skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I suspect the link itself is getting flagged because it reads more like a scam than a startup.

* Wall St Technology for Main St. - Wall St is the stock market, Main St refers to small business. That isn't your target market, so this initial reference is wrong

* Make Additional Income From Stocks You Already Own - sounds scammy, doesn't give actual context of what is happening.

* You describe hedge funds using algorithmic trading, then say you're going to automatically write covered calls. As far as I am aware, this is not the same thing.

* The video ... is that your team? It says SMB. Now we're wondering who we're dealing with

* How it works...connect your account... I understand that you're going to need this step for this to work, but I think you're going to have a REALLY hard time getting people to trust you. Why should they? What reason have you given them? I'm sure this was an issue with things like Mint.com when it started, but they weren't making promises about creating options calls on your behalf.

Perhaps you're on to something, I don't know. I don't have an issue with low returns (nobody does in this current market), and I'm skeptical of anyone offering something for nothing.

I think your approach is missing something. We don't really know anything about you. Perhaps start with why you started this business, try to build a connection with the reader, and see if you get less flagged .
Interesting. Could it be posited the same is true in programming languages?

I did Smalltalk for 20 years, a language that constrained you to think about things in a consistent paradigm. And I felt I was much more creative there than the handful of multi paradigm languages I use today.

I get the impression that adherents of Forth, Lisp, Haskell, also seem to claim creative empowerment with these single paradigm languages.

I'm not sure how one would make this observation less anecdotal. I'm also not sure that I'm not mixing causation with correlation in my observation (e.g. supposing my thesis is valid, it may just be that more creative people are drawn to single/consistent paradigm platforms).
I'm not convinced. Show me at least three examples where this works in an existing government jobs that matches the same criteria-- extreme risk, unpredictable situations, low pay, low appreciation.

Perhaps you could work as a police officer in the USA for a few years to get an authentic perspective. Based on your ideas, it seems like you're a large consumer of media narrative. There's no magic pill buddy.
Which would take just about as long to catch on with the public as a way to avoid tickets.

There is no perfect system to address a problem like this. But if officers/union members know they’re at least as likely to avoid the possibility of leniency as they are to encourage it, then they are both less likely to commit traffic infringements to begin with and less likely to try corruptly weasel out of them.
Since 2017 (and much worse in 2019 version) the (15") MBP dGPU overheats whenever it is use (including whenever external monitor is used) due to a driver bug.
Stay away
One phenomenon I am fascinated by is the advent of software that is entirely built out of open source components and open standards, that is closed off to people using non-mainstream open operating systems and hardware sort of by accident at packaging time.

I'm thinking of apps that built around Electron and Chromium. This stack allows people to ship beautiful webapps (= web protocols and languages, weblike experience) in a format like native applications, with the addition of desktop integration, but ... now we have HTML5 developers shipping binary blobs for the operating systems and CPU architectures they choose. It's cool that that includes common Linux distros as well as the leading commercial OSes, but what if I want to run RISCV instead of Intel/AMD, or FreeBSD, or <insert any other system entirely capable of running the usual stuff from the Unix ecosystem that some people call the "Linux desktop"> instead of Linux, and why is an HTML5 developer/publisher making that choice? Add to this the fact that Chromium itself is an open source project that is widely ported to systems other than Android/Linux/macOS/Windows, but the upstream apparently doesn't accept portability patches. Suddenly that matters if the unit of delivery includes an internal browser executable.

I understand the practical reasons for all of the above, but it irks me on some level; the whole point of all of the huge tower of open standards involved was to avoid this situation. In practice most of these apps are probably also available as straight up webapps in a browser, so it's not really a big deal in the end, but it seems like a really strange position to have finished up in.
Dechlorinating the Moderator (2018)
Been playing around with this for the past hour. Pushed a couple images. But I can't seem to delete them. Under "Edit packages", there are only the options to "View all versions" and "Edit description". But nothing to manage or delete packages.

Anyone successfully deleted a container image?
This is why I plug new USB devices to a USB Hub always and never directly to the USB port of the computer, if the device manufacturer pulls off some BS like this, it will be only the Hub's port which goes in smokes(i.e. if the Hub is done right).

I have a Hub to every port, some of them powered and advantage of using non-powered Hubs are that they can be easily used for isolating EMC(e.g. to prevent buzzing noise on speakers etc.).
Sometimes, the domain has already been chosen ("this application is written in Fortran++"), and your task is to find the best tool/technique given that constraint. This means you cannot necessarily bring your knowledge of Closedjure or Rusty to bear upon the problem even if you believe it would improve the situation.
The question that arises is how much are our internal systems disrupted by living in a sea of electromagnetic radiation from tv transmitters, radio transmitters, mobile phones and towers, wifi etc
I thought I'd seen a rather dramatic benchmark of this but I can't find it now. (I think it was in the context of io_uring, whose documentation mentions that polled IO is much lower latency and I'd trust Jens Axeboe on that one.)

