skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Do you have any citations explaining this in more detail, perhaps with some argument supporting intent or collaboration? I ask because it directly conflicts with everything I've seen about the economics arising from the fundamental physics of chemical engineering. To whit:

I do not, but I mingled a lot with EV engineers from BYD, with some of whom I used to spend Fridays.

> the cost of using a tanker full of benzene is 5% the benzene itself and 95% safety measures, regulatory compliance, purpose-built equipment, and specially-trained employees.

The cost of benzene is 50% and more tax in most Western countries.

> The chemical engineering department at my university was full of extremely bright people working on incredibly complex machinery

Indeed it is, but there are far more harder to synthesize, and work with chemicals sold at single digit margins, largely thanks to Chinese factories steamrolling chem monopolies for the last 2 decades.

And battery materials are by far not that tricky to make.
From the HN Guidelines: "Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community."

Oh, and I think you meant "There are two articles".
Yes, I think there was terminology confusion (terminology in this space can be a real dumpster fire - you don't want to know how many different things are called "widget").

I don't have very strong feelings either way about stream-based computation. I am skeptical that using them as a primary primitive for building UI is going to work out well. Things are nice in the static case, but it seems to break down a bit when there's dynamic reconfiguration. Evan Czaplicki has given good talks on his evolution away from purist FRP. It's also interesting to compare the original Elm thesis[1] with the farewell[2].

That said, I think it's a super-interesting experiment to try to integrate these ideas with the Crochet architecture and see how it turns out.

[1]: https://people.seas.harvard.edu/~chong/pubs/pldi13-elm.pdf

[2]: https://elm-lang.org/news/farewell-to-frp
Yes. Before that it was mainframes and those who had access to $ who had access to computing.
If you're caching data, you now have stored state and it's no longer a pure data transformation. You will run into these performance problems with any large data set, not just blocks of text.
Here is the Instagram account of the now sadly deceased Eric Talmadge that during his travels to North Korea would share photos. While normal SIM cards in North Korea do not provide internet access visitors can get a 3G SIM card with internet access. And bear in mind that he was an American doing work in North Korea so he was probably under greater scrutiny compared to the average tourist.

https://www.instagram.com/erictalmadge/
The second one! Sorry, I meant to include it. I updated my comment.
Evolution of Among Us
I wonder if that's always been the case. Maybe humans quickly cleaned up all the easily accessible fossils before realizing what they were. Ancient Greeks thought they'd found a giant's bone and other cultures seem to have used dinosaur fossils as inspiration for myths of dragons. Even western researchers a few hundred years ago thought dinosaur bones were just recent animal bones. Imagine how careless every previous civilization was with them.

Maybe the biggest obstacle to archeology is having people around who are interested in explaining what they're seeing. Science is a very rare thing for human cultures to spontaneously do. Even the 1000s of years old Chinese civilization never invented science and had to wait for it to be imported. I tend to think that human societies naturally actively discourage science because they'd quickly think up and memetically spread myths for any unexplained phenomena then anyone challenging the popular myths would have to be a misfit and that would come with punishment because misfits were generally harmful to society in the short term.
Out of curiosity, how did you land on the concept for your business?
The article linked in the parent comment explains it. Audits of lower income people are largely automated - a letter is generated and sent in the mail. Auditing higher income people takes paid investigators, lawyers and time. They are both considered "audits", but its not the same procedure.
Yes. The name gives it away.

And Microsoft's mission for many years was "a computer in every home".
While I agree with your reasoning, I think the generally accepted understanding of "working class" is of skilled and unskilled laborers that are distinct from the "professional class" that tend to work in offices and don't work so much with their hands. A plumber running a small business employing other plumbers with a massive cash assets could be a lot farther from being homeless than a senior lawyer with multiple houses and expensive cars but the plumber will always be perceived as "working class" in contrast to the lawyer's "professional class".
Container Orchestration: Nomad or Kubernetes
Not a lot. But it has been very good at marketing things. There were several web browsers long before Internet Explorer came along (Mosaic, Netscape, etc), but Internet Explorer was the first one that most people came across.

This is very similar to Edison, who also wasn't all that good at inventing things, but also was good at marketing stuff. Many of Edison's "inventions" weren't his, but he made them popular so people thought they were his.
> pretty basic for HN

HN is not a homogeneous mass anymore and not everyone has experience with everything already.

> Where's the beef?

The usefulness of this article probably depends on what you take away from it. That you can viably run OSX in a VM was certainly news to me.
Texas residents warned of tap water tainted with brain-eating microbe
I think three things would have done it:

1. A clear explanation of a symbol system and how math is a symbol system to deal with issues of quantity, shape, structure, and logic.

2. Frequently converting between diagrams/drawings and symbols (show "x x x" at times and "3" at other times). I actually have a concept for a game I want to program that does this.

