skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The major reason to have separate import paths is to support multiple major versions of the same module, which is important to not end up stuck in situations where package A wants dep D1 and package B wants dep D2, and you can't fix it.

Of course, you could handle this w/ more complexity in the package manager/build system, but having separate import paths makes it very clear, and is a very "Go"ish solution.

Since you're only doing this when you've got breaking changes coming in anyway, i.e., you've already got to fix the code, is it really such a big deal to update the import paths while you're at it? It's like a 2 second grep/replace...

That said, having Go tell you about major version upgrades available, and also an option to fix the code to use the upgraded versions import path, are good ideas.
The downvotes should be sufficient, but I think you are misinformed if you think the modern right’s perspective is the same as the 60’s right.

I don’t know anything about the perceived violence of MLK- but three quotes are in my brain on him:

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

“Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”

“We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools.”

His legacy is his ideas- not the lens through which they were perceived. He had success because his ideas were compassionate and strong. A YouTube video that tries to slap a narrative on how he was perceived then to justify your current bigotry is irrelevant compared to the quality of his ideas.
Seems like this was just wrong.

Bill gates was never really that visionary about products, but was a great businessman.

Ballmer was neither.

Steve Jobs was a visionary in many ways, one of which was to understand that the company needed to become a machine that could outlive him not merely by appointing Tim Cook.

He spoke about this at various times. He said his finest product was apple itself.

I’m not saying they won’t fail, but I am saying that Jobs was aware of the problem and intentionally built the company to function without a line visionary CEO.
The underlying problem is hard. I’m not aware of any packaging system that isn’t a mess.

Not making apologetics here, I just don’t know what a good package system looks like.
> How do you know that they will become poor if not for your action?

Here's a simple example. A mine closes down. You can start giving the ex-miners money on an ongoing basis to let them keep paying their bills, maybe. Or you could fund training for them to learn a new career.

How do you know they will become poor if you don't fund the training? You don't. Maybe they would have managed to change careers anyway. But chances are you are in fact helping people avoid poverty.

> If you need to do this over and over again, and we're talking about just that,

Ah, maybe this is the disconnect. No, we are precisely _not_ talking about doing this over and over again for any given person.

Or put another way, this is the "give a man a fish vs teach a man to fish" thing. The latter, if it's an option, seems evidently better to me.
Imagine being this much of an Elon Musk bootlicker that you completely miss that 90% of his wealth is from a leveraged stock bubble
When a (former) head of Government is calling your personal phone number I think you're entitled to want more than 280 characters to tell the story of how the hell that happened.
This is just an anecdote, but when I was called up as first-time juror, I was surprised how much the police and the prosecuting attorney were pushing for something that just wasn't there.

Incentives are everything, and these groups of people get paid to put people in jail. And it shows.
> a common argument that schools should focus on pragmatism and working with what they have - the age-old argument that free software still is not accessible or easy to use

Ah yes, the "people use calculators in the real world so long division is a waste of time" argument
That has several reasons. I will explain why your approach didn't work.

1: (source) Social media is doing reinforcement learning on their "lab rats". This is true for all the social media platforms. It's not like you read one fake news article, you see them non-stop: your world becomes fake news. Just like how YouTube keeps playing the same type of content. Facebook and Twitter do the same thing. Good for engagement ($), not good for society.

2: (psychology) The way the human belief system works, is to try to find evidence in favor of your own beliefs (not against). Social media reinforces your existing belief system: your political, religious but also conspiracy beliefs. Our ego doesn't like to be wrong, we like to be right (see heated debated about adults discussing religion for example). Humans aren't particular open-minded by nature, this sometimes includes scientists. This is human psychology at work.

3: (state sponsored, large budget) There are large botnets spreading fake news: including deep fakes, bogus scientific articles, using famous figures etc. It's very sophisticated psychological warfare: a day-time job for many. For instance, the son of President Kennedy made a speech about mass surveillance (facts), but in doing so he supported the whole conspiracy scene. But AI botnets spreading fake news is something many governments do. Like all mass media news, it plays on the sub-conscious level (fear), not the logical level. The entire goal of media (news) is to manipulate, not inform. Social media is just better at manipulation.

4: (propaganda effect) Like any propaganda, it's mixed with reality: stories of Epstein, Bill Clinton, Climate Change etc. This makes it more difficult to disprove a story.

4: (the effect) For any system (including the human brain): garbage in, garbage out. Watch this junk to long, and you start to become crazy yourself. Yes, even you yourself can be manipulated by social media + AI botnets. In fact, entire countries are manipulated using social media (cambridge analytica didn't stop it, see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24474343 ).

5: (why) From Zen Tsu quote "The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting."