This intuitively makes sense especially with SSDs and especially with NVMe SSDs: you're not going to have to wait that long, especially compared to the overhead of an interrupt. Also, if you're reading sequentially, once you get one I/O completion you're going to get a lot more in a short timeframe—it makes sense to just poll for those instead of handling every one as an interrupt. Interrupts are pretty expensive (I honestly don't have a good grasp of how Linux interrupt handling works but it can easily be on the order of microseconds.)

It also has some side benefits like preventing the CPU from going into a lower power state for only a short period of time.
Not sure why you're thinking that? HN audience is definitely global.
This question is meant in good faith, not to be facetious but out of a genuine lack of understanding: now what?

If this action was ruled illegal, then someone in the chain of command ordered this illegal action - in other words did something illegal. Is the individual who ordered the illegal action going to be disciplined? Is anyone?
> AFAIK this isn't really true. If the adversary captures the initial key exchange plus all the data (ie the full transaction), then later discovers your PSK, they'll be able to decrypt. The only case where this helps you is if they capture some packets out of the middle without the initial handshake.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the idea behind a PAKE is that the password only authenticates the key exchange and doesn't contribute to it. So if you record all transmitted data you still need to break the key exchange which should have used a bunch of random bytes from both parties that are thrown away after use. The password is only there to prevent MITM, not to derive keys.

I believe magic wormhole uses SPAKE2, which has perfect forward secrecy. When using passwords to secure transmitted files it's really important to have forward secrecy otherwise you risk the transmission being recorded and the password being attacked offline which depending on your password strength might lead to trivially decrypting the data.
I am not a corporation marketing something. I am a person. I am raising a point.

There are more monad tutorials than applications by an order of magnitude.

This seems interesting to me. If it doesn't meet your marketing neeeds and you need to start calling people names maybe HN isn't for you.

The evidence of many and varied haskell applications is very, very, very thin. I wish it wasn't. You clearly do too. Great, we agree on that.

Learn haskell it's good fun. It's interesting. Do not expect to write successful applications in haskell because the evidence points elsewhere.

But sure, link your repos of actual applications. Please. Not marketing pages. Actual applications. Code.

The goalposts are:
Why is haskell so very much less successful in applications than any other language with as many people who have learnt it. Including me and you.

Git Annexe. There's another good one. There are some. Just not many. Where are the rest?

This author has stated clearly he seeks to address this. So it seems like something sensible people can discuss. This is apparently more difficult than it should be.

Calling people names suggests you know there's a real problem here that you wish wasn't. I'd suggest working on that problem. For a successful technology reality must take precedence over public relations.

I will change my mind with evidence. collate the list, see how compelling it is or isn't. Or just call people names so we can be clear on what isn't.
Maybe not for a programming language per se but Developers often do pay for IDEs and other niceties around developing software. Swift is another interesting example of a language that you have to pay for developing in (not directly but in order to participate in Apple's developer program).
I would go so far as to say if the organization you're working for is breaking the law, and you know about it and do nothing, you're an accomplice.

So not only did Snowden have a moral imperative to blow the whistle, but a legal one too.
The 27 y/o single person is not the average case, and that is only the cost of insurance, not including deductibles and other costs, electives, or drugs, which are included in the above mentioned numbers.

Finally, many people are simply not eligible for Obamacare.
Creating Holographic User Interfaces
That's fairly sad. I've never found a butcher whose quality or price is beaten by a grocery store yet. I've also yet to find a quality butcher shop that wasn't packed(pre-covid i suppose)

Butcher shops are also about the only place i've been able to find lean or extra lean ground beef that don't contain some percentage of 'reconstituted meat products', that pink slime shit.
How to Tell Time in Java’s Garbage Collection
Theoretically true, but practically unworkable.

If you give end users the right to redistribute your software for free there's not much you can do other than appeal to people's better selves and implore them to pay for your software instead of choosing the exact same copy for free (even though that's something both legally and ethically completely allowed by your choice of license).

At that point it's just a donation model with a suggested donation, which really isn't all that different from "free as in beer."

Under most circumstances "free as in freedom" is a superset of "free as in beer."

This is the reason why open source businesses focus on paid add-on products or services rather than monetize their nominal core product.
Sahil built a fantastic personal brand, and now that he's VC-free and profitable, he always forgets to mention that it was done on a back of dozens of employees, through $8m of other people's money. In that sense, taking on VC was anything but dumb.
But businesses seeking out low cost areas is probably unavoidable.

You could build a super dense city, but a limited population is going to want to live there - people with kids, etc.

