skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That may be true but it does not address the kinds of large-scale, national policy issues Schmidt is talking about. We have lost our way in technology strategy. Instead of welcoming foreign students we chase them away. Instead of integrating tech markets globally to extend our soft power, we practice knee jerk techno-nationalism. It is not even done competently. The "advisors" pushing these policies are known for being cranks. The utter mess that is the TikTok forced sale highlights that we do not have policy as much as we have bad improvisation around spastic uninformed actions.

We have always had seemingly invulnerable dominant tech companies. Remember Intel? Their dominance was seen as holding down chip innovation, but it was also an instrument of American soft power. The latter is what Schmidt is talking about.
> No idea idea if the stories in the book were real or made up.

Hmmm. "If you don't behave, we'll give you to the Orcas..." sounds like the kind of thing some pissed off parents would tell their kids.
I haven't written a huge amount of Rust, but I feel like I understand it well enough to not have much of an issue with this. It seems like what Rust really want you to think about is not so much memory management directly, but ownership.

Linked lists? Rust just really doesn't like them. Better to use something else instead. I can't remember ever wanting to use a linked list in a program I've written though. I think you could argue that it's tough to write a linked list implementation that really never leaks memory without a GC.

Threads? I'd argue that the stuff that Rust prevents are usually real bugs. You might not hit those bugs right away, especially in a language with a GIL, but they're there. Better to know they'll just never happen, no matter how hard you push your threads.

For async, I guess I've had good luck with it so far. I still feel like I don't really understand what's going on with Rust async and runtimes, but most of the code I've written with it just works.
Orcas and sharks are after fat. Whales, seals, pinguins are great. Humans are too skiny.
This is obviously a massive topic, but from my vantage as a foreigner living in Europe is that Europe already has (and pays for) all features of a federal government with two exceptions.

* Responsibility to implement treaties remains with the individual members.
* No ability to tax or set fiscal policy.

The advantage of a single set of laws is obvious. For starters I wouldn't be spending my Sunday reading a 500 page document on minor items describing how Denmark's implementation of an EU treaty differs from the treaty's wording. (Although it would cost the jobs of the people who produce such documents, and as such would fly in the face of the one central pillar of paneuropean identity).

The ability to tax and set fiscal policy is needed to offset the imbalance created by the single currency. Another lengthy topic, but basically the assumption that every EU member should "export" is simply impossible. A normal currency system would correct a trade imbalance automatically. The euro systematically undervalues the cost of German output buy forcing their European neighbors to transact in the same currency.

And then you have mafias, bankers, tax havens, uneven social nets, and a raft of other social problems that can only effectively be dealt with by a central government. The irony should not be lost that the American government has had better success battling the Italian mafia than the Italians have.
There is so much more to 9/11 for me than the day of 9/11
All continents rest on tectonic plates, which kind of rest on the liquid core and are moving around on it. Let enough time pass, and the plates will move around, and the continents with them.

Check out this image of the plates: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics#/media/File:Pl...
How to get the emails you send past the spam folder
You do have to lift from earth gravity since there's no fuel on the moon. Even if there were, 1/6 earth's gravity makes lifting easier but not two hundred thousand times easier.
I used to think so, when I was single and working more than I should. But, I have a one year old at home now, and I’d give anything to reduce stress elsewhere and spend more time with him. He is growing so fast right in front of our eyes, and I do not want to miss these moments in our lives.

Of course, I’m not talking about slacking to the job to use family time. I’d like to work in a low stress environment and shut work off when I need to. Interview prep demands me to spend a lot of hours on toy problems in leetcode which of course I can’t do at my work time. So, I decided to not do it, atleast now.
https://research.google/
Problem is, it's almost impossible to know unless you're there. Companies that are dependent on financing might not get financing if loud short sellers are able to change the narrative, and then fail to achieve goals that would be achievable if investors were on board.
I don't know enough history to know concrete candidates, but I'd be very surprised if no company had ever been stopped from achieving a good trajectory by short sellers and other naysayers changing the perceptions of investors. Yes, there is a value in short selling as a market mechanism to detect fraud and correct incorrecly priced companies, but it's naïve to think it doesn't also incentivize destruction of initiatives that are actually valuable.

I did follow the short campaign against Tesla closely from 2014-2018. And that project was vicious. I could easily see it toppling a less-financed company, or one where the quality of their engineering was less obvious. And trust me, although things might look black and white in retrospect, there was nothing obvious about Tesla's success in 2014. The indications were pretty clear if you followed it closely, but this reality was in very sharp contrast with the narrative. I believe it was a closer call than most would believe in reterospect.

Comparisons with Nikola nonwithstanding, I believe you're wrong about loud short sellers in general not being able to destroy the prospects of a company that would succeed in their absence.
That's the first error of the objectivists. Mistaking "blue" as a property of the sky.