3. Showing multiple concrete applications of different ideas, and lots of word problems. In retrospect I think this was always reversed in the American system. We would learn the symbolic and algorithmic aspects of a math concept, then use it to solve some word problems. Once I went back and started teaching myself some of this stuff, I read that the Russian system is quite the opposite: lots of word problems, multi-faceted problems. I suspect I would have learned from that style a lot better.

EDIT: One more point I should make. I scored in the 85th percentile on my SAT math. It is probably not a great sign for our system of education that I could do so well with nothing but the most rudimentary understanding of what I was doing.
[pure politics]
There's a ton of these stories around. I think they're great. I don't get all insulted by them; even if they are meant as such.

In my experience, robust is simple. The best code is the code I don't write. The eraser is my best friend.

If I want to write code that has the fewest bugs, I need to write the code with the fewest lines possible.

Every line of code is what I call a "trouble node." That's a place where a bug can happen.

I also need to take the simplest, most straightforward approach possible. Horse sense is valuable, and a lot of my horse sense comes from painful lessons.

When I'm writing code, and I find myself starting to rabbithole one kludge over another, I often have to stop and just wipe the slate clean.

Take off and nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

When I was working for corporations, this was never an option, and I (and my team) always paid the price. Since working on my own, I've done exactly this a dozen times over.

It's great.
This a bad take. In 2 years time there will be a quantized, TensorCore optimised equivalent that will run fine on desktop GPUs.

We've seen this over and over again and there is no reason to believe this is different.
Rust and Java are so far apart it's not even funny.

Can you give some examples of parts that are not well designed?
How else would you define “AI democratization”? The fact I can even program puts me in an elite of less than 0.5% of the world population [0], and that includes all specialties not just AI.

I do iPhone apps these days; even though I can follow the various tutorials for how to train an AI to recognise handwritten digits [1], I don’t actually grok the maths behind the back-propagation algorithm and why it’s better than, say, simulated annealing of the weights (which I do grok).

True democracy puts the power in the hands of the masses; making it available to all developers and only developers is like giving the vote to only the richest half of all millionaires. Packaging AI into a simple magic black box makes it available to everyone.

I don’t know if normal people have the right expectations of the tech for that to be generally wise, but that is a separate problem and black boxes are the only way I can see to achieve the goal.

[0] https://www.daxx.com/blog/development-trends/number-software...

[1] https://kitsunesoftware.wordpress.com/2018/03/16/speed-of-ma...
Solving a 1600-point codeforces: Good Subarrays with Python and JavaScript
teddyh's, for injecting this vapid negativity into the discussion.
On an issue that boils down to social consensus such as how much selfishness is reasonable or what the speed limits should be it's impossible for the overwhelming majority of people to be wrong since they form the consensus.
>Logic is fundamental and proven to be able to apply in reality.

Logic only exists in our minds as well as other things mentioned. The problem which arises with making logic fundamental is that it does not do much for things which matter most in our lives. Like logic can not bring you happiness and joy. I can't make your experience sweet or ecstatic. Nothing wrong with logic it's just limited. Once people see those limits clearly they start exploring life beyond logic.
Ok, peace :)
2 active tokens per identity = suspicious activity?
> Unless you live in a neighborhood or building where packages get stolen, who cares? You'll find it when you get home.

Some packages will fit in my mail slot. Some packages won't fit and will sit outside. If I bought something that could be damaged by water, and it is sitting outside in the rain, I might drop by the house to move it inside. If it is safely out of the weather, I can save time by not doing that.

> Who cares? My office window overlooks the mailboxes, and it comes at a different time every day. As long as it comes.

I have used the data from my cameras to find out that my mail comes on a fairly consistent schedule. If I am expecting an important letter (especially something that might be a prereq for other errands I have to run), this can be helpful information to plan my schedule in a way that saves time.

> Who cares? Even when I had an HMO, we had eight hours to get the trash cans off the curb.

I live on a hill, so it's nice to put my cans away promptly so I don't have to chase them down the street or retrieve them from the middle of the road. When they're empty it's easy for them to blow away.

> Nice to know, if it's a tornado. But again, there's nothing you can do, so why do you need to know?

I disagree with this more than anything. Plain ol' thunderstorms or winter storms can do significant damage, and if the damage is to the roof, a window, or a pipe, the resulting water damage could be exponentially more extensive if it isn't remediated quickly. I have some family who were on vacation when a pipe burst -- if they would have caught it quickly, it could have been mopped up and shut off. Instead they had to stay in a hotel while their interior was gutted and replaced.
After a few failed attempts to begin to understand the Lambda calculus, this is the one that finally "stuck" with me. Looking forward to future articles in this series!

