skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Alternative of 3D Tour (Realtors/Buyers/Sellers)
Hello, I'm a developer and I'm improving an idea for the last 2 weeks. I want to get more perspective from the realtors and the buyers in this thread.

Currently, when buyers interest in a property (from the photos) they are connecting with the realtors to visit that place. To make faster this process some third-party companies created a solution 10 years ago (maybe) as 3D Tour. Buyers can visit places online like they are inside of the home without going there. (e.g. https://www.vpix.net/754104)

The price of 3D Tours is quite expensive and needs lots of equipment. My results of the searches say "A video might be more effective than a 3D Image".

So, come back to 10 years ago;

What is the purpose? => The purpose was to make faster and understandable of home visits.
What do we want? => We want to give more information about the property's rooms and the places.

How we do that?

3D Tour: We need to get some equipment and took some 3D photos with some professional people. We have to pay some money to a third-party company for all of them. That means we can't do this thing for every property because it's expensive.

Alternative of 3D Tour: 3D Photos? Why it's necessary? We can give to people a video for each room. So we don't need professional people. We only need someone who can use a photo machine to record all room videos. (Each room will be 1 minute)

What if the users can use a screen like that instead of 3D tours experience?

* My main purpose is to minimize all requirements of 3D Tours and ensure online tours as many people as possible.

* They can ask a question while they are doing their tours.

* They will be able to see all details of the room as a content while they are watching the video of the room.

* They can pass other rooms easily.

Guys - I'm a developer. You all are the experts of this sector and I want to hear your thoughts about it. What do you think about this solution?

Solution's Template: https://prnt.sc/tpk2d3
'Alexa, I love you’: how lockdown made men lust after their Amazon Echo
I am actually working on a product called vlokit (https://vlokit.com). It helps you collaborate beyond zoom. It's video chat for remote teams.

The cool thing is you can share your thoughts instantly. Other people reply on the same thread with their ideas, thoughts or feedback.

You keep track of context in a single place. People consume ideas better. It also means you end up doing better brainstorming on zoom.

Let me know if you have any questions.
Not only that but a new vector is like a gold rush. It's a virus infected a new host that hasn't developed an immune response.

A new vector (probably) hasn't built hardness yet against spam, like for example email with apps like Gmail filtering out most spam and SPF etc.

If you start a forum, you expect spam, and there will be tools in the forum software to deal with it. But something new that isn't a traditional place to spam may be caught off guard.
I wonder how a computer would have reacted to Search US Airways Flight 1549...
Runs on my laptop vs runs in production
Is there any reasonable term that's not likely to eventually end un in some personal, irrelevant conversation? I can guarantee you that by the time any court rules on anything FB will have so many of these examples where the search words are seemingly organically intermingled through all kinds of irrelevant or personal documents.
>In a word, it's baloney.

This is where you lost me. They included important caveats to indicate not being sure, which is important to me as an indication of healthy skepticism. And you substituted a specific example: making inferences about arithmetic, for an more expansive, uncharitable, easy-to-caricature claim of "gee we must have solved general AI!" which is much easier to attack. And, unlike your counterpart, who hedged, you just went ahead and categorically declared it to be baloney, making you the only person to take a definitive side on an unsettled question before the data is in. This is a perfect example of the anti-scientific attitude exhibited in Overconfident Pessimism [0].

I don't think it's known how GPT-3 got so much better at answering math questions it wasn't trained on, I do think the explanation that it made inferences about arithmetic is reasonable, I think the commenter added all the qualifiers you could reasonably ask them to make before suggesting the idea, and frankly I would disagree that there's some sort of obvious history of parallels that GPT-3 can be compared to.

There is an interesting conversation to be had here, and there probably is much more to learn about why GPT-3 probably isn't quite as advanced as it may immediately appear to be to those who want to believe in it. But I think a huge wrench is thrown in that whole conversation with the total lack of humility required to confidently declare it 'baloney', which is the thing that sticks out to me as antithetical to science.

