skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I am not sure why people continue to redefine the word "monopoly" to the point where it becomes meaningless.

Claiming that Apple has a "monopoly" on app sales on its own devices might be technically true but is not a meaningful statement when there are plenty of alternatives to Apple devices on the market.

It is about as meaningful as claiming a gas station has a "monopoly" on gas sales in a three block radius, or that a bar has a "monopoly" on cocktail sales in its own building, or that I have a "monopoly" on lemonade sales on my front lawn.

If you have to apply an arbitrary constraint to eliminate the consideration of meaningful alternatives that the consumer has access to, then you're not dealing with an actual monopoly.
Per-video profit isn't really meaningful; these kinds of companies report revenue (and thus profit) base on the number of active users.

Consider that in 2017, 21 billion ARM chips were manufactured (doubled in 4 years, from 10 billion in 2013), and that ARM's licensing fees are over 2% of chip cost for current high-end designs (and they're talking about raising that even more). They have 95%+ of the mobile phone market, are making inroads in the server market, and will soon be in every Apple laptop, which I expect will grow the market for ARM laptops even outside Apple. It wouldn't be a stretch to find them in common desktop computers after that. They're in smart TVs, washing machines, robot vacuum cleaners, and all other kinds of smart (and non-smart) appliances. Even SSDs have their own embedded ARM chip. And that's just home/consumer stuff; haven't even scratched industrial/commercial applications, of which there are a ton.

I could easily see yearly production at over 100 billion chips before 2030, probably even before 2025. While I'd love to see something like RISC-V take off commercially, I don't think that's realistic.

Meanwhile, social media users are incredibly fickle; platforms are subject to fad and fashion. Certainly Facebook and Instagram are still huge behemoths, but their growth is nothing like it once was, with people -- especially younger people, trying to distinguish themselves from their older, boring relatives -- flocking to TikTok. I fully expect TikTok will be in Instagram's boat in under 10 years, with some other platform taking its place.

ARM seems like an amazingly great short-, medium-, and long-term bet, while TikTok feels like a nice short- (maybe medium-, if they're lucky) term money-maker, and even that feels like a big maybe: I have no idea what their ad revenue per user looks like, but it's probably not great since their audience skews younger. Teenagers and college kids don't have much in the way of discretionary income. Then again, TikTok doesn't pay their creators like e.g. YouTube does, so they get to keep all that ad revenue.
Anyone else read this as

Eliminating cold
starts with
cloudflare workers

?
Well the age implicitly assumes potential levels of education and sophistication. Few would be surprised to hear a 30 year old engineer designed a novel world class chip - they could easily have a PhD at that point to have the sophistication capable. For a 17 year old that would be pretty damn extraordinary. Now hacking is less than thar even to laymen who don't know how simple some holes are but 17 implies a lack of great sophistication.

The whole thing is an ageist rough proxy anyway - a developmentally disabled 30 year old hacking it would be more shameful than a 17 year old college graduate.
For every Metallica there are 100,000 other bands that didn't make it. They're an anomoly rather than an example.

It'd be more interesting to look at the number of people who make a living from music, and whether or not the majority have formal training. I suspect they do so off you want a career doing what you live maybe training is a good idea. And if my assumption is wrong it'd be an interesting thing to research.
24M Americans fear missing next rent payment as benefits dry up
I didn't say that. And just repeatedly stating something doesn't make it true, especially if others disagree and you refuse to elaborate, discuss, or explain.
API changes every minor release.
If using a search engine is the ordinary method of discovery then there would be no need to upload the same video to multiple services. Meanwhile if people did that anyway, the search engine would want to figure out how to merge the duplicates.
This is not really an apt comparison because the commitment to a movie theater is pretty minimal. If you spend $1000 on a phone, you're stuck there for a while. Most of these issues don't become immediately obvious right when you buy the phone either, it's things that might take you a few years to realize are happening (if ever).

Additionally, the network/ecosystem effects might make it such that you are really disincentivized to switch.

- For a lot of people, the idea that they would show up as a "green bubble" means they will never consider moving off of Apple
- If you've purchased a lot of apps that you will now lose, you're not going to just move off of Apple

If you don't like a movie theater chain, you just go to another one, or don't go to the movies. Not having a phone isn't a realistic option for most people, and neither is switching (this applies in the Google -> Apple direction as well).

People are very narrowly focused on whether Apple (or Google) are monopolies, and the fact is that you can have very imperfect competition[1] in a market that can seriously harm consumers, without anyone being a monopoly.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperfect_competition
I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to be argumentative. I just truly don't understand it. It kinda feels like the people that move close to an airport and then complain about air traffic. You knew the deal going in, but you went in anyway. And now you're upset about the choice you made.