This part:

> encoding a datatype with lambdas means representing the datatype as functions supporting all of its operations

was the key in being able to make practical sense of its purpose.
Ask yourself why they are getting fewer listens than the 1.4% who get the most listens.

It's not because Spotify is a meritocracy for music.
> I’ve been considering building a “Hackintosh” system. But with Apple’s plans of going to ARM possibly by the end of this year, I don’t want to invest a lot in hardware that’s going to be obsolete soon.

This argument doesn't make much sense to me. While not all hardware works with the goal of building a hackintosh. Plenty of top of the line hardware does and will run Windows just fine if ARM becomes an issue.
This is a case of a commenter not knowing the sequence of events, realizing their mistake, and then pretending they were right all along.

Good faith doesn't mean "be very afraid to criticize others when they lie".
But not finding fossil fuels wouldn't tell you anything, because nobody knows how much there ought to be.

If they discovered better sources of energy a little faster, they would stop pumping almost immediately. But for politics, the US might easily have started the switch to wind power forty years ago, and billions of barrels' worth would still be in the ground.
Platonists don't need to renounce empiricism. Assuming that I am real, if I can think about what mathematics is and arrive at answers, then logic exists and reality is non-uniform, it has some form of structure that permits non-uniformity of answers, allows questions, logic.

So the first thought I formulate is an empirical proof that reality has structure. Mathematics is nothing but a description of that structure of reality. We may describe it in human-centric terms and models, but the structure must by necessity pre-exist the mind and is empirically discovered by the action rational tought, not created by the mind.

No similar conclusion can be drawn for other non-empirical hypothesis, such as the existence of God. My ability to think does not imply the existence of anything else beside myself, so other empirical proofs must be considered.
Audits of the rich are not economical for the IRS. Audits of the poor are extremely cost efficient, because they can be automated, and because they don't fight back.
This is why I love open source. In LibreOffice, cruft like this is often removed due to the embarrassment factor.
I used to have a MacBook for work (sw dev) and a gaming desktop PC for entertainment and hobbies (games, music production, photo editing and graphic design).

Until one day, this part wasn’t true any more:

> Third, because for your common web developer a 2nd PC is cheap. You can get a refurbished i5/i7 machine, add a new 32GB of RAM and a 512GB SSD for less than $500. [0] This will last you for 5 years, easy.

Unfortunately not all types of dev work can be done on a middle-of-the-road machine.
Substack Rhymes with Medium
Difficult to answer without details, potentially the app does have natural points to limit scope of use.

If it's a major issue, per-seat licensing could also be just the wrong license model.
Marginal tax rate is a weird way to look at it when you list a specific salary. You should use the actual effective tax rate that person would pay, which is 34.8%, fico, state and federal.
How badly do you want it? There are 30,000 deaths per year from cars in the USA, and many many more injuries. It's not clear what the relationship between that number and the speed/size of cars is, but I'd be willing to bet we could cut that number in half by reducing cars to a max speed of 40mph. Is your desire to drive fast worth 15,000 lives every year? Over your lifetime that could be a million lives saved.
Nope, middle-tier US city.

One of the offers was FAANG, but a small office. To be clear, I did not do most of this over email, but I used very similar wording in my phone calls.

I never had more than 2 offers at once, and I don't think you need to try and time everything so that you can bet everyone against each other. You really just need 1 other good offer, which was my case. And non-negotiable deadlines have always been extended. Some companies got annoyed that I didn't decide within a few days(especially startups, probably since they are trying to hire super fast), but others were very patient and willing to let me finish interviewing as long as I was upfront with the timing.

> It's over the top to send them long messages in writing that you will never accept whatever number they give and reserve the right to disagree anytime.

I don't think that is the take away at all. You need to be clear that you are still interviewing and thinking things over, and once I got offers from my top choices, I made it clear exactly what it would take to get me to accept immediately, and that counter-offer was not a fantastical number. If you set goal posts, you can always point to them as your reason for not accepting. It's definitely bad form to not provide any feedback on what you're willing to take once you get far enough into the negotiation.

If you're not a compelling candidate, and for at least one of the companies, I wasn't compelling enough, they absolutely will stop the conversation.

But I think it's a case-by-case thing. Not every company will respond the same. I also spent a fair amount of time researching what different companies probably paid for a generalist SWE, which for FAANGs is a lot easier these days, so I knew what some boundaries were.
Without a userland or application ecosystem how could one even say?
> Personally I chose SQLite sharded on S3

This sounds interesting, would you mind sharing details?
California property taxes aren’t that high, even for new owners compared to other states.
Yep, very sad to see this at the bottom.
US places trade restrictions on China's largest chipmaker SMIC
Effective Tax rate and Marginal Tax rates are two different things.
Flying people to Mars is a bit silly, as was flying people to the Moon. Yes, it can be done with insane amounts of money but to what end? It'd not like Mars will be colonised anytime soon or that anyone would like to live there. We haven't colonised Antarctica. The Russians were more pragmatic with robotic exploration.