0: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/gvdYK8sEFqHqHLRqN/overconfid...
im currently an off grid farmer i used to work in tech. the current iteration of solar panels are very reliable even the dirt cheap chinese panels will last 10 plus years. the screw pumps a really simple and only need the rubber screw replaced every few years. the pump controller is probably the most complex part that varies pump to pump, in theory you could solder something up very cheap if you just want an on off situation.
going down 100 meters is a long way for a bore and not all ground water is equal, the better aquifers for irrigation are often a lot closer to the surface. to drill a bore you need a drilling rig. for an example in australia i had a bore put down it cost me $160 a meter so you can do the math on what a 100M hole would cost. (also no guarantee you hit water at all or its usable). this article while well meaning doesn't understand how farmers irrigate. while i dont contest the heroin output of afghanistan is going up i can't conclude its the access to solar pumps that are doing it.
Actually, online therapy can be more effective than in-person:

[1] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5...

[2] https://healthsci.mcmaster.ca/news-events/news/news-article/...
I would need to see a lot more than that to be impressed/worried. I love how there's even a serious bug in there - discounts at 80% instead of 20%
I'm 57% ok f the way through Childhoods End. So far it's a great read. The pages turn themselves.
A simple benchmark of various math operations
little side question, whats with these support forums that almost never have real employees answering but have community 'support specialists' that never answer the question and only tell you to use the feedback forms but beg for props on their answers. I don't get it.
As a ______ also affected by this issue on my personal Gmail accounts, I've filed a feedback/request for this internally.
There are a handful of projects out there, such as BuilderX[0] and React Studio[1].

[0] https://builderx.io/
[1] https://reactstudio.com/
A 'fixed supply' is not key to his points. Point 1 is, more specifically, that you would not be able to get agreement to adjust properties of the currency (remember, bitcoin is only 'fixed' in that there's a number in the code: with enough support, all the numbers can be changed). But he goes on to say that the problem is that the rich & powerful won't have incentives to adjust the money supply, something that could be argued about any money that already exists right now.

Point 2 is just: there will be inequality, the rich stay rich, the poor stay poor. Yes, true, unless you do some huge form of wealth redistribution, you won't change this. But note that this again is not related to the new currency. Jeff Bezos will still remain rich no matter what features your new currency has, because he already is rich.

So, I don't see how these points are related to bitcoin or in fact any currency.
> I built the NLP features in Arabic,

> who didn't even speak Arabic

I think that's the real atrocity. Think about all the Arabic speakers out there who have deal with substandard NLP.
Do you mean the same systems driving Tesla cars to immobile objects on the road ?
Not affiliated with these, just like them:

- https://devurls.com/

- https://lobste.rs/

- https://tuxurls.com/
It's hard enough to do _one_ of those things effectively, let alone both. Welfare certainly helps, but you're still half-assing both things at best, and the results are pretty self-evident by now.
@dang -- this seems like an unproductive comment.
I just did some benchmarks and it's pretty similar for small files. The difference would only be noticeable if you're serializing a ton of small files.
I think you'll find that people (broadly) are capable of altruism, but persons (narrowly) act in their own self interest and take advantage of the altruistic.
The same way you get any customer service from Google: Get your post on the front page of HN. This is probably going to get fixed shockingly fast now.
This is a bit of a misrepresentation. Drivers still have actual safety and operational roles – they can drive the train manually in cases of equipment failure, deal with passenger emergencies, that kind of thing. Even the DLR, which has used automation since opening, has a staff member on each train who can take over driving if required.