So what I'm really curious about is why is that? Regardless of the legality beyond it, why did you make a choice you're upset with?
To me, and probably a lot other people, this means the death of ARM. Not literally, but practically.
This is controversial for some reason, but I don’t think there’s ever been a significant demand or market for music production. The entire notion that musicians get paid to make music is a false premise.

There was a market for records, not for music. What people were actually paying for was the technology to play music, and the distribution of music. When that became digitized, no significant market formed around music production for reasons that seem pretty obvious to me: 1. It is absolutely impossible for the market to ever reach a state where new music is not produced, regardless of the existence or absence of any monetary factor; and 2. I will be just as happy regardless of what is produced because my brain naturally adjusts that emotion to the scale of whatever I am perceiving.

There was a huge market around distribution and licensing and technology related to music, and a lot of that went away. But that doesn’t mean musicians are entitled to a 50-billion-dollar industry around music production that never existed to begin with.
I'm not clear here [UK Citizen] due to how the article is worded. Are unemployed Americans receieving $600/week in what we'd call unemployment benefit?... or has the existing unemployment benefit been increased by $600/week?

Either way, it seems a very generous amount for a nation so generally mostly opposed to state benefits. I'm unemployed at the minute in UK and get under £200/week -nearly 2/3 of which goes on rent.
KODA is literally a government sanctioned monopoly.
Spotify are effectively parasites. They pay poorly.
Dominate the market. Force everyone to accept their poor treatment through their market domination.
(Go watch some Youtube tutorials on paid spotify placement services)
And thus, this youthful tech CEO is speaking from a position of extreme privilege with an eye towards what is good for HIS business, but bad for musicians.
I hope Spotify goes away, but it probably won't.
The consumer side is pretty good/enticing etc.
The musician side is 2-tiered.
The vast majority of the POOLED streaming revenue goes to large labels who manage global pop stars.
Indie artists can just go die under a rock... ermmm "try harder"

I don't really want to read 20 hackernews' argue about how hard it is/isn't to make a hit album.
Quality music takes more effort, training, and skill to make than low-quality music, and this is not about the production alone.
Expert-level musicians are generally disregarded by Joe Q. Public in favor of Joe Q. Publics "favorite" musicians, training and knowledge and compositional skill notwithstanding. The limiting factor is Joe Q. Public's musical listening skills, which certainly will not improve in a world that is racing to achieve cheaper mass-produced conformist "music" that likely will be replaced by algorithmic generation in the near future.

I am hardly a great composer, but even I could describe formulaic "genre music" in such a manner that a decent music AI could iterate it nonstop.

The subject of people "liking genres" rather than following individual artists of talent across their works as they explore all genres, etc... that's a different topic for a different day.

I will also contend that grooming a public to like simplistic rhythms that are easy to program on 16-note step sequencers is not accidental.
That you nancy pelosi?
I think about death every day, which means I think about life every day. I don't think about it in a "morbid" way.

Every day I wake up is a bonus for me, an opportunity to make things, live experiences, and be better: a better son, brother, uncle, colleague, friend, human.

Death where I live is different. When someone dies, hundreds of people go to the funeral. They'll support the family with their presence, the logistics, catering, transportation, and an organization forms for a few days to completely solve any problem the family might face to allow them to deal with the death. People will self organize in rotations, bring necessities, transport other people to their destinations, etc.

Those who knew the person of course will come, some will fly in, some will take days off to be present. It doesn't have to be family. For example, colleagues or professional relations of someone who lost their father will come to the funeral. Family friends, neighbors, people who've worked with the person twenty years ago, childhood friends of their children will come. People who go to funerals also bring people with them who did not know the family. There's a funeral motorcade.

If the person who dies had a "good" family, by good family I mean children who were nice with people, honorable, and helped others, a cemetery can get too small.

If the person was in a line of work that involved knowing many people, like in the armed forces, again: their colleagues and their families will go.

If the person was hospitalized, it's common for colleagues or acquaintances of the person's children to come and visit, introduce themeselves, chat the parent, bring things, ask if the person needs anything.

One of the common things here is that children get exposed to death at a very, very early age. They get exposed to it mostly from a religious stand point, and not in a "your mom is in heaven looking at us", but more like "people die, and if they did good things when they were alive they go to heaven, if not they go to hell". But they do get exposed to it. They are taken to funerals, and marriages, and baby celebrations, and generally speaking, all the above also is valid for marriages. Hundreds of people will flock in.

So the rapport to life, sickness, and death is a bit intertwined and they're all present in people's minds with varying degrees.