Think about it: Who benefits from "defund the police", "overthrow the government", riots in the street, "bill gates wants to kill the world" etc ?

The technique is called subversion and was designed in the Soviet Union. You can watch the historic presentations by Yuri Bezmenov: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yErKTVdETpw

Subversion didn't stop, it just evolved into the digital sphere. Now combined with AI and reinforcement machines (social networks).

Probably this answer could have been shorter, but I'm to tired to write fewer words.
I'd love to share, thanks!

My background is as an application developer (RoR, React, Python) and fell in love with machine learning. I wanted to use ML at the startups I worked at but with everything involved it would become a bigger project than anticipated and fall out of priority.

The aim with Deepserve.ai is to make shorten the cycle enough that you could train and deploy a prototype model in a day and a production ready model in a week (if you had the data ready).

I am actually still part time and bootstrapped — I spend a few hours a day hacking on the platform and am starting to market to ML practitioners and sales into enterprise. It's definitely a lot of context switching — from React to CLI writing to AWS devops to marketing.

My aim is to be profitable out of the gate by having pricing with sufficient margin over my underlying compute cost. I'll definitely be more expensive than doing it yourself — but the point is that you don't have to do it.

If you launch your startup, definitely reach out, I'd love to add AI to your product! And if you want any advice on your startup, I'd love to connect, this is my third startup and I've had a couple of successful exits so might have some ideas!
I think the elephant in the room for this study is the high bullshit scores of immigrants. If you're a non-native language speaker and someone asks if you understand something, you're probably used to having to figure it out offline - but you might say "yes" anyway, for a myriad of reasons.

Something I find disingenuous in this study is the failure to follow up on competency. "High bullshit index" individuals claim with higher frequency to be able to calculate the petrol consumption of a car, and are confident in their popularity. Are they wrong? Immigrants are more likely to bullshit when they are confronted with language they don't understand - but they are also highly experienced at figuring out things they don't understand after the fact.

I found it queer that the tasks asked about where relatively mathematical, and the domain they used to measure bullshit was also mathematical... if the checklist of "could you find the gcd of two numbers" "could you find all the complex roots of this polynomial" etc. were interpreted as "if you were prompted (in good faith) on a homework assignment to do this task, are you confident you could do it?" (this is a much more ecologically valid situation than being asked to do something meaningless or impossible), then the answer learned through hard experience might correctly be "yes", despite the respondent "not actually knowing what they were talking about".

Food for thought anyway. I think the article takes an exceptionally otherizing stance towards would be bullshitters. (And uses some... hopefully ironic? ... rhetoric. "We all know a bullshitter" is the classic fallacy of appealing to popular belief).
You do seem to be an expert in 'propaganda'. North America is the same as South America, because they both have America in the name, right? And I pay taxes on my Costa Rican subsidiary in Costa Rica...so Costa Rica owns the United States, right?

Do tell us about those 'consequences' your threatening. Gonna send us to one of your concentration camps out West for 'reeducation'?

Just...sad.
> very long winded insufferable hooting about finding the passport number

Did you read the whole thing? Also included were phone number, notes from airline staff.

> is that still a big security hole?

To quote the article:

> Just having the information on the passport is not quite as powerful as a photo of the full physical passport, with your photo and everything.

> With your passport number, someone could:
> - Book an international flight as you
> - Apply for anything that requires proof of identity documentation with the government, e.g. Working with children check
> - Activate a SIM card (and so get an internet connection that’s traceable to you, not them, hiding them from the government)

.. and then it had a couple more points.

> could have been one tweet though

And then you'd miss the whole story about informing government security and Qantas of the flaws (difficult apparently), tracking down the staff of the ex-Prime Minister of Australia, and then finally getting a call from the man himself. Might not be your cup of tea, but not 'click-bait'. The author put a lot of effort, and told a really interesting story.
We blame these social networks for collecting vast amounts of our private data (yes we should), yet these folk have no problem of posting already sensitive information under a hashtag - creating an Aladdin's cave of identities waiting to be stolen for fraud as this blog-post has demonstrated.

'If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place' - Eric Schmidt

I guess they will learn the hard way given that they aren't really 'tech savvy' or internet wise these days.
> existential threat

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/2020/6/23/21293875/internet...

"it only asks for a halt to the practice of copying books for loan in the Open Library itself, not the entire IA"

"the lawsuit takes pains to clarify that the publishers aren’t trying to shut down the rest of the Internet Archive"

"the lawsuit seeks financial damages only for the sharing of 127 books under copyright"

"the most the Internet Archive would have to pay would be $19 million — essentially equivalent to one year of operating revenue, according to IA tax documents. That’s a huge setback, but for the IA, a tech nonprofit that relies heavily on grants and public donations, it’s not the major death blow it might seem to be."
Trades are not all selfish. A person trades selfishly if they are trying to get some benefit for themselves. Trying to benefit only other people is not selfish.