That's not to say that entirely driverless services can't be done. There are a bunch of metro services globally that are grade-4 fully-autonomous and totally unattended, and some of them have been in operation for over 30 years. But like all large-scale systems, there are lots of complicating factors, system-specific conditions, and various tradeoffs to be made – a lazy Daily Mail "damn unions" argument isn't really fair.
There's a lot of back and forth on the discussion, and summaries are included in the tops of almost all of the linked articles. In general, the name "master" branch was commonly used in proprietary git predecessor BitKeeper which almost all of the early git developers were familiar with [1] and it did use master in a master/slave meaning. (It had a concept of "slave repositories".) While git has never had a concept of "slave branches" and the meaning may very well have meant to evoke one of the other etymologies, the word was "in the air" because of BitKeeper, which did intend it in a master/slave relationship, so git is guilty by association if not guilty by intent. Which is fine, no one is suggesting git is guilty by intent, they are simply suggesting it is time now to do what early git developers failed to do and question the association (both associations, using the word simply because it was a word commonly thrown around in tech up to that point, and in the association of master with chattel slavery).

[1] Bitkeeper was the SCS that the Linux kernel had been using up to that point, and whose dropping of free licenses to open source projects like the Linux kernel was the immediate cause of the creation of both git and Mercurial.
Americans have issues. A lot of issues to be honest. Add to the mix their fervor about what they think is right with their utter disregard about what the rest of the world has to say about it, and you will get an interesting recipe for neocolonialism.
Also there is another aspect to cardsets that might be worth thinking about, which is that they are like "polling" done in a fun and easy way (swiping on pictures) -- the fact that you can also show people that answered similar to me doesn't need to be the focus.

Having polls like this can help you grow the site. For example, imagine I make a cardset for "Beatles albums" where I put in each Beatles album, and shoot the link out to, say, r/Beatles or whatever. Your site can let people swipe, then show the aggregate % for each of the cards, thus ranking them.

Of course... having viewed this really fun and quick poll, random pollers might wish to make their own new polls and spread your site.

Enjoy your sleep.. you have a long journey ahead of you!
This is an person arguing with socialists about why bitcoin is not good for socialism, not a person trying to convince libertarians to not be libertarians. Try to argue with it on its own terms, not whatever your personal issues are.
But now your argument has nothing to do with the AGPL at all and everything to do with not doing business with disagreeable people.

And many free software projects require copyright assignment (e.g. the FSF requires this), so in all of those cases you're not dealing with 10,000 different parties, only the one. If that party is litigious then it doesn't really matter which license they use, they'll still be able to find an excuse to cause you grief.
Yeah, I heard about this project. But there’s a graveyard of dead OS projects out there.

What’s the progress and potential of Redox?
We had a local incident a few years ago where the roof of a shopping centre collapsed during renovation, killing multiple people. Not much info in English about it to quote, but one of the legal consequences was conviction of the structural engineer who signed off without proper verification the changes to a key construction element that made it insufficiently sturdy for the load. He was sentenced to six years jail for violation of construction regulations and manslaughter by negligence.

In general, if a bridge/building goes down due to a honest mistake, that would not result in criminal charges, however, the planning and approval process is designed so that simple mistakes by a single person don't result in such failures, and it needs some clear violation of the process - not doing a mandated re-verification of calculations someone else made, faking some signatures of approval, intentionally skipping parts of process or change documentation, etc; those are unethical acts which make you criminally liable if they result in actual harm to people.
I would and I would much rather that than multiple interviews
Founder here - we agree. ChatOps has traditionally required you to build out a specific solution for Chat, which failed the cost of ownership equation, after you consider the cost of setting up servers, code and chat specific logic to run your workflows. Hubot is a good example but we've taking it way further and rethought DevOps from a Slack first perspective.

With CTO.ai your existing CLI "just works" in Slack and you have none of the additional overhead but get all of the benefits of chat such as distribution, transparency and collaboration as well. It's a big paradigm shift.

Many of our users are going all in because of this!

