skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> But for some reason, they've been losing money for decades. (yes, even before the whole pension debacle)

Citation needed? A quick search suggests that post-pension-debacle, the USPS has lost money every year, to the tune of several billion dollars. Pre-pension-debacle, things were mixed; most years they made a decent profit, some years they lost some money, though much less than they do post-pension-debacle.
> This doesn't mean maths notation sucks any more than vim's user interface sucks because it doesn't make sense to non-vim-users.

I think this nails it perfectly. There are plenty of good programmers who refuse to use vim. In math those people can't operate.
Disagreement isn’t hate. Is good to disagree and share differing viewpoints. My above statement was that the guy brought up his disgust for Trump when the discussion was entirely unrelated.
Ok, but even if I was to agree with you about wealthy people supporting structural racism, how do you connect that back to wanting to privatize the Postal Service?
Is this statement from the page I linked to wrong then?

> In contrast to American private schools, Sweden’s free schools don’t charge tuition — they draw on government funds to operate — and are required to follow Sweden’s national curriculum. They’re more comparable to American charter schools, which are publicly funded but privately run.
How does the fed pay these programmers more than the normal federal compensation schedule? Is the compensation uncapped if they work through a contractor? If they dont, why do these programmers choose to work there?
The Surface of Mars in 4K
That Chrissy Teigen was on the Epstein flight logs and involved in sexual depravity, despite being a minor at that time; that pictures Tom Hanks takes of random roadside detritus are secret signals to a worldwide network of Satanic pedophiles; that there is video of Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin sexually abusing a child and cutting off her face; that Michelle Obama was secretly assigned male at birth and should be called "Michael"; and so on.

Also, just look in the replies of any regular person who attacks QAnon claims on Twitter and you will see responses accusing them of being a pedophile, a murderer, a Satanist, and claiming that they, their families, etc. will be imprisoned or executed.
> Scoped CSS support is built-in so you don't need css-in-js hacks.

vue/react also have scoped css, but built into the building process using loaders rather than being a feature of the frameworks.
I'm still not sure what you mean, but I'll take another stab at it.

* "Medium Services" is defined earlier in the text as

> Medium’s sites, services, mobile apps, products, and content

which seems pretty self-explanatory to me.

* They give some examples of what they do with your content in the rest of the paragraph you quoted. To paraphrase a little, they can show your content to others, put ads next to it, and include it when promoting Medium itself.

* You can post your content elsewhere, even if you posted it to Medium (hence "nonexclusive").

* You can delete your content from Medium.
Uhm, you seem to be forgetting private property rights? As such, Capitalism both creates and exacerbates negative results.
Sell stocks and:

- invest into overseas quality real estate.

- buy physical gold.

- invest on cryptos.

In that order.

We need to protect assets from potential inflation, likelyhood of high taxes and overall instability caused by politics and social unrest.

Basically my (untraditional approach) is DO NOT keep any liqud assets in USA. In addition - leverage low interest rates and mortgage the hell out of your real estate assets and do the above.

If inflation will hit - let bank have a problems, not you.
TBF Unicode contains quite a few absurdities because of its commitment to round trip consistency. That means glyphs which were obviously representations of the same thing (such as ‘[‘ in one character set and ‘[‘ in another) got different code points, The names often reflect that too.
And the alternate argument, that if it failed there obviously wasn't enough government intervention, is pretty common, too.
Thats downright disrespectfull. Some poor sucker bought that!
The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 requires the USPS to pay over $5B annually to pre-fund future retirement benefits (an amount greater than their usual yearly profits prior to this).

No private courier would ever be saddled with a requirement like that. It's clear that this requirement was put into place by people who want to make the USPS look bad so it's an easier argument to kill it.
If the field just needs messaging and positioning info, you're good. In my business, customers usually assemble a bunch of our products (and potentially competitors) together into a solution. We usually have 3-4 different options for each flavor because folks want to optimize for different things or have different opinions/skillsets in their org. It's effectively impossible to be clear 100% of the time for all those permutations, so you really have to be accessible to the field to help clarify when it matters. 99% of the time they handle it, but that 1% that they can't are often because it's a complex, demanding customer that also usually means $$$. In my business, the top 10% of customers can easily drive 80% of your revenue, so it can really matter in the end that the field WANTS to work with you, and not pursue a more accessible alternative.
That's cool! But it's also somehow even worse, by being so complicated.
The USPS has a monopoly on first class mail delivery. This is why UPS doesn't leave letters in your mailbox.
I'm not up on current PhD philosopher's tastes, and I'm biased since I'm a major fan of Wittgenstein, but, assuming you don't have a biased sample, I'd say this phenomenon is explainable through some of the Frankfurt School's theorizing on specialization, the professionalism of philosophy, and the general bureaucratic turn of society.