Color happens in your head.

That is why trichromacy, tetrachromacy, pentachromacy, dodecachromacy etc. is a thing.
1) Some people don't share your passion for software. They consider this like just another job, they are not interested in improvement as long as they can do daily programming tasks. That's ok.

2) It's not enough that an idea makes sense to you to communicate it. People usually hate changes, you need to understand all the details before opening your mouth.

3) I remember many a-ha moments regarding how the Internet works while reading "Computer networks" by A. Tanembaum.

4) When I was finally able to exit vim.
so you're saying to avoid biases, we should have a diverse and inclusive set of interviewers that can counter each others' blind spots.

And that meritocracy on its own cannot work because everyone is biased in one way or another. Got it.
The office model is based on the factory model, which was constrained by the need to have people, machinery, and raw materials in the same location.

Offices don't require that. All the soft benefits - water cooler chats, and so on - are balanced by disbenefits of expensive commutes and even more expensive real estate.

So the experience becomes a lot more individual. Some people are happy, others aren't.

Since most corps care more about productivity and costs than happiness, the final decision will be made by the cost savings.

If productivity drops by (maybe) 20% while costs drop by (maybe) 50%, it's likely wfh will become much more of a thing.

Some corps are already giving up on centralised office space - either permanently, or in the hope they can run remote for a year or two and renegotiate much lower rents and/or ownerships costs then.

Of course this assumes the (maybe) 20% productivity costs won't be cumulative. But given the insane costs of office space, I suspect we'll see a lot of corps trying the experiment and attempting to make the best of it.

So IMO anyone who is expecting things to go back to "normal" soon is going to be waiting at least a couple of years, and possibly forever - and should make plans accordingly. This applies equally to everyone, from CEOs to interns to freelancers.
Thank you so much for the effort you put into this comment and of course the content.
Googling for Gut Symptoms Predicts Covid Hot Spots
Nikola's refutation says that "an activist short-seller whose motivation is to manipulate the market and profit from a manufactured decline in our stock price published a so-called “report” replete with misleading information and salacious accusations directed at our founder and executive chairman. To be clear, this was not a research report and it is not accurate. This was a hit job for short sale profit driven by greed."

It seems clear that they are right that the report is driven by "greed" and "short sale profit", and that the goal is drive down their stock price. The more important question, though, would seem to be whether the accusations are true. Are there any Nikola supporters here who can debunk any of the bullet points at the top of the Hindenburg report: https://hindenburgresearch.com/nikola/.

Conclusively refuting any of them would be useful, but the most important ones to me are the ones involving their demos. Did they lie to the public about the functionality of their vehicles at the time? Or did they merely mislead the public with language like "in motion" and "cruising" to describe a truck rolling down a natural incline? Does that distinction matter to you, or only as relates to potential SEC action?

(I'm currently holding some puts that I bought---slightly too late to be profitable yet---as a result of Hindenburg's report, making me effectively short NKLA)
Not to deride the post, but if you’re willing to carry your smartphone and a feature-phone, wouldn’t it be about the same to carry your smartphone and a power-bank / battery-case of equivalent weight to said feature-phone?
For optimizations, the compilers do much work for you now. So it's not like it's not done anymore, it's done in another way. I myself stopped handcrafting assembler when I noticed that GCC beaten me 9 times out of 10 :-)
A single member LLC dopes not have to file a tax return - same as a sole proprietorship. Unless there is a partnership, or you need to have some sort of corporate veil for legal reasons, then there is little value in an LLC if a sole owner.
Actually it originated in a joint venture of Apple, VLSI Technology, and Acorn.
I'd like to invite you to come up with a strategy to counter meritocracy bias to make it "fair" for everyone. What would your strategy be?
I use an old Moto E4 as my "entertainment center". I just removed all the extra apps I've installed over the months of usage, kept only Spotify, Google Podcasts, and the Action Blocks apps.

The phone is always connected to wifi and a Bluetooth speaker. ALL notifications are off so when I fire it to play a podcast or song, nothing interrupts me.

Also, I use this phone as my alarm clock. Using my daily driver phone was problematic as I usually end up opening facebook/twitter/reddit when I wake and wasting valuable time. The Moto E has none of those.
What's happening in California is exactly what critics of the law said would happen. I don't find arguments that problems created by government can only be fixed by more government to be very persuasive.