Thanks for your feedback! We'll keep iterating!
Google support forums are terrible. Every time there is a missing feature (I usually find it in Google Spreadsheet) or a bug, the corresponding entry in the support forum would be answered with some pretext of why said feature will never be supported.
>If they were, they wouldn't be negotiating AGPL with Google; they'd be negotiating an actual contract.

This would stop being true if (and when) FAANG figured out how to effectively use AGPL internally. In my opinion, this is inevitable as long as software continues to be published under this license. From their perspective it seems they don't even have to do anything besides wait for other smaller companies to get in legal disputes and set a precedent. Or better yet, wait for a potential acquisition to come along that happens to have won one of these disputes.
…but closing the UX tickets apparently is.
Bitcoin presumes (1) everyone owns a computer (or a smartphone/similar) and (2) everyone has network connectivity all the time. Without these two things, one cannot transact.

There are huge swaths of the world where this isn't true. Short of making computing devices and internet connectivity human rights, these assumptions compound existing inequalities.
Historically Microsoft has been an offensively litigious actor that paid as much attention to the rule of law and ethics in the scope of their area of business as the average drug dealer does in theirs.

If relationship counts then surely the fact that you will be dealing with one of the worst actors in IT doesn't help your argument much.
What do you think is better about people made by Boeing?
SecureDrop 1.5.0: Pre-Release Announcement
> The real debate here is not about the principle of free speech, but the much grayer question of how we draw its boundaries. What kinds of speech should be morally out of bounds?

"All speech is free, some speech is more free than others."
They have not fixed it.

I wish I could turn off the feature entirely, but I still occasionally get Russian spam events on my calendar. They also try to notify me at ~3am (fortunately I turn notifications completely off at night).

The emails themselves land in my spam folder... but no one said "hey, maybe calendar events shouldn't be created from the spam folder" at inception, so I guess it'll never be implemented.

I report them as spam when I get them, but I also discovered that I can't report calendar events as spam in the mobile app.
> Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what you mean by transporting.

On-chain? No, that may have been true in the early days (pre 2013?) but a tx fee has to be included unless you want your money held in the mempool. You may get lucky if it has high days destroyed, but that's not really a risk you want to take unless you care about the funds and want to eventually have to resort to a CPFP tx. I did a 18 satoshi/byte tx and it took a few hours to confirm, which for my purposes was entirely fine as it was a low sum. But as we get more people onboard On-chain should only really be used for important, secure, and therefore commanding a higher fee, transactions than would/could be done as a LN tx.

And actually LN has everything to do with how bitcoin is transported, note the lower-case here, LN makes it instant and near no cost tx fees.

Holding, as you said, can be done for free. Many old schoolers never really opted for hardware wallets, as the paper-wallet method can be just as secure, despite it requiring far more planning and contingencies.

I liked Yanis when he was lambasting the Merkle/Rumpy governed EU and telling them they'd prefer to default and exit the EU and take Cyprus and the PIIGS with them. However, ever since the party he helped create (Syriza) failed to do anything different in Greece than the Trokia before it I completely tuned out to him and his tired rhetoric has lost any of its appeal.

And he is right, Bitcoin is completely agnostic to Political Ideology or its proposed factions, in fact I'd say if you understand what it really is: that is entirely the point!

I'm not going to read his article, but if that is his only contention, then he is right. Socialists need not apply, and if the Petro is any indication of what happens when Socialists create their own cryptocurrency (only to see it fail, in value or utility and then have to accept Bitcoin anyway for their services) it doesn't really matter, and proves the above.
Would you choose a plane with a pilot or without a pilot if a plane without a pilot is 5% cheaper? 20% cheaper? 50% cheaper?
Flight plans are filed in advance, but a flight plan is just a plan. It's an impossible task to predict where an airplane will fly in advance, there are so many variables involved.

