skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>I am 24 and I have some pretty incredible tools in my pocket right now

That's cool, but your life likely isn't any better than the life of isolated indigenous tribes in the amazon. You get your dopamine hits by playing with your smartphone and they get theirs by catching fish with their bare hands.
A comprehensive list of static site generators can be found at https://www.staticgen.com/
> We converted away from it, so naturally we were doing something right or we wouldn't have Western Civilization. Medieval farms were incredibly sustainable from an ecological perspective, often integrating with natural processes wherever possible. We once had a much more integrative approach (for lack of technology) and moved away from it (due to labor constraints and improving technology).

Medieval and earlier farms were horrifically unproductive and unsustainable. Land had to lie fallow for nutrients to be replenished, and even when there were actually plants growing, output was low. In an average year, a medieval european farm could expect to produce between 7 and 15 bushels per acre, and as little as 4 in a bad year. Compare this to a modern farm that can produce 60 bushels per acre. Medieval farms would harvest about 4 seeds per seed planted on average, a bad harvest may not leave enough to plant for the next year, modern farms on the other hand reap 30 to 40 seeds per seed planted.

Europe's population remained stagnant for 1000 years as any increase in food production would lead to a reduction in grazing area, which in turn meant less manure was produced and lands could not be sufficiently fertilized. Famines were frequent and severe. Medieval agriculture wasn't sustainable, it was inescapable. Only the crisis of the late middle ages and the ensuing deaths of millions forced systemic changes which allowed europe to break out of its vicious cycle and lead to real quality of life improvements.

Just because something is better than what came before does not mean it is perfect, and it's worth considering other ideas. But pre-industrial agriculture was terrible, and anyone romanticizing it either has no idea what they are talking about or is actively trying to deceive you.
[I'm adding thoughts here instead of editing the above]

Speaking more broadly, these kinds of misaligned incentives are probably doing massive damage to the economy, in terms of lost productivity and innovation.

A huge chunk of the people who should be productive and be innovating literally don't have an incentive to do anything above and beyond keeping their job. It's all adversarial and extractive instead of cooperative. On both sides. Employers won't pay workers for the value the workers provide, and in return workers surf HN and reddit all day.

Meanwhile, apparently there's some kind of epidemic of "bullshit jobs." Again, go figure.
sure but then by that logic so does building more powerful computers. so intel and nvidia and amd employees are also evil. and don’t forget building a more efficient operating system
The final sentence is true.

But what's the evidence or case that this applies to free movement of capital?
The missive:

https://medium.com/@dojalumni/doj-alumni-open-letter-on-prot...
I’m not saying it’s racism.
And today people cringe if the movie they're streaming isn't in 4k. Times change!
The Deadliest Aircraft in the Military's Arsenal (You Have Never Heard Of)
The ability to better visualize this info, is the value. Governments are willing to pay for Palantir because doing things tracking down pill mills is easier if you can perform operations like filtering for people that bought the same drug twice in a day, and then plotting those purchases on map. It's a lot harder to do this kind of analysis with Excel.
I had the same thing on mushrooms once, many years ago. I kept finding myself in the corner of the same room, staring at a troll (an hallucination). It seemed like it had happened a hundred times, and was pretty frightening.

The whole night went horribly, and I never touched shrooms or acid since.
1. Yeah, I guess... But I'm not complaining really. There are less interesting things on the front page. :P

2. The way I see it, re-implementing JS from scratch in a language that is designed to help avoid very common, often compromising programming mistakes around concurrency and memory management makes perfect sense. Eventually this might make it into browsers and web servers; environments that are executing untrusted code in the former case and are publicly exposed in the latter case. Having them be fast-yet-secure is important, isn't it?

Of course, it's early days, but you gotta start somewhere after all...
God mac people are retarded.
PS Online Network Emulated
I am one of those people who struggle to say no. Just this year, I consciously started saying "no" to people more frequently because I was getting overstretched with commitments and knew I needed to stop.

So far I have never regretted saying "no" to something (even though I suspected I might regret it at the time). But I have frequently regretted saying "yes" to something.