In the place where my parents are from, it's different since we're not the same ethnicity or have the same relation to religion, or religion in the first place, as the majority. It is not uncommon to have tombs of people right in front of houses, or in piazzas where people in the summer go to cool off, eat ice cream, and play guitar and sing, with kids playing around. I've always seen it as a way to include these people in living activities, so that their body may have left this place, but their memory nonetheless still is intact.
In the US, scams are still "conspiracy to commit money laundering", which is what the kid was charged with. Also wire fraud.
And? It's called a personal experience. I thought that was obvious.
For me it is hard to grasp if this really is a paradigm shift or merely some valuation cycle aka https://twitter.com/chamath/status/1280531290635157505
Stop making split keyboards! You don't need 2 separate pieces; all you really need are slightly angled keys away from the center. See the Truly Ergonomic keyboard[1] for example.

That layout also has the advantage of being a design you could use for a laptop, if only manufacturers put actual effort into their laptop keyboards.

[1]: https://trulyergonomic.com/ergonomic-keyboards/
VR gets my face out of my instruments and up looking at where I'm actually flying. It's an incredible change.
There is spyware (that is, malware) in almost every single app in the Apple App Store. Apple asserts that you consent to spyware in your apps when you agree to the App Store TOS.

These apps track your location (both sensor and geoip based) over time, and aggregate and sell that data, along with other user data they glean.
Freedom of Conscience and the Rule of Law
what makes you all think ByteDance will agree to sell their top product in 1st place?
Obviously Cortana was a laggard, but I wonder how much ROI any of these voice assistants are really delivering for anyone. Besides maybe Alexa. I have not observed anyone talking to their phones since these were a novelty.
$10-30 trillion is probably not a valuation that should be or will be allowed by regulators. The business would have to be split up.
>If someone got swatted, is it the police's fault or the person who called it in?

Both. The police certainly have culpability for being willing to send armed thugs anywhere to bust down doors and start shooting based on nothing but an anonymous phone call. Swatting wouldn't exist without America's militant police culture.

>Or when a racist calls 911 to report "suspicious activity" on a black person not doing anything that can reasonably construed as illegal or suspicious, and he ends up getting shot by the police?

Again, both. The police are always, and obviously, at fault for pulling the trigger on someone who doesn't pose an obvious threat. The instigation is the fault of one party, but the escalation is the fault of the system.

I'm not saying the person who posted the picture isn't at fault, obviously they have some culpability, and I'm not justifying it either. It's just odd that the employer is never considered to have any agency or responsibility in these discussions. The decision to fire the employee was entirely that of their employer. Presumably when they sat the employee down and asked for his side of the story, they weren't satisfied with "I was just cracking my knuckles." They could have taken one look at the photo and decided it was nonsense, but they decided to do an "internal investigation", suspension and eventual termination. No one made them. No one put a gun to their head.
I just read one of the complaints, against the 22 year old "Rolex". It's not so much loose ends as loose everything.

He didn't use a VPN or anything to mask his home IP, he discussed the hack on Discord, an unencrypted third-party platform, and reused a gmail address for the hack that he also used for a Coinbase account. Said Coinbase account being verified with his driver's license...

I shouldn't be too surprised, but I still am. I would have expected, at the very least, all discussion being handled on Signal or similar, all access to involved accounts to be exclusively via a regular VPN or Tor, and only using a brand-new fastmail email for anything to do with the hack. Those are the very basic precautions.

Curious aside: there's a bug in the complaint document. The affidavit is by a Special Agent with the US Secret Service, but the title page lists him as "Special Agent, FBI".
I listen to whole albums. I still buy CDs primarily because I don't want piecemeal "hits" when there's gold in the material that will never see wide promotion. You'll never hear that without buying an album. Live albums in particular don't work at all in the streaming era where tracks are discrete units that can't flow into each other. When I rip a CD I know with 100% certainty the gaps will be seamless.
Really seems like a modern day MafiaBoy.
Sending these particular packets was more akin to fraud. Should fraud be legalized?
From the outside looking in, it seems like Mixer had other factors that contributed to the decision to close up shop[1].

It seems like Phil Spencer had a meeting with the affected ex-employee but nothing came out of it[2].

Adding on to that, a leaked town hall video really painted a grim image of the company and the management internally.[3]

[1]https://twitter.com/MilanKLee/status/1274830702538821632

[2] https://twitter.com/MilanKLee/status/1286008870935179266

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RZxaSLyjUM
Gas analogy works for charging the phone and you can charge with any USB power source.
The secret to modern music isn't releasing full albums, but to release singles throughout the year. That is the future. I've even seen some (small-mid size) musicians simply have Patreon subscriptions to get new music, and then release the best on Spotify, etc. (I live in Nashville, so I feel like I'm near the cutting edge)
How do you feel about them removing an app because it allows people from HK to circumvent censorship? And why? Just asking to understand your point of view on the article.
True, but musical talent doesn't mean I should give you anything. If you ask something of me (money? time?) I may demand something in response (entertainment). Should we fail to make a deal, you are out the money/time and I am out the entertainment and we both seek out others who may be agreeable. This is fair. This is free. This is the market. And it is today.
I'd love to see Apple do some serious work on the battery side. If anyone's equipped to do it, it is (though I'm less certain of this after the "sapphire" debacle). You wouldn't believe how hard it is to actually get new battery tech to market: I've probably seen a dozen start-ups pitch technologies that could substantially improve capacity, longevity, safety, size, weight, manufacturing cost, or a combination of the above. None have yet succeeded at scale.
It's sad to me how the authorities are bragging about how quickly they caught them and how effective they are at solving this type of crime.