Expensive BMWs are equally silly. The company generally produces nice vehicles, but they also make hideous atrocities like the X4 and X6. What's worse is that Daimler followed suit and that every car company is producing SUVs now, that aren't any good off road and have lots of aerodynamic drag on road.

German Engineering students work on interesting projects like swarm drones playing team games. I suspect these are quite obviously projects with military applications or space exploration.
Isn’t sales mostly learning how to wine and dine people?
I was wondering the same. I am familiar with it because we use NHG as our company font, but didn’t know that it was widely known.
Ask HN: Why would a bot (or person) leave these identical nonsense IMDB reviews?
This rambling, apparently gibberish, review has been left with nearly-identical text on several completely different movies:

https://www.imdb.com/review/rw6125310/?ref_=tt_urv

https://www.imdb.com/review/rw6124704/?ref_=tt_urv

https://www.imdb.com/review/rw6125312/?ref_=tt_urv

Even stranger, they're tagged "14 out of 14 found this helpful"

There's no spam links or other obvious reasons for these reviews. Is this just a mentally ill person? Is it a bot malfunctioning somehow? Who are the 14 other people or bots marking these as helpful reviews?
surprised it isn't mentioned:

Partnerships!!

Key strategic partners for distribution, sales, brand, advertising. They are the highest ROI on your time by a long shot.

Big partners will negotiate for a Large cut. This is a cost you can absorb early on because the scale effects of partners set you up for success in 6, 12 months.

Email me if you'd like to know more :-] charlie@vannorman.ai
Who will speak up when they come for the HN moderators?
Not many language have cross-module type inference. For example I'm pretty sure Haskell does not have cross-module type inference (you need `.hs-boot` files to help it along if you want cyclic modules for example). So in that sense OCaml's type inference is no weaker than other languages with global type inference.

And in fact type inference is generally not what slows down compilation. It is often barely any more expensive than type checking (and indeed for languages with global type inference a viable way to implement type checking is to run type inference and then compare the generated type signature with the annotated signature). This is especially true for OCaml which requires definitions to be in order or otherwise explicitly marked as recursive (so the type inferencing algorithm can immediately add a term's inferred type to the current typing judgment as a known type). What's slow is usually recursive implicit definitions and optimizations. This means typeclass-heavy signatures for Haskell and frequent use of recursive implicits in Scala.
I'm a Director of Sales and the first sales blog I recommend to everyone is gong.io ... they ran thousand and thousands of sales calls through AI and have quite a lot of data-backed observations that will help you win
What does finance do? Related to accounting and keeping books?
This is also what I remember, but then I also remember that the specs of my first and last XP machines were miles apart. The first had 256MB or RAM...
I can teach everything you need to know about sales for just $399.99.
The first part of the first paragraph is wrong:

> Nearly a century ago, Alonzo Church invented the simple, elegant, and yet elusive lambda calculus. Along with Alan Turing, he then proved the Church-Turing thesis: that anything computable with a Turing machine can also be computed in the lambda calculus.

The Church-Turing thesis is not something one can prove. It's more like an intuition and/or definition we have. It states that anything that is computable can be computed with a Turing machine. See [1].

"Anything computable with a Turing machine can also be computed in the lambda calculus" this is true but it not the Church-Turing thesis and its called a Turing-equivalence. This was also not proved by Church, but by Turing in an appendix to his paper [2].

About a computation model being Turing-equivalent: the fact that most reasonable computation models we came up with were proven to be Turing-equivalent is one of the reasons we believe in the Church-Turing thesis.

[1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/church-turing/

[2] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10506-017-9200-2
Why would you even want a security camera IN your house? Just get outdoor cameras and point them toward possible entry points.
Eventually! I started scrappy at first but hope to make this happen.
I appreciate your clarification here, and apologize for the shortness of my response:

The way your comment was phrased, combined with your dismissiveness of Eich's departure from Mozilla in the comment's predecessor caused myself, and seemingly the preponderance of your respondants to read it in the tone of a kintergarten teacher asking a child if he'd learned his lesson, and to respond as such.
Should you own part of my brain if I read your comment?
> So these are wonderful, if you do not consider that they will have to share the road with actual cars which can easily pancake them and kill the occupants.

A much better approach to crash safety than trying to survive a crash, is to not to crash in the first place.

Companies need to make a distinction whether they want to protect the occupant from the collision beyond his control, from protecting the occupant from himself.

European accident rates started to plummet when ADASes became a thing in mass market cars.

If you can limit the maximum crash velocities to 60km/h with ADASes, then I believe car-to-car collisions can be made much, much less lethal even in such light cars.