Every rational choice is made based on some personal values. A person with unselfish personal values can take action on those values. Do you think their action occurs because of their selfishness?

Are all rational actions selfish?

I think that is not a useful way to think.
This compact is a great idea, but unfortunately it doesn't interact well with other reforms like Ranked Choice Voting where voters can express their opinions on multiple candidates (if they chose to).

One solution would be to allow candidates who are eliminated at the national aggregation stage to specify who their votes should be reassigned to. That at least solves the problem of spoiler candidates, as long as the voter trusts their (third party) candidate to reassign their support correctly.

Another possible improvement would have been for the compact to elect not the popular vote winner, but the candidate who would have won if each state had assigned their electors in proportion to the popular vote within that state itself. This more incremental approach would avoid the objection that the electoral college "correctly" boosts the voting weight of people in smaller states.
Hirundo is a Branch Elonian. His religion stipulates that failing to promote Elon whenever posssible is grounds for shunning.
Fintech companies often do take deposits in the short term. People have balances with PayPal, which could potentially go bust or be looted. There's no deposit insurance.

Classical money transfer companies like Western Union don't hold money very long, days at most. But PayPal, Venmo, etc. do.
Apart from the really interesting content, this is an extremely good read, strikes me as the right kind of balance of information and keeping you entertained. I really enjoyed this writing style!
Does it concern you that GPT-3 will make up quotes and citations? That it will autocomplete both sides of an argument?

The only reason GPT-3 sometimes gets facts right is that it was trained on Wikipedia. It will be as inconsistent as its input.
Igalia are a co-operative of engineers and others working on Free Software & Open Source projects:

https://www.igalia.com/
We're the same, our parents tell us things we feel are "breathtaking" and super confused.

The other thing I'm starting to realize is that a lot of people are falling for more "comfortable" ideas.

Like I think honestly that it's easier to believe the Corona virus is less severe or even a hoax because if you can make that leap, you feel better about it.

Exactly the same for climate change. If you don't like the idea that we're destroying our future, well you can just choose that it's not real.

On a side note, Facebook was constantly hounding me to come work there, I didn't and personally, I'm really really glad I didn't, even though so many of my friends made good financially from working there.
I can't downvote you but I would if I could. The reason republicans/conservatives believe more in conspiracy theories is because part of their group ideology has become being mistrustful of authority (established media, tech and science). This can lead a higher percentage of their population into some pretty hopeless beliefs but sometimes I can't blame them, seeing the utter foolery of many elites in science and technology (and the media) thinking that by erasing tried and true institutions they can magically make society function better than the most successful set of ideologies ever to have happened to humankind (innocent until proven guilty, freedom of speech, free market, etc). Generalizations like the one you made above merit downvotes. There are more reasons to be conservative than those conspiracy theories.

I am slowly coming to believe established media is the worst culprit of all. If everything I see on the major networks (Times, CNN, etc) that a generation ago provided clear journalism and now simply proclaim that tearing down institutions is the only way forward - where am I to go if I don't buy the propaganda? There is a truth power vacuum at play here because no one is willing to give up their ridiculous partisan hackery.
Yeah, it was a bit yikes.
Not sure why you're being downvoted, you actually do have a good point... I guess people are uncomfortable with directly acknowledging that social programs are funded by "donations" that are taken by force (i.e. taxes).
When he made the donations it was not the case that everyone knew he did, yes?

The fact that he's effectively been doxxed on the donations does mean it's no longer anonymous, yes.
I haven't studied the original text myself, but I believe that #1 is slightly off. It's not necessary to do the charitable action before a person becomes impoverished. Rather, the idea is that:

a) teaching a man to fish is better than giving a man a fish

b) the former is also more dignified for the person receiving help

This applies whether a person is going to become impoverished or is currently poor. And this idea of dignity is strong enough that it outweighs other considerations, such as anonymity on either side (of course, there's the question of whether giving someone a job anonymously is better than doing it with one or both parties' knowledge... and I don't know what Maimonides would have said).
What's wrong with leaving your wealth to your offspring?