Besides, why can't consenting adults simply agree to whatever employment relationships they want?
Not sure what the 3310 3G runs, but if it's series 40 it has a lot of annoying bugs. One of them being that removing the headphone jack doesn't pause the music but actually continues playing the music on the stereo. I tried using an earlier Nokia feature phone but that drove me nuts, together with some odd quirks.
How can you make it stop spinning?
IMO this is a big difference: I'd actually feel quit bad about becoming rich off th back oef a technology or innovation that I could have made more open and widely available.
I’m not sure I follow. What do you mean with mostly permanent? A period of bad sleep can surely be devastating, but will it really mean you’re damaged for life just because of that…?
> What happens in practice is the interviewer compares candidates answers to each other, not to his/her own way of solving it.

I think that's _ideally_ what happens in practice. But as sibling comments mention, is that what happens in practice?

Interview fatigue is very real. Many interviewers are not positively incentivized to put in the substantial amount of effort to conduct a quality interview. It's something that is simply thrown on top of their usual workload. Come promotion time, there's no reward for doing it well. But, there is punishment for noticeably "screwing it up". Often, that means that interviewers put in the bare minimum effort with interviewing (as with other tasks) to not get punished.

I've seen competent leaders avoid this in the past by emphasizing that interviewing is the most highly leveraged thing you can do for your organization and your own career, because you are step-function increasing the effectiveness and capability of your own team if you do it right. But in order for that to happen, there needs to be a real culture of working as a team and not just a disembodied group of ICs: a culture which rewards increasing the effectiveness of the team (instead of merely focusing on ones own tasks) and doesn't just pay lip service to it. It's tricky. But I think the subthread GP's approach is a clever and creative kind of a lateral thinking that shows how to do just that.
States can tax income in their own state even corporate tax.
Maybe this particular study, but I have to say I believe it in general.

I remember working for a manufacturing company where I drove a forklift (during the summer).

One of my most vivid memories is walking into the breakroom and seeing on the television a scrolling banner that declared homosexual couples were less likely to have children than heterosexual couples.

And I remember everyone in that room laughing their asses off. And it's not as if no one in that room realized the reason for the study was so they could take into account things like adoption, etc. It's that the result was so obvious, even taking that into account, that it was amazing that someone was PAID to come to a conclusion that everyone knew without the money.

And this is the crux of the problem with "science". It wants to be "interesting", so it will literally try to drum up something against what "everyone knows".

So the idea that what everyone over generations "knows" is generally more applicable than "science" is not surprising at all.
Erich Schmidt and BBC are dog whistling.

What the Western elites envy, the "dropped ball" and "innovation", is the CCP's "AI" assisted total grip on the Chinese society. It is true: CCP is free of ethical and moral considerations that we have been told for generations are 'foundational' to Western civilization, and thus has been free to "innovate" and materialize Big Brother with Chinese Characteristics.

We could be having an honest debate about the merits of (apparently now legacy) moral and ethical guidelines that supposedly shaped our society, and whether these foundational principles are in fact a "hinderance" to "innovation" and "progress". Two centuries of exceptional development in the West seem to indicate otherwise, but apparently the control freaks behind "Alphabet" are not convinced.
As a big Haskell fan I love laziness and completely disagree with otabdeveloper4. On the other hand, others are entitled to their beliefs and opinions. Even if we think otabdeveloper4's assertion was false I don't think it needs any response as it wasn't an invitation to discussion. I think the Haskell community will come off far better if we avoid petty spats.
Your short anecdote is usually the story of shorts that turn out to be successful. Usually it's a solid company outwardly, maybe a few years less than the grandees like Microsoft and IBM, but on strong footing, but as you look deep inside, you'll find a lot of dirt hidden in muddy waters (pun intended).

On the other hand, there are firms like Tesla or Facebook, which have been shorted by a lot of investors, including traditional HF bulwarks like David Einhorn or Jim Chanos, but the firms don't move down because the shorts are often grounded in misguided perception, bias and despise rather than actual facts and data.

Shorts are actually a very reasonable way to put tabs on companies and essentially threaten them to do things right. Where they have failed is when big companies like Facebook can essentially buy their way out of justice from nasty situations (as happened with the Cambridge analytica scandal), thus rendering the short ineffective against companies with large warchests.

Say Tesla actively defrauded investors early on by claiming too lofty things about tech (like an unreasonably effective battery or something). In its early stages, a short against such a situation would have been devastating. As it turned out, they never defrauded and hence they are a sizeable enterprise now and have reached critical mass (and can actively claim stuff about their self-driving cars that need not be true).
The Airborne Wind Energy section is general, and discusses energy kite performance in a broad way - the tether drag was well predicted and wasn't a surprise for our prototype.

The inability to turn the necessary tight paths and some degraded aero performance are responsible for most of the performance miss. Also hugely concerning was the struggle to saturate power at high winds.

