skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I hope you see the problem in your logic. You've just said developers only build when people want more housing when stakkur claims that people only want housing because developers have built more housing.

The conflict is that you two are saying the laws of supply and demand don't work because of two mutually incompatible reasons.

Those two things can't be true at the same time. So either of you must be wrong. And it's pretty obvious that your comment is the only one that doesn't violate basic logic. However, just because you're not wrong doesn't mean you're capturing the whole truth.

>This is a huge reason why the notion that our housing affordability problems can be boiled down to "simple" issues of "supply and demand" is false.

>Developers don't over build supply. Why would they? There's no economic reason to. Whenever any sort of overbuilding occurs which would oversupply , it is always by some accident (eg. a pandemic), and the taps are turned off immediately.

Building exactly as much housing as needed would still result in lower prices. When you have 10 houses and 20 people only the 10 richest people get a house because they are bidding up the prices. If there are 20 houses and 20 people then everyone gets a house. If there are 25 houses and 20 people then landlords will compete with each other and try to lower the rent they charge to fill their units. Villages with 1€ houses exist for a reason.

Do you know what the worst mistake in housing discussions is that everyone tends to make? Everyone talks about the price because that is what people can see and what people are familiar with. No one talks about housing in absolute numbers. Nobody thinks about the fact that one more house means one more person. Everyone is thinking about how an "evil" house is going to raise housing prices even further because people are only familiar with expensive housing because they made it illegal for inexpensive housing to exist, when policies like this reform are intended to allow inexpensive housing.
How could zigzagging through fiber be faster thaz zigzagging through vacuum? You still need to cross nearly the same distance with fiber.
Gaming and video conferencing come to mind. Videoconferences need bandwidth for obvious reasons but it's also nice if you don't have any delays in when you says something and when the other side hears it. I've been in some calls lately with very noticable delays. Especially people joining from mobile phones tend to be affected (shit latency, variable bandwidth).
Not necessarily. I see Western societies of the future as a two-tier system: most countries turning to some form of Putinism - manipulative "democracies" inhabited largely by populace so dependent on the government handouts they can't even think of expressing any dissident opinion (plus low-scale, targeted repressions against those few who dare), and some islands of real democracy, inhabited and funded by money of global elite and even sort of a global middle class, who has multiple passports and siphons off the cash from countries of the first group.
A good multi-hop proxy tool for pentesters and security researchers
> I would assume you have a problem with the satellites, but Amazon, SpaceX and OneWeb are companies, not a Millionaires.

Elon Musk is CEO of SpaceX and owns > 50% of the shares. As for Blue Origin (aka Bezos / Amazon); Bezos is the owner of the company. That means these people can make decisions on their own without consulting anyone else. They appoint the board, they appoint the CEO, etc.

And sure, there are outside investors. However these investors can only marginally influence anything because they can not get a majority of share holder votes (since Bezos, Musk have > 50% shares). Maybe they got a seat on the board if their investment is large enough. But then what? They still can't get a majority in the board. Besides the only reason these investors want to participate is because the whole thing is controlled (and partially bankrolled) by Musk and Bezos.
It follows then that helicopters are, for the time being, not real.
Cause with satellite is ALL about latency. It’s THE topic. Most comments here will reference it. It’s a critical issue. It doesn’t go away.
Does it really matter? If not one brand, you get screwed by another.

What we need is a push for free software in consumer electronics. Get any major manufacturer to realize that they can not differentiate on software and stick to making good hardware. The sooner they accept that Google is eating their lunch on the value-add anyway and that the best way to counter them is by commoditizing the software stack.

Were I an executive of LG or Samsung, I would just make sure that any TV could boot a custom OS and I would get it shipped with Kodi. Get whatever resources on R&D you want to keep and make sure they work on top of Kodi. Show a big fat finger to Android and let Google being forced to make their own TVs if they really want the market.
Classic capitalism management. If a market change creates negative effects on society, create a tax to mitigate negative effects
The article isn't about her politics, it's about the harassment she got.
Awesome, thanks for digging that up :)
XY problem is invoked when someone is asking for help, to get to the bottom of the problem.

I am dealing specifically with product users or prospective users who, possibly via stakeholders, request new features to implement.

The tip I quoted is very helpful with the latter as means of explaining why feature request should not be treated as actionable to stakeholders. Until I manage that, neither XY nor any other approach can be used.
I'm in a VM cabled area, so the I get ~ 100/10 Mbps and ~ 12 ms ping. This is the second lowest tier that VM offer btw
Exactly, if China launched thousands of satellites ruining everyone's astronomy efforts I'm sure there would be an uproar. But US doing it? Fine, business as usual.
Starlink blah blah blah.

Wait till the service is massively over subscribed and get back to me.

With any luck Starlink operators (Elon Musk?) won't let that happen, but it does tend to be the way of things.