What I find sickening is people trying to meddle in other people's pockets.
Show HN: dSock – Distributed WebSocket Broker
Dropped using Luxon when I couldn't easily chain like moment.js.

moment.js's API is intuitive and I have been using Dayjs and it has been doing great.
> Remove the Solaris and SPARC Ports

https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/381

Wow this is the end of an era.
At first I was surprised that he didn’t mention companies that interview many candidates endlessly and never actually intend to hire. But then I realized, he was the other side of that.
Find a better company (and let me know how you managed it).
It does kind of suck. But it’s better than npm... or rubygems... or the python ecosystem... hmm, what language’s package management system doesn’t suck?
I asked my mom (native Serbian speaker) and she said she's not heard of it as a proverb, and some Googling reveals that native Serbians are confused why foreigners seem to attribute it to us[1]. I also weirdly found a lot of questions on Quora and Yahoo answers asking for people to translate it to Serbian -- which explains why the proverb sounds slightly strange when read in Serbian. My guess is that this is actually some recent English proverb which someone decided to attribute to us (though it is neat that "zemlje" and "zvezda" do have a certain kind of rhyme).

[1]: https://www.svetnauke.org/95-srpska-poslovica
The system was, by its very nature, not ready for production. That's why it had a safety driver in the first place. It's crazy to argue that the safety driver should have been alerted...the whole point they're there is to handle failures of the system, including ones where the system fails to detect an issue.

If my skydive instructor doesn't deploy the backup parachute because I, the student, didn't alert them that the primary chute failed to deploy, it's entirely their fault if we hit the ground at terminal velocity.

If a lifeguard is working at a public pool watching Netflix on their phone and a kid drowns, you can't argue that the kid should have splashed more.
Is it really? Seemed to be more of an ironic point.
It's kind of a weird escalation -- steps 8->2 incrementally make sense (the more anonymized you are, the 'better'). But then the difference between step 2 and step 1 is totally different, the distinction is no longer anonymity, but some measure of efficacy of the support.
I remember request.js being "done" as of late.
Did we watch the same video?

"Every tingly spidey sense, every sniff, every whiff, smells like global warming—which they now call climate change, in case they want to go the other way and say it's colder—but it just reeks of fuckin' bullshit to me. And yet, in good conscience, we can't really come out and say it's bullshit, because there isn't enough information to really refute it completely. And there is some information that it might be real.

So—the high-dea is not to go with your gut, the idea is to go with your head, and our heads can't say that global warming is complete and utter bullshit. So we're doing—again, this is like our third show that's kind of sort of on global warming—we're kind of picking out one area that we're sure is bullshit, and that is the carbon credits, the spending money so that your guilt goes away. Buying a forgiveness."

I see proper intellectual restraint about the science, and criticism of one particular policy proposal.
Should be the opposite. Companies would be incentivized to reduce risk if they alone face it.

Consumers don’t have any real information on the risk between a Waymo or a Tesla. So they aren’t in a position to mitigate.

Further, you’d incentive the car companies to cut corners since someone else would pay for it.

We don’t even need a new legal framework for it. We could just apply products liability law.
I once had a manager try to hire me back from another position:

'Look you will be overworked and underpaid, but you will get to do really cool hands on things here.."

I appreciated the honesty.
>we must remind ourselves that this is unimpressive compared to the poor person who donates $25 to others while starving herself

While it is truly selfless, I'm not sure what is __really__ harder; for a person living a multi-billion-dollar lifestyle to change to a million-dollar lifestyle, or someone who is used to living on the penny, to give away most of what they have....
I think most of the frustration I have seen comes from people expecting symmetry and uniformity in the vendor/package management solution. This is the same way some looking at an architecture diagram expects clean straight lines or aligned boundaries.

That said, Go team should have made it clear right in the title (for all blog posts) that they are attempting a unique non-intuitive solution to a hard problem of transition from 'no-versioned' world of existing packages to 'semver' and the explicit desire for force people to avoid versioning if they can (just like the old days). There is nothing wrong with weird solutions. We don't have to follow Rust or Ruby or npm. Their situation is different.

Of course then the protobuf or grpc team (I forget which one) went and created a new "v2" without the "v2" suffix and that pissed a few people off. Of course that was still within the reasoning Russ explained (it was a reimplementation and domain part of the URL already changed, so there was no need to add v2), and Russ probably doesn't control the particular package's team. But that is life! People still expect perfection from opensource projects.
> 10. When the donation gives you favors in return.

What if the "favor in return" is a reward after death? For a lot of people of faith, their motivation to donate is often post-resurrection reward... (The Bible is fairly against this attitude though. As Jesus for instance says "But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing" -- https://www.bible.com/bible/59/MAT.6.3.ESV ; and the general message seems to be that everything you have is a gift from God, so you're actually only just giving away what you've been gifted.)
Safety driver in fatal Arizona Uber self-driving car crash charged with homicide
I think that's sometimes just specs preening.

The US answer to the Spectrum was called the Timex/Sinclair 2068 and advertised as a 72k machine (48k RAM/32k ROM)