Unless you’re willing to force them to live in a city, some people are going to seek out low cost areas and be a source of employees for the companies doing the same.
I probably learnt it out of a desire to be different, but the language is a incredibly (reassuringly) pragmatic language that was written by a compiler writer(Walter) and a C++ Wizard (Andrei) and it shows. It's still a top down systems language, but you can generate enormous amounts of code for free at compile time, e.g. your parser generator can trivially be written in D but use itself to parse new BNFs and compile them at compile time using CTFE.

The standard library is very professional too, not as wide as some languages but the range idea is very pleasant to work with. Very snappy compiles, best in class interop with C and C++, things like that.
Lol, of course nobody will be disciplined
Well, thanks for explaining Russia to me (I'm one person though, not guys) but nothing you've written suggests we have accurate data on the support Putin enjoys. In fact, 'support' of the sort we typically think of, expressed in a poll for a democratically elected leader subject to periodic free and fair elections, is not really a commensurable quantity with 'support' for an authoritarian leader who's clung to power for a couple of decades.
Not that comparable unless you start issuing the insurance bills to the people the officers ticket or arrest.
Anyone aware of an easy way to tell if a specific extension is available or not? I really don't want to upgrade just to find out I'm missing one I rely upon.
Well his suggests that the oysters would Likely not be affected as they weren’t responding to signals. Birds, i believe, navigate with a compass so could suffer disruption
The clock module that they talked about is amazing.

I recommend the article just for that bit.
FWIW I never used zoom until this year and even then only for town halls. I didn’t know it was a thing until late last year.

And I’m very much a youthful person in the tech industry.
In 2015 the 15" was 4-core.
If you don't care about privacy
There's no reason that feedbacks must be positive in principle. Regardless, though, as the earth system wanders farther from its most recent stable state (the Holocene equilibrium), its behavior is likely to continue to become more chaotic and difficult to predict. That's not good for humans no matter whether it involves warming or cooling.

To my knowledge the reinforcement mechanisms we are aware of do tend to be positive, though, hence the focus on warming.
I didn't get to 10 last time I did this. The above list is all closed and marketing but let's just accept it's all 100% haskell and 100% successful and 100% brilliant.

10 is a measure of how bad the situation is. More than 10 now, GREAT! 15 is less bad than less than 10. Hey let's say it's 50! Why not? Could be. Can't find 50 myself but you'd imagine the haskell website would boost the hell out of it if there were. But hey let's say there are. Why are we not at 500? Seriously. Why not 10,000?

From the original post the point I made was there "orders of magnitude more monad tutorials than haskell applications" is a real and genuine data point and the one I made. Not anything else. If we've got over 10 now I'm thrilled about that. Really.

Apparently noting the problem this book seeks to address has hurt people's feelings.
Cynicism aside, I genuinely don't understand how the legal system works where an action may be found illegal - with no actual penalties despite organizations and persons having committed that action.
gpg symmetric encryption just derives a key from the password so theres no forward secrecy. Using bittorrent in particular opens you up to the risk of third parties getting ahold of your encrypted file and without forward secrecy the can attack the password offline which is typically much smaller that 256 bits.

Using Magic Wormhole would seem to be far more secure than gpg and bittorrent since it has less risk of third party interception and uses SPAKE2 which has perfect forward secrecy.

If I had to use bittorrent to transfer a sensitive file I would generating a random key and encrypt, then share the key over a different channel.
The dGPU is much hotter due to a no-downclocking driver bug that is worse on a chip that is more powerful, and bad software that wastes CPU cycles had more cycles to waste.
C99 added type _Bool (also called bool if you #include <stdbool.h>) -- but it doesn't actually use it much. Operators that yield logically "boolean" values (<, <=, >, >=, ==, !=, &&, ||, !) yield values of type int, not _Bool. The value is always 0 or 1 -- in contrast with isdigit(), for example, which is specified to return 0 for false and some unspecified non-zero value for true.

Converting any scalar value (that includes pointers) to _Bool yields 0 or 1 (false or true).
Standard practice is to introduce legislation to make either make it legal, or to make it more secret.
exodus

movement of jah people
Yes. I must apologize, my poor English grammar made my comment unclear: I was wondering, in case of releases of methane orders of magnitude larger and quicker than they are now, how microorganisms could possibly stop large bubbles on their way. It is clearly not the case right now.
ARM64 Performance in .NET 5
From what I see the problem is that the newer Macbooks are slimmer and have less efficient thermals. So the processors are more efficient, but the benefit gets lost by shipping them in smaller enclosures and on top of that smaller batteries.

I'd love to see the new processors and RAM in a 2015 enclosure. Makes me wonder whether someone has attempted to hack it together.
I don't think that wording is very accurate, but certainly there is a wide range of geopolitical opinion among real, legitimate HN users. There's no question about it—anyone who wants to pore over just the public history of commenters here can easily establish this. Besides that, it would be bizarre if it weren't the case. Why should the disagreements and conflicts that pervade the world somehow be absent here?