Personally, I like to view philosophy and academic philosophy as two distinct things. The former is represented best by the famous philosophers, many of whom would never make it past a peer review, e.g. Wittgenstein himself, Kierkegaard, Schopenhauer, Heidegger, Nietzsche, Deleuze, Guattari, Bataille, Adorno, even Foucault to an extent, etc.--I think the reason for this is that all of these famous, epoch shaping philosophers have a certain mysticism or poeticism about them--their work doesn't really hold up to the standards of academies, since these are institutions with very specific mechanisms and rules. All the great philosophers have a certain creativity and ingenuity to them that defies the confines of convention and reason.

Wittgenstein is in many respects a key player in shaping our modern though on logic, yet he was also an undeniable mystic who went so far as to say certain things escape representation and codification as formalized knowledge altogether, which is not amenable to the motives of academies--producing formalized knowledge that they can sell. I say this, again, as someone who entirely lacks context but who can imagine certain structural tendencies that would disfavor a philosopher like Wittgenstein.

Academic philosophy is, in my opinion, quite a different beast that's focused on solving very specialized and particular abstract problems deemed to be foundational, meta, or novel enough to escape analysis in the fields of application they'd otherwise belong to (the foundations of mathematics, of great concern to Wittgenstein and Turning as this post illustrates, is a good example of such a topic--it's too meta to be the concern of mathematics proper, too narrow to be the concern of a philosopher in the classical or "true" sense, who is supposed to concern herself with the broad problems of existence (like Wittgenstein points out, the living (assuming to philosophize still means to theorize on what it means to live a good life don't really need to concern themselves with such issues), so it falls to specialized academics).
Back when blog syndication tech was being actively developed, Dave Winer called that sort of reactionary response "stop energy".
> E.g. I couldn’t for the life of me annotate the return value of the pipe function

Don't feel bad, no one can do that (yet! I think it should be possible with Variadic Tuple Types, coming in TS 4). There are a couple of attempts[1][2], but they all lack in some way. Redux does it with a boatload of overloads [3].

1: https://dev.to/ascorbic/creating-a-typed-compose-function-in...

2: https://stackoverflow.com/a/53066700/1586229

3: https://github.com/reduxjs/redux/blob/686d29b5d4e2dcb6709c16...
If you don’t see that QAnon and Trump are symptoms of the same disease, then I have a bridge to sell you.
Now I'm just waiting for some company to actually make an app with Sapper and Svelte and I'll give this a go.
One danger I see is that unlike an insurance company, which does a serious amount of due diligence and selection of the risks it takes on, this company/idea completely leaves it up to the founders/"investors" (however you wish to call it) to make judgement calls about their own and other people's risk, without much pooled knowledge or history. I doubt founders are very good at that.

When an insurance company sells a policy, they have something on the line in terms of risk themselves -- they have to pay out. Here, the company just acts as facilitator for founders to spread risk however they self-organize to do so. Is that likely to be right? Who cares if some people get burned when something inevitably goes bad in the pool?

It's much like the general tech company issue that thinks all the complexity and need for oversight, etc. can be externalized to others to deal with. It'll police itself. In the meantime, rake in your percentage for being the platform.

I think an idea like this will take much more work (or the verification / pooling / trust sides) than they expect -- for it to work well and people to be willing to join. Otherwise, bad money will drive out good.
I’d replace InfluxDB with Prometheus. InfluxDB has been a PITA for me.
surely going by the OPs inversion, you'd ask 'What is preventing us trying something new this weekend?'
I agree entirely, but the premise was that more labor went into Altavista’s indexing than Google’s, which is inaccurate. Google was better at capturing the value of labor external to itself, which was far more labor than was ever used to build Altavista.
You have to decide what the purpose of the rating system is. Using it as a reward system for players to feel accomplishment is a different use case then trying to correctly predict the likely outcome of a game.

Personally, if I was designing a rating system, I would use two separate systems.

One would be like the one in this game; publicly viewable, pleases the players, and gives a sense of accomplishment.

Then, I would have a second, internal only rating system that players can't see but is used for matchmaking to make sure people are matched up to players with as close to equivalent skill as possible.
It's actions that matter. Both extremes behave the same, regardless of what they call themselves or claim to do.
True, but the question is always: what level of profit is reasonable? A corporation, absent regulation, will charge as much as the market will bear. If they can charge twice as much but only lose a quarter of their customers, they'll do it. Such a situation with something like water would be a disaster. People would die.
It’s failing for huge swaths of the population that live in bad geographies. You’d be shocked at the disparity between one public school and the next. You’d be even more shocked by the percentage of people who can’t do percentages.

Now some of that is a familial issue but not all of it.

Has public schooling been a net positive? Oh wow yes, by many miles. Could it be better? By many miles, yes.