The truth is, the vast majority of these crimes go unpursued. They handled this quickly because it was so prominent, but if this happened to an everyday individual, the police wouldn't even bother.

I don't see this as much of a triumph. It never should have happened in the first place, and the consequences could have been utterly dire if it hadn't just been teenagers running a Bitcoin scam. This isn't a victory for nation-state security, it's an utter failure, and no policy changes have been made to prevent it happening again.

So what we have is a world in which our leadership is vulnerable to hackers, as are the rest of us, but only attacks against the rich and famous have actual consequences. It's the worst of all worlds.
Source for those charges? Article this currently points to says "The third defendant is a juvenile. With exceptions that do not apply to this case, juvenile proceedings in federal court are sealed to protect the identity of the juvenile. "
* https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/030504...

* https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5444072/

* https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/fishsci1994/61/6/61_6_9... -- see figure 2 on page 4, showing extracted carotenoproteins
An Israeli friend told me that after the Shoah her countrymen faced a choice. They could say "never again" or "never again to us."
Have a look at some of these[1]. Some of them are vacuous, but I would definitely not call a lot of them positive values mainstream America would associate with.

At the end of the day they are a corporation whose job is to make profit not possibly die by being idealistic. I would even argue that the privacy thing, while commendable is a selling point more than an ideal they hold dear.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple_Inc.
Excuse the cultural reference, but the outdoor recreation thing makes me think of a plot line from The Sopranos where an addicted gambler gets "busted out" by the mafia and ends up being force to do illegal things because of his debts.

Maybe it was the gambling addiction that lead your friend to doing illegal activities? Addictions like that can cause people to go out of control, it's a compulsion and a very sad one.
It’s routinely done by researchers.

Here’s a lot of papers on it.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,15&q=bitco...
If you squint, you can see the Minecraft fit: along with the Xbox side, it's quasi "coding" or "developing" for kids. Basically, you hook the kids who are interested in developing super, duper early.
Using WordNet used to be a very popular way to perform "knowledge-rich" NLP around late 90s upto around 2010 (approximate timeline). "Knowledge-rich" meant you could start with some understanding of the language and not rely solely on the data at hand. Much like the use-case that pretrained models like GloVe serve today (WordNet probably is closer to Dependency based word vectors [1]). Some interesting uses were query expansion [2], sense disambiguation [3], word similarities (popular: wu-Palmer similarity, check out NLTK), and in an interesting area called "lexical chains" [4]: group of related words running through a text, with their "weave" signifying topics.

The arrival of WordNet on the scene, when it happened, was a big deal, since there weren't many ways to perform knowledge-rich NLP back then. The common ones were using a dictionary or a thesaurus. There was some effort to tie topic models with WordNet too, like LDAWN [5]. And extending it, based on collocation information you could glean from the gloss - "eXtended WordNet" [6].

You still (occasionally) see its uses where you need some kind of rich prior knowledge. For ex, the "Hierarchical Probabilistic Neural Network Language Model" by Morin and Bengio [7], or cluster labeling (which uses embeddings with WordNet) [8]. To quote an example from the latter, 'a word cluster containing words "dog" and "wolf" should not be labeled with either word, but as "canids"'. And you know "canids" is a super-category here, by looking up the precise relationships in WordNet.

My own Master's research looked at combining WordNet based lexical chaining with more "ML"-ish techniques like Hidden Markov Models [9]. Which is why I know, or rather, vaguely remember, some of the stuff that was happening back then :-)

I think the primary reason why WordNet did not retain its popularity was it was a good "one off" solution. Worked well with "correct" English. You want to adapt it to your domain vocabulary? Heuristics. You want to use WordNet in another language? Well, someone needs to build one first. You want to use it to process text in internet lingo? Nope, hybrid models and heuristics. Also, at this time the amount of text available to train on was increasing by leaps and bounds, so the field moving toward ML heavy techniques made sense.

[1] https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P14-2050.pdf

[2] https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P08-1017.pdf

[3] https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7f2c/b3e390c5e539ef9089014a...

[4] http://www.cs.columbia.edu/nlp/papers/2003/galley_mckeown_03...

[5] https://wordnet.cs.princeton.edu/papers/jbg-EMNLP07.pdf

[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EXtended_WordNet

[7] https://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~lisa/pointeurs/hierarchical-nn...

[8] https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/U18-1008/

[9] https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e7ce/34e5acdbb7a91e28fdafa9...