiber since the idea is encourage their monopoly over the last mile. They just need to do what is happening today on the private side and run a fiber (which is cheaper for each individual player). Then encouraging everything other than the last mile to be private sets up all the right incentive structures as far as I can see to solve a lot of problems of broadband internet access.

You can see this model in very similar markets, where some countries run the cell network as a national utility. But your actual carriers are a large choice of companies connected to that network that differentiate on service, price, and added on features, rather than the amount of capital available for infrastructure investment.
> Unfortunately it has become obvious that no such authorities exist. The President lies. The Governors lie. The NYT lies. The WHO lies. CNN lies. Fox lies.

So, just like it's always been?

> The old ways to make sense of the world no longer work.

What were those old ways? From what I recall, the "old ways" was to believe lies fed to you, which caused all kinds of problems - not very different from today. Lies about women, gays, people of other races, people of other religions, people of other ethnicities, people of certain professions, etc. Looking at history through perhaps a tinted lens, these were all common problems in the "old days" - the only difference is that now it's a bit harder to hide them. To an extent, some of the tumult you see today is due to people realizing that being lied to was common and the norm, coupled with the ability to have a platform to counter what they perceive as lies. That a lot of this "countering" is likely as misinformed as the original lies is sad, but not surprising. I cannot say, though, that accepting lies from authority as people generally did in the past was "better".

> If there is any unifying experience these days in America is confusion. No one knows what is going on, no one knows what the truth really is, we just react to whatever meme manages to get past our jaded weariness. The old ways to make sense of the world no longer work.

I think we're in agreement about what is going on. My stance is that I don't think "the old ways to make sense of the world" was good - especially not when you were on the receiving end of things, and pretty much all of society around you acted as if the problems didn't exist, or dismissively justified them.

> We need Journalism. Real Journalism

We've always had it, and still do, or we've never had it, and never will, depending on how you view the glass.

Journalism, in the traditional sense, has its place, but will never "solve" this problem. There never has been a model of journalism that satisfies all of:

1. Covers a wide variety of topics well

2. Can find "bias-free" funding (i.e. nonreliance on ads, etc).

You'll get instances of journalism that do a really good job by having a very narrow focus (e.g. Pro Publica), or you'll get stuff like the NYT (which as you said "lies").

We definitely need journalism, but we'll never solve the problem just with it. I don't think we'll ever "solve" this problem, given that in our thousands of years of history, we never solved it.
We. Shut. Down. Too. Early. In. Most. Places.

For the love of God. Texas didn't have an outbreak when they shutdown! Nor did Oregon, or California. That is the difference. All of Europe shut down _after the virus had already grown exponentially_ in most places. We shut down Oregon when there were fewer than 100 cases. After three months of being shut down in Oregon the curve had nowhere to go but up!

What in the hell did people expect? We shut down before there is spread, wait three months and then reopen. How is that a plan? Did anyone really expect that places where shutdowns were early and strong would somehow come out unscathed?

It has been true since day 1. You either need to shut down HARD until there is a vaccine (not possible, not sustainable, more deaths caused by this) or you deal with the surge of cases and do your best to protect the elderly/vulnerable.

What you don't do is panic, shut down too early, burn through all your money and political capital, reopen and then be all "golly gee there are cases now!". If we had waited until there was growth in cases, we could shutdown and actually flatten the curve enough to handle the shock to the system.

It is so. damn. frustrating. that this isn't more obvious to people. What materially changed between today and March 1?

Lockdowns where a bad idea from there start as there is no way to continue them until there is a vaccine.

I am very curious to see if NY and the other early hot spots avoid a resurgence like Europe has. That is what I am most interested now. If they do, perhaps the folks who are talking about cross-reactive immunity are on to something.
good hardware

trash software