Saying it could be better does not negate past contributions.
You don't have to use twitter. They don't have to host people talking about hillary clinton sucking the blood of sexually abused children and your website doesn't have to host the communist manifesto. Platform holders have free speech as well.
What OS/arch? I have a small program that compies to 16MB, 14 with -w on OS X. Compiling for Linuxx with -w results in a 14MB binary too.
It's a joke.

I don't claim to be especially smart, and even if i were it does not neccesarily translate to 'succes in prison' or tunneling skills.
The lie in this article is hidden here: "though there are differences in assumptions, particulars of the calculations..."

Companies need to fund their pension plans, but only for the portion of time the worker has been employed by them. For example, for FY 2020, the company needs to set aside money corresponding to an additional year of work. But for the USPS, the law requires it to set aside money assuming that the worker will work his entire career for USPS, and project all retirement costs 75 years into the future, even for workers that they haven't even hired yet. In actuary, this is the difference between "actual vested liability", and "total projected liability". The result is clearly absurd. Moreover, this money is not staying in USPS retirement accounts, is going to the government. So it doesn't even guarantee that the money will be there for USPS workers. To add to the injury, USPS is allowed only to invest on treasury bonds, which means that they need to raise even more money than a private company, which is free to invest in any high grade bond.

https://www.businessinsider.com/usps-rise-fall-post-office-c...
> A 0.1% equity stake in a startup that ends up hitting is life changing.

For the vast majority of startups, "hitting" is $100-200M acquihire. 0.1% of that is only 200K. If you can get in on something like Beyond Meat, sure, but that's the kind of a company which won't be a part of something like this.

Speaking from the other end of this spectrum, BTW, my risk tolerance is higher now than it's ever been. I don't have to work at all, and my mortgage is paid off. But it's much more difficult now to convince me that some harebrained startup scheme will work. :-)
For the uniformed: At least, long ago, in the beginning of 4chan, nobody believed this. They purposely made it up for fun and trolling. I seriously don't understand how there are some people unaware of this.

They then purposely pushed it from 4chan to places it would be believed, other forms of social media like Facebook.

The general populace (of social media users) are the ones who eat it up. They eat shit up from an anonymous image board that has always said that

"The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."

tl:dr "civil" society has quite literally proved it's simply not ready for the internet. Wonder if this will go down as the Great Filter.
No that's not an equivalent. QAnon is not a person in the same way LeBron James is a person. Is there a name for this logically fallacy where someone compares two wildly different scenarios thinking it's somehow related?
What does Google have to do with this discussion about Twitter?
US charges two Chinese spies for a hacking campaign that targeted Covid research
The miasma theory of disease was the dominant understanding of Europeans at the time. Miasma was understood to emanate from putrescence but was not communicable between people.

Germ theory did not take hold until the 19th century.
Tech Internship Program Is an Apparent Scam
Researchers Demonstrate How to Hack Any TikTok Account by Sending SMS
Under fire from Washington, TikTok touts U.S. job growth
You have LinuxSampler listed as GPL licensed, but it's actually source-available proprietary software.

From http://www.linuxsampler.org/downloads.html:

"LinuxSampler is licensed under the GNU GPL with the exception that USAGE of the source code, libraries and applications FOR COMMERCIAL HARDWARE OR SOFTWARE PRODUCTS IS NOT ALLOWED without prior written permission by the LinuxSampler authors."

This directly contradicts the GPL v2.0 (the relevant version):
"You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein."

Of course the copyright holders have the right to impose whatever self-contradictory license they like, but this combination isn't GPL and it isn't Open Source.
Honestly, I don’t think twitter should ban anyone. As long as it’s legal, keep it up. Otherwise you essentially have censorship through corporate monopolies.

However, if you are going to have terms then stick to them.

To answer you question, yes. Those a part of Antifa, and those promoting Antifa. (decision based upon their statement in the article and them stating what is a “ban-able” offense).

Hope that answered your question! :)
Guess what happens with something as simple as versionCode?

Hacks like this, to allow a single "version" of an app to have multiple APKs, but wait, versionCode has to be unique. I know, we'll do this:

> In the following example, the APK for the x86 ABI would get a versionCode of 2004 and the x86_64 ABI would get 3004. Assigning version codes in large increments, such as 1000, allows you to later assign unique version codes if you need to update your app. For example, if defaultConfig.versionCode iterates to 5 in a subsequent update, Gradle would assign a versionCode of 2005 to the x86 APK and 3005 to the x86_64 APK.

https://developer.android.com/studio/build/configure-apk-spl...

Sigh. Nothing is ever easy. We make assumptions when we design our systems without realizing it and then paint ourselves into these silly corners to not break things.
Billions of dollars? I have no beef with Node, but that seems like a lot. Could you elaborate?
A few months' back, someone on Twitter criticized a similar platform, calling it an outright scam.