It is important to separate and highlight tether drag in the context of the purported big benefit of airborne wind turbines accessing higher, faster winds. While they do indeed access higher winds, they do so via tether length and elevation angle, both of which carry losses. The net effect in almost all scenarios isn't a win.
Serious question: Did someone ever find an exploitable bug in software written in something more safe than C/C++? Remote shells in Java, C#, Rust, Go, Haskell?
> Some orca at some point in time would've realized it and eaten a human, yet that hasn't happened.

There are no known attacks on humans, that doesn't mean that is hasn't happened. Orcas are generally not hunting where humans swim, and they aren't going to capsize a freighter. Plus there's better food in the water, and it's more frequent. An orca, or a family of orcas that would specialize on hunting humans would starve. We don't swim in the open sea a lot, they don't walk through towns a lot.

I believe you're over-estimating their intelligence.
Are all books comparable linearly like this though? I could see separate stack ranks for different genres (practical books, sci-fi, relationships, whatever), attributes (readability, teachability if applicable, subject matter interest), or more.

I also can't help but think in graphs, so I could also see horizontal-ish linkages between the stacks as well. Each book, then, could have a number of attributes that get an independent stack ranking for each one, leaving you with a constellation score as well as a focused look at what the book is good at or focused on. I could see it getting unwieldy though.

Thinking through this, maybe genre stacks based on some collapse of attribute ranking scores.
Life is fleeting.
But Chinese xenophobia is not American style. Sure they lack immigration but so many Chinese travel outside for education and business that they are in fact hyper aware of cultural differences and are upskilling themselves en masse in dealing with various cultures. They bring that skill back home to build companies and sub cultures that ape the best of other countries.

This is very unlike US style xenophobia where Murica number 1 and anything about foreigners sucks.
Look how many C library functions implicitly call strlen() internally.

Also, look at functions like sscanf(). It can be orders of magnitude slower than fscanf() because every invocation calls strlen while fscanf incrementally reads from the current file pointer. I don't know why sscanf doesn't also work incrementally but the implementations I've tested don't do that.

The main point here being: if strings had a size_t size plus data, that would change an O(n) scan to an O(1) length lookup, and that would have huge performance gains throughout the C library, not to mention your own code as well.
Smearing his current company based on his past makes the short case less trust worthy
Their space launch business will fail hard if the launch market doesn't pick up soon - all their investor presentations and financial forecasts assume 50 launches a year, yet the reality so far this year is only ~5 actual paid launches from external customers.

For starlink, I could imagine 75% of the world banning it simply because the network is run by a foreign company. Governments want to keep infrastructure locally owned and controlled. North America is a tiny fraction of the service area, and the only big funding sources on offer are the US government for serving rural communities, and the US government for military use worldwide.

If both those fall through, starlink will fail. If starlink fails and the launch market doesn't pick up, SpaceX will fail.
> No interruptions from IMs, SMS, Facebook, Linked In, Slack, GCN, Ring, Nest, Apple+, Farmville, Solitaire, or any other application that thinks it must get a hold of your attention

Unwanted notifications are not a vice like snacking or the like where obviously you get some endorphins every time you do it and therefore you can get addicted, and thus it makes sense to "restrict access to sources of food" when you are trying to avoid it (e.g. self-control issues).

No. _Unwanted_ notifications is something that is by definition not possible to get addicted to, so I really don't get this point of view.

Just turn them off, dammit. Like you can in any operating system ever designed (so far) and then they are off. There's no need to go around fishing for a device which has no support for notifications.

But I've seen a shitton of people saying they prefer this "dumbed down" device or the like for precisely this reason, which is absurd. Battery life, I get. Less maintenance, I might get. But "avoiding notifications", I don't get.

I have a cheap no-name Android device as bed-side alarm clock since they are actually _cheaper_ than (off-shelf) bed-side alarm clocks and I can write my own alarm clock program for them (a big plus). I put it on Don't disturb mode the day I booted it for the first time. Never got a notification. Never woke me up in the middle of the night (unwantedly ;P ).
I don't think you understand how contracting works.

If I contract you, and your subcontractor messes up, I don't complain to the subtractor, I complain to you. It's up to you whether you complain to the subtractor or just get it fixed.

There's no issue with 'they can all point to mysterious third-parties'. That just isn't how contract law works. You’re responsible for the work of all your subcontractors.

> but without informing you

They do inform you. It's completely normal and works fine. The top-level contractor is often explicitly called the 'prime contractor' with the expectation they'll do the work of finding other contractors for you. It's not a scam it's useful to consumers. I don’t want to find and manage ten different contractors - I want just one person to complain to.
Of course there are link farms etc, but that doesn't mean the "Google search is controlled by large (Chinese) botnets". That's like saying email is controlled by spammers. There are countermeasures.
>My understanding was that Uber lost money on each ride, right?

AFAIK in mature markets they made a profit
Japan has a firewall?