Additions, the unintended consequences haven't revealed themselves fully yet.

One thing I personally dislike about electricity, cable internet, and fibre optic, is what they do to the visual appeal of the built environs. Could be underground, but only areas missed that boat.

Not saying the trade-offs, if any, won't be worth it though.
A database to find and compare JavaScript package with review
I'm sure the IT sector employees wouldn't vote for Lukashenko anyway; if they can block the internet for the rest of the population, all is well.

Oh wait, they can fake election results, kill anybody they please and are backed by Russia. I guess all is well regardless if they can block the internet or not.
I also think the mods should manually unflag this. The events in the article are interesting, and the issue of trolling is currently a hot-topic in tech. I could understand people flagging it if she went overboard making political prescriptions, but her essay is pretty tame on that front.
Sounds to me like Apple built their company on the principle that they are able to make money without spying on their users. Sounds quite principled.
Why would 4 duplex housing turn a city into a shithole?
As an example, DOS machines came with a form of BASIC and you had these: https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/QBasic/Sound

We had fun in school putting the SOUND command in a loop and either increasing or reducing the Hz to test our hearing and prove that yes, "old people" (such as our teachers who probably weren't much past 30) have terrible ears for higher pitched sounds.
I'm calling bullshit. Compare it to the TBM900 which has a 900hp turbine engine and vastly similar layout. There is no way they can go 60 knots faster on 300 less horse power.

And even if they somehow pull off that trick, that short skinny wing will make the MU-2 feel like a safe family minivan.
Won't someone please think of advertisers!
I think Parallels has directly supported this for a while.

That may change, soon...
Covid-19 Consumer Insight Report – Bounce Insights
That is nice to see that ML can be used for expanding our knowlede of space!
I'm sure astronomers would pay for access to a global distributed space-based telescope. So, if there is demand... We are about to have a huge supply.
Why do astronomers own the skies? I don't remember when they got title to that property.
> User -> Satellite -> multiple hops between satellites (as they are orbiting earth and the right one has to be selected to relay data to -> earth DNS servers -> multiple hops across internet -> satellite -> user

All of that in general is comparable to the costs incurred on the ground from any other kind of network.

> complications from rotation of satellites

As far as a single routed packet is concerned, the satellites are stationary.
Pretty much. Getting the best outcome for the most people etc etc...
> I personally believe that pervasive high speed internet even in remote locations will do more for humanity than the scientific cost of these satellites.

I've had faster Internet than the average Starlink speedtest says, in rural Romania, at the foot of a mountain, wild bears and all: https://twitter.com/q3k/status/1172621386977861632 . Internet access in rural areas is pretty much a solved problem, it just now hinges on enough of a societal push to apply this solution where needed.

Starlink is yet another SV-style attempt to solve (US) societal problems by blindly applying technology. Except this time, this also affects other countries, and we're furious.
For those who do not aware how this story began. After the ban was introduced, Russian Internet Monitoring Agency (Роскомнадзор) tried to enforce it, blocking whole subnets where Telegram proxies were spotted. It led to massive shutdown of many Russian IT companies' services, relying on AWS and DO infrastructure, with resulting multimillion dollar losses. However, Telegram remained afloat, ashaming Russian officials responsible for censorship. After several years of numerous attempts, they still could not enforce the ban (honestly, their expertise visibly worse than, let's say, those who designed Great Chinese Firewall), and had to officially lift it.
Looking for a Developer (f/m/d)
The fiber is a fixed geometry.

The satellite mesh is not, a straight line from point A to point B is not possible most of the time, given the number of satellites available and range of laser communication in space.
You can't create a Google account these days without a phone number, and you can't reuse phone numbers. Worse, in my country, you need to register to get a phone number (anonymous /unregistered sims were outlawed a few years ago).
Maybe, but with tens of thousands of satellites, each with a life expectancy of about 3-5 years then Space X will have to re-fill the constellation constantly.
Thanks, I suspected that but never really saw the opportunity. The information about donations is nowhere to be found in the Firefox browser, Firefox website, Mozilla website. So it seems like they are not even trying to get user's money through the donations channel.

Also, the donations seem to fund every other Mozilla Foundation effort except Firefox.

Quote from FAQ: "Firefox is maintained by the Mozilla Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Mozilla Foundation. While Firefox does produce revenue — chiefly through search partnerships — this earned income is largely reinvested back into the Corporation. The Mozilla Foundation’s education and advocacy efforts, which span several continents and reach millions of people, are supported by philanthropic donations."
https://interestingengineering.com/apple-to-pay-up-to-500-mi...
I prefer owning my data and customise my pages to be blazingly fast without any javascript bloat, etc.
That's why I use static blog generator - Jekyll and host it on AWS.