I said that was totally unfair, and that it's one thing to call it a bad deal (which really depends on the percentage given up and the quality of the companies in the pool), it's another thing to call it a scam.

That prompted the "pro-VC crowd" to start calling me stupid and naive - "startups need cash, not equity", "if you don't back yourself, I won't back you", etc etc.

If there's one thing I learned, it's that VCs have an almost irrational hatred for this model. Unsurprising, given the pool makes founders less reliant on them. No matter what, you retain your pool share, so your insurance policy is something other than "go back to VC cap in hand".

I also wonder if it may indirectly create a unionizing effect - if a non-negligible number of founders can start banding together, they can push back on onerous terms (liquidation preferences etc).
> By saying that 11 is what 10 was to Mac OS 9 implies the same substantial changes made to the whole system which is not the case here, at all.

This is not a rational metric for what a "full version tick" should look like. OS X was arguably a different operating system than Mac OS 9. If that was the bar to cross, Linux would still be 1.xx.xx and Windows would be Windows 3.xxx.

Considering they had a major break in backwards compatibility last year when they dropped 32 bit support, that was arguably the better year to do a major version tick.
I'm a power user (been programming for 30 years) and I refuse to use vim keybindings.

I have too many things to remember, and there are plenty of options that give me equal power but don't demand that investment from me.

Math isn't like that - I do more math than the average person and I hate having to decipher the annotation. The number of times I've tried to work out if this sigma is the same as the sigma in this other paper frustrates me enormously.

Or the paper that used a accuracy^bar metric as their primary reporting metric, and we couldn't get near it until we found an obscure footnote in an appendix that explained the ^bar metrics were temporally averaged at test time around a known labelled standard (ie, test data was used to optimise the performance).
Because corporate welfare is good because it'll create jobs and put money in the working man's pocket and anything with social value is a waste/drain on our strained resources and we'll have to raise taxes and you can't do that!

/s
If your job consisted of calculating with sequences of changes of programs, with no copy paste available, you'd probably feel differently. For example, a fairly roundabout derivation of a change of base for logarithms (pretending we forget log(a^x) = x log(a) for arbitrary base):

We're trying to derive that a^x = b^(x * log_b(a)).

Or in verbose descriptive terms, oldBase `exponentiate` oldExponent = newBase `exponentiate` ( oldExponent `multiply` inverseExponentiationInNewBase (oldBase) ).

We could maybe argue about the verbosity and clarity of each statement, but I think math's notation shines when you compare derivations instead of statements:

a^x
= b^( log_b(a^x) )
= b^( ln(a^x)/ln(b) )
= b^( x * ln(a)/ln(b) )
= b^( x * log_b(a) )

or with descriptive names (apologies to readers on mobile):

oldBase `exponentiate` oldExponent
= newBase `exponentiate` ( inverseExponentiationInNewBase(oldBase `exponentiate` oldExponent) )
= newBase `exponentiate` ( inverseNaturalExponentiation(oldBase `exponentiate` oldExponent) `divide` inverseNaturalExponentiation(newBase) )
= newBase `exponentiate` ( oldExponent `multiply` inverseNaturalExponentiation (oldBase) `divide` inverseNaturalExponentiation(newBase) )
= newBase `exponentiate` ( oldExponent `multiply` inverseExponentiationInNewBase (oldBase) )

If I were doing it by hand, I know I'd screw it up with long stuff to copy. Remember accidentally dropping negative signs in school? Hell, I'm still not really sure I got the second version right. By hand, I'd also get super frustrated and impatient writing sooo much.

This is a ridiculous over the top example, since I'm avoiding using everyday symbols like * and / and ^ and log, but for working mathematicians and applied mathematicians, their notation is just as familiar to them and I'm sure it'd be equally annoying to write out descriptively as it is for us to write out basic math symbols descriptively.

Programming notations are to be written and read. Math notation is to be manipulated.
People spend far more time learning to put together "reports" in powerpoint. A slide deck is a sales tool. If you're selling a product, sure, make a deck. If you're communicating any nuance or subtlety, you will be hampered if you attempt to make it out of powerpoint.

Bad powerpoints lead to bad decisions, and Edward Tufte addressed this years ago.
https://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=...

You could probably find an even worse ppt that justified the Iraq invasion, but nobody thinks they're dumber than the DoD. What about NASA though? Incredibly smart, hardworking, technically savvy engineers saw their recommendations get ground to dust by powerpoint. They couldn't write a good technical powerpoint. You can't either. Write the whitepaper instead. Use powerpoint for pretty pictures and graphs.
I thought the Wayfair theory originated on Reddit, r/conspiracy ?
This is why you have two rating systems; one you show to people and is geared towards making players happy, and one that is used internally to create fair matches.
> Interestingly, pedestrian injuries went up significantly after seatbelt laws, for the reason you note/deride.

Source?