That's my point, in fact. The spectrum of legitimate opinion is much wider than people imagine it is. When they encounter views which don't belong on their much-smaller imaginary spectrum, they don't go "wow, I wonder what your background is that you would see this so differently than I do!", they go "Shill! Manipulator spy! Putin poison puppet! GRU agent!" and similar variations.

Here's another version of this comment from a few months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23867707. That was in the different context of China not Russia, but the internet dynamics in all these cases are exactly the same—which, btw, is strong evidence that they're not really about what people say they are.

I didn't say there was "no consistent astroturfing", but rather that (a) we've found no evidence of it (on geopolitical topics—corporate propaganda is a different issue) and (b) there needs to be evidence of it before taking action against it. I've been posting this for years—alas it's not clear that it has any effect. This is starting to feel a tad Sisyphean.

Are we the best at finding evidence, or even particularly qualified? How would I know? I'd never claim we were. But surely you're not arguing that we should take action without finding evidence, and the argument, "get better at finding evidence until you find the evidence that I'm sure must be there" is pretty questionable too. This way of thinking leads into the wilderness of mirrors. There are much simpler explanations for everything we see in the comments on China, Russia, unions (that one came up today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24344699) and whatever else people are battling about in HN threads.
The big problem with QI in the US is the phrase "clearly established" which has been interpreted extremely strictly to mean there needs to be a case already ruled on with essentially exactly the same circumstances sometimes tiny differences mean a cop gets away with clearly egregious conduct.

On top of that they get a chance to have the case thrown out immediately for QI reasons and if that's denied they can immediately appeal that ruling. Also the Supreme Court essentially only takes cases that grant immunity rather than stripping it meaning it's constantly getting tougher and tougher.

https://www.stltoday.com/news/national/crime-and-courts/for-...
At first I was almost outraged at how you blatantly attribute to me something that is absolutely impossible to actually extract from what I was saying, but then I read comment history of this throwaway account of yours and understood that it is pointless to try to explain you anything: you are either completely brainwashed, or trying to do some brainwashing. So, whatever.
No, we’re blessed with lots and lots of network capacity. It’s possible to have a peak demand that would saturate one of the fabrics, but our usage patterns allow us to avoid that.
Interesting view, but what would you do when Github grabs a market share, and then start to take 15% off? I am not trying to be cheeky here, legitimately curious. Microsoft isn't in the non-profit business either, and they will try to make money off anything they could.

For example, did you know that when Microsoft bought NPM, they starved NPM employees for oxygen, forcing people to quit over time, as they were unable to work on anything?

That's anecdotal, and I am simply trying to say that MS isn't charity. Maybe it's worth it to support Patreon and help them to avoid (delay, perhaps) their future predatory behavior?

I am just brainstorming here. I don't know what the right answer is.
My take on ORMs (and OOP) is that they create a harmful illusion that data is just a bunch of "objects" that can be used in some abstract "reusable" way without care for the concrete form it have to be stored (relations, indices, collections/tables) to support efficient computation.

See https://twitter.com/dpc_pw/status/1240719977071575040 for how this works in practice.
Hahaha, have you ever set up an Asterisk server? It's difficult to do right. Then you've got clients - there aren't many good SIP clients for Android, let alone free ones (CSipSimple is long abandoned)
I have a Pluggable brand switch which shares a single A via two B to A cables, I have one going to my gaming PC, and the other my Mac Mini, then I cheat a bit and have a compact 4-port hub plugged into the one shared A, which has mouse, kbd, webcam, and DAC in it. Works pretty smoothly, once in a while one machine or the other won't see one of the devices, but toggling the switch, or re-plugging the hub always perks things back up.
Given that non-conforming A-to-A cables have existed since very early in USB's life I'd be surprised if the vast majority of host devices didn't have protection against this.
Now, to be fair, one place I might agree with such a program is for picking up people for public intoxication. If the police respond, the person is likely to be uncooperative and/or hostile because they expect to get arrested, but perhaps if we have someone taking them to get medical care (and help them into rehab) some of this hostility would be avoided and we might not end up with people overdosing on drugs dying in police custody.
There need to be real consequences for this kind of nonsense for people.

Liberal estimate of missed earnings multiplied by 10 paid to the victim. Some fininte number of offences before the CEO spends a fortnight in jail. Computers are not and should not be a shield for taking full responsibility.
An org is made up of people. You can't punish an org without punishing people. So you have to decide who to punish. Do you punish the entire population by removing an org that is there to protect them? Or do you punish the individuals inside and outside of the org that are responsible for making those bad decisions?