But it's a bit tedious at times. Having an "admin panel" accessible from everywhere is very comfortable. But I don't like the bloat monsters like Wordpress, etc.

As for the reach - I think Medium doesn't provide so much value. Posting on HN, Reddit, etc feels enough in my case.
Unless you link to stats, this is nothing, but an opinion.
Huh, seems like a more convenient CGI
You still believe in miracles?
I have seen super toxic dude who also was pretty good at programming. (All his failures were social non-technical.) Being talented does not guarantee non toxicity.

His ideology was atrocious. (He was actually physically violent to all his girlfriends and build worldview where he was the good one.)
To be frank, I find his arguments a little flaky and hand-wavy, of the "self-help guru" variety, but there's usually some interesting perspective or tidbit there that I wouldn't have thought otherwise...
Principles can be profitable...

Apple offers paid app discovery, and they want to increase that revenue. Facebook has historically been the paid channel for paid discovery. By limiting its effectiveness, Apple can grab that revenue.

Stratechery dug into this recently (see the "The Apple Vulnerability" section about 80% of the way down):

https://stratechery.com/2020/apple-and-facebook/
The winners in the competitive struggle are going to be people who don't break things. People who routinely reset their ecosystem tend to lose then get forgotten.

It isn't so much their influence as much as there is a community that is constantly searching for reliable platforms to build on.
No. That's not how optics works. The resolution is set by the diffraction limit of the optics, which is mostly limited by the diameter of the aperture. This is not something you can magic away (I am aware that interferometers exist, but those are very limited in their capabilities and don't replace big telescopes).

And even with free launches space telescopes are still extremely expensive, since the telescope and all it's instruments has to work in space without any tweaking or possibility for upgrades. Ground based telescopes are used for decades and upgraded with newer instruments over time.
No. I actually discussed that, over here, in this other comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24291757

Edit: Here is a more serious reply.

I should have stressed that the new network-layer would support the old internet. So, for example, a user might have a Firefox.app window open on their screen (connected via TCP/IP and displaying a normal HTTP website), and a also an AltBrowser.app (connected via AltTCP/IP and displaying a new AltHTTP website). Sort of like the Tor-paradigm, only if Tor required you to update your router's firmware.

I think, in such an environment, the old internet would still be the first choice of most 20-somethings (aside from when they online-shop). Why? Because young people tend to seek excitement, danger, conflict, boundary-pushing, etc.

The new internet likely would be the primary choice (probably the sole one) of oldsters, toddlers, parents, researchers, sensitive souls, retailers, and so on
Conversely, why do the the satellite owners own the sky?

Space is a shared resource. One use shouldn't infringe on another.
We’ll just add this to the long list of privacy and security features that Apple has implemented for not necessarily principled reasons. I’ll see you in the top HN comment next time they come out with another one.
Is there a term for this terrible practice? Should be similar to scrolljacking, but backjacking feels weird... perhaps navjacking?
It's coordinated through ITU.
Astronomers don't "own" the skies, the rest of humanity simply considers the benefits of astronomy to be higher than some satellite internet vanity project.
Thanks, I read it in a newspaper article once and I should probably have checked but I was lazy and I knew someone else would do it for me! So I just wrote 'supposedly' and waited...

I just remembered that this is a great site for Concorde facts http://www.concordesst.com.

Also this OmegaTau podcast episode is pretty fantastic, it's so detailed you could almost jump in a Concorde and fly off after you've listed to it. http://traffic.libsyn.com/omegataupodcast/omegatau-166-flyin...
For people not DEK tempted to try this approach, consider the implications of http://phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1446 .

On the other hand, I do have a friend who, while he was Dean, had his email on three day delay. The theory: only those problems which were still problems after 72 hours were worth addressing at a super-departmental level.
Sure, you'll be able to see the most recent launch, just as you can now. But you won't see 30,000 in the sky, which is what everyone assumes. Also note that you can't see them at all in the middle of the night; only for an hour or so around sunset and sunrise.
You write: "having the sufficient amount of flaggings suggests that hackers do not find this interesting".

I think you have misread the dynamics. To start, most people don't flag something just because it's not interesting. I don't - do you?

The piece describes coordinated harassment against the author, by software developers.

How many people does it take to flag something on HN? How many people are involved in that coordinated harassment. Can you therefore conclude that the flagging is not part of that broader coordinated harassment? I ... don't think so.

This coordinated harassment is part of a larger subculture of harassment against women in tech. As an example, 13 years ago Kathy Sierra withdrew from online life due to harassment. Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathy_Sierra#Harassment_and_wi... 'Scoble said "[W]henever I post a video of a female technologist there invariably are snide remarks about body parts and other things that simply wouldn't happen if the interviewee were a man."'.

As the piece points out, silence - and flagging is an attempt to silence - is one of many tactics used by harassers.