Just some of the many reasons a flight will vary from flight plan:

-Avoiding convective build up (thunderstorm)

-Avoiding turbulence for passenger comfort (changing altitude)

-Unexpectedly high headwinds (changing altitude)

-A cold front causes winds to shift, so the runways in use change

-Low clouds limits arrival/departure rate, so holding is needed

-Snow removal from runways/taxiways
Lib.rs – Home for Rust Crates
But that's the thing about Roman numerals: you don't need a placeholder number to represent empty columns. And for "what is XVI subtracted from XVI" they could just use a word meaning "nothing", such as nihil or nihilum. The need for the concept of zero as we understand it really only arises together with a place-value system.
NOAA Satellite Maps – real-time weather patterns developing around the world
A semi truck breaks down in a position fouling the tracks. A drunk passes out on the tracks. A freight car isn't securely tied down on a siding and rolls out onto the tracks. Et cetera.

For an open system, you have to be able to respond to arbitrary visual input. For a closed system, there shouldn't be random stuff on the right of way.
> There's nothing wrong with the taste of Nespresso (it's a little weak for me, but that's personal preference).

I suspect it's the personal preference of a lot of people. Pods typically have 5g of coffee. A typical portafilter basket holds 12..21 grams. It's not a small difference.
The "bail" maneuver is considerably easier in a car.

It's also far more likely to be necessary, but pulling over to the side of the road is easier than landing off runway.
> So what changed? We aren't sure, but the speculation is that in the process of training, GPT-3 found that the best strategy to correctly predicting the continuation of arithmetic expressions was to figure out the rules of basic arithmetic and encode them in some portion of its neural network, then apply them whenever the prompt suggested to do so.

I saw a lot of basic arithmetic in the thousands range where it failed. If we have to keep scaling it quadratically for it to learn log n scale arithmetic then we're doing it wrong.

I'm surprised you think it learned some basic rules around arithmetic. A lot of simple rules extrapolate very well, into all number ranges. To me it seems like it's just making things up as it goes along. I'll grant you this though, it can make for a convincing illusion at times.
What drives me crazy is that this will happen even if the email with the invite never hits your inbox and goes straight to spam. Outright insane to not patch that ASAP.
Make School is recruiting an adjunct faculty to teach at an HBCU
Moreover, this free-rider problem is made far, far worse by the fact that Bitcoin ownership is very unequally distributed, thus giving the Bitcoin-rich powerful incentives to restrain the growth of the money supply (since such restrictions would boost their private rents at the expense of the public interest).

Take out the word 'bitcoin' from this, and all the points still stand. The super-rich tend to be the ones with power, and they are never motivated to change this.

(Which is kind of a truism really, because if the super-rich & powerful were willing to be generous, they wouldn't be super-rich in the first place...)
I am not sure what is your argument. Google and Facebook didn’t even exist in 1997 and Amazon was still in basement of Bezos home.
Absolutely not. Varoufakis isn't even an authoritarian, he's more the Bernie Sanders type but more open about his worldview.

The issue is that Bitcoin is a currency that has both a fixed supply, and is naturally controlled by the very richest people. This leads to a series of incentives and effects of monetary policy that creates conditions where the average person loses out, big time.
LOL, you're assuming anyone gets promoted by fixing issues at Google. Wrong. You build some new shit and switch teams. Someone pitches a new project and builds from scratch. Rinse and repeat.

This particular issue happens (at least that's my recollection a few years ago) frequently enough at Google that there were memes about it internally. Not sure giving additional feedback would help.
If the non-leverage path involves X dollars. The leverage path >X dollars. Unless someone is fairly explicitly trying to stop them then banks (and other businesses) will start inventing private methods of exchange, popularising them and then playing leverage games.

There are extremely powerful interest groups that want money to be creatable on demand (and not subtle ones; the public loves credit). If a sound money system is in use (Gold, Bitcoin, etc) then it may hold for a long while but sooner or later be re-defined out of the system and replaced with something that can be created. The process has nothing to do with the other underlying technical realities of the sound money, the problem being solved is the soundness of the money itself.