Given the context, you might therefore ask why "hackers do not find this interesting". Is it because a non-trivial number of hackers are sexist, and empathize with the harassment against women in tech, so flag in order to silence?

Or is it because hackers are tired of reading about how sexist the tech field is and want HN as their safe space? Or they feel powerless to change things so flagging is a way of sticking their head in the sand?

Or, really, you should rephrase the question entirely. Don't interpret flagging as a signal for interesting/not interesting, but see it as signal for "should not be on HN" - of which 'not interesting' is only a (small, IMO) part of it.
For many reasons, ground-based telescopes will continue to play a major role in astronomy.

Space telescopes offer advantages for particular types of observations, but there are many types of observations for which ground-based telescopes are superior. The basic advantages that ground-based telescopes have are:

* Larger collecting area, which means more photons collected, which means you can see fainter objects.

* With adaptive optics, ground-based telescopes can actually achieve better resolution than space telescopes over small fields of view.

* Ground-based telescopes are far easier to maintain and upgrade.

* Much looser weight, size, radiation-hardening requirements mean that you can do things on the ground that would just be unthinkable in space. You can attach things like massive spectrometers to ground-based telescopes, without having to worry nearly as much about form factor and weight, or whether radiation will damage your electronics.

The advantages that space telescopes have are:

* No weather to deal with.

* You can observe UV and IR wavelengths which the Earth's atmosphere absorbs or emits in - which is extremely difficult/impossible from the ground.

* You can get high resolution over large fields of view. However, you can't reach the same resolution on small fields of view, because ground-based telescopes with a large aperture + adaptive optics will beat you there.

Basically, at any fixed budget, you will be able to build a much larger, more complex instrument on the ground. You only go to space when there's a compelling technical reason to do so (e.g., you need to observe UV light).
Yeah. And ban you too. And every other complainer and objecter. Participation is a privilege, not a right.

Also, punishing the entire group is very effective in the military. I am surprised how consistently the unit will turn on the offender, rather than the individuals who are making up the rules and administering the punishments. I think my proposed strategy will work.
How do you know what the final orbits are? Why would they not be visible on the final orbits? Sure, only a fraction of the satellites will be above you and illuminated by the sun, but at 30000 that's still bound to be a huge number.

See for example this guy who tried to model this for the lower number of 12000: https://twitter.com/Alex_Parker/status/1132335640605945856
I don't remember the sky being awarded to America either.
> Robbery, extortion, theft and burglary - plus other crimes and social ills - are all made far, far, far worse...

Really? What's the evidence for that?

I'm not necessarily in favor of criminalizing drug trade, but it stands to reason that absent that "line of business", criminals would be under higher pressure to make money otherwise.

Drug trade at least is more likely to only affect those involved with drugs, whereas these other crimes are more likely to affect "bystanders".
If you take long exposure of dim object, bright satellite passing in front of it will saturate signal and there will be nothing to recover. To avoid that you need to track all the satellites and split one long exposure into multiple shorter ones - but that multiplies read noise accordingly.
Show HN: Device Shots – Create High-Res Device Screenshot Mockups for Free
You have a point.

At 550k off the deck, my house to Los Angeles isn't that much closer via satellites link that terrestrial fibre, maybe a few hundred kilometres.
That’s a false dichotomy. The WHO and other International aid organizations were founded and funded at the direction of the USG. The US continues to fund humanitarian causes around the globe. Gates himself has said that Government funding is essential to the causes he’s interested in.
How someone get off GMail if they have already been using it for a decade or quite a few years more than that? Has anyone done this? How do you do that with the fewest issues possible?

Having the most important communications with other people and companies, and the login verification all in the hands of one company which could shaft your access in all sorts of ways (screw up, removing service, ban) is just terrible in the long term. And if someone is using their ISPs email address, that is something that would keep them signed to that ISP even though another may offer a service much better for them.

Anyway, anyone migrated away from their email provider after a long time signed up and could answer some of the questions in the first paragraph? Thanks.
Think of Kessler syndrome. One can imagine that blowing (small) N of them would create a cloud of shrapnel posing danger for the whole network. Birds are on really low orbits, so it would clear after some time, but network might not survive this.
Satellite owners don't own the skies, in the sense astronomers are trying to argue they do.
You are generally correct, however, the donations to the Mozilla Foundation do not go into Firefox development (see my other comment).
Possibly the tinydns-data compiler, which uses the last modification timestamp of the input file when processing Z and . records (unless the Z record has an explicit serial number, of course).

* https://cr.yp.to/djbdns/tinydns-data.html

* http://jdebp.uk./Softwares/djbwares/guide/commands/tinydns-d...
I always wondered if that advertising ID is GDPR compliant, given that the setting is currently opt-out, instead of opt-in. Even if it is low entropy.