By saying no to more things, it allows you to have more time to do a good job at the few things you say "yes" to. Plus there is a power in taking your life by the reins and not letting other people dictate what you do because you blanket accept everything they request of you.
Is this something you could have used to create a startup to compete with your previous employer?
I think it's important to note that when a 25 year old talks about their career, it's almost all 'beginning'. Even if they are precocious and got promoted, they have only barely made it into what other people might call the middle of their career, it's still the beginning for them (unless they settle). You talk to a guy who has been working for 50 years and 'most of his career' looks very different than most of your career, even if you follow the same arc. Because all of your career is just the beginning of his.

I feel like he is missing the part where if you're a relatively passive person and you keep saying no to everything, you end up alone, bored, and broke. If you are going to say 'no' to people, it's because they are offering you options that might not be the ones you'd choose or make for yourself. So you should demur and work to create your own options.

The best way to predict the future is to create it.
>Developers are rewarded for features, PMs are rewarded for happy customers.

I generally feel that most things are best when they are in some kind of healthy tension. Appeasing power users happens because it appears to align with both of the above.
> "The only differences between Palantir and, say, Booz Allen Hamilton that I can see"

I'll start by saying I am not invested in Palantir, and they are not my investment tastes, but I don't think you are looking at important numbers.

Booz Allen has a growth rate of about 10%. Palantir grew by 24% in 2018 and yoy 45% (might come in at 60%) (Forbes). Some say that the growth rate may be because of covid (I dont know that's a bad thing), but it is fair if you are in that camp. However, looking at just the current revenue and ignoring growth seems like you are ignoring the important parts of the picture
So who is making money on news then? A quick google search for "trump has coronavirus" shows some news articles and no advertisements whatsoever. Going to the news tab shows more articles and still no advertisements and I cannot recall ever seeing an ad when searching for news so it doesn't look like google is making money from their search engine on news to me.
First of all, the answer to your question is "yes".
Secondly, I think the inherent low-bandwidth nature of online communication, is going to make it hard to replace.
Third, one aspect of conversations IRL, is that they are NOT taking place on the computer, where you work (for many jobs). This very fact, is important psychologically. The fact that any online alternative is taking place in the same medium (staring at a screen) as work, will make it difficult to avoid either:
1) too much distraction to get work done, or
2) too little "reason" to go there, to have spontaneous conversations

So, it sounds like I'm being very negative, but if you manage to find a way around these problems, it would be an impressive feat of both technology and psychology. Good luck!
Like you I also had a mid/high range Samsung TV. The ads were not as obtrusive being only on the bottom left of the menu bar, but its the ACR that I needed to get away from.

> Samsung Smart TVs have built-in Automated Content Recognition (ACR) technology that can understand viewing behavior and usage including programs, movies, ads, gaming content and OTT apps in real-time.[0]

Literally every second or two, Samsung was performing some screen reading data collection and sending it off to their servers. My Pi Hole was capturing 12,000 blocked requests from this per day (6-7 hours of shared family viewing). This resulted in a poor user experience where I would feel the actually latency when trying to navigate around or open the menu. After factory resetting my TV it was so snappy again. Plugged in an AppleTV and haven't looked back. This form of advertising is incredibly invasive and disgusting to me, with constant spying/screenshotting of the content I am viewing.

[0] https://www.samsung.com/us/business/samsungads/resources/tv-...
It's a fake argument anyway. People perfectly understand that when they buy a used car, it could have had damage from the previous owner or other wear and tear. Is this common-sense somehow magically forgotten when Apple is concerned?
Does it? Which operating system other than Linux uses flatpaks?
Do you think these devices were sold disclosing that Apple themselves found them to be not worthy of repair? Don't think so. Of course there is a market for cheaper Apple products. There is never a market for Apple products that catch fire in your pocket.
But the reseller still has to have their ID on file so they will constantly get deposed in cases where a sim card they sold was used and now the police are trying to identify the buyer. It would be a huge pain for them and I don't see it actually protecting the buyer much.
The original is highly editorialized. It's too partisan.
This is my nightmare: going out of date. Never lose the fear!
We (not US) are currently holding our rates negative, which has the potential to be ... problematic. How would the IMF and the World Bank manage to raise rates? Get everyone to agree to a coordinated increase? I had thought Japan showed that rate raising from the financial side can be like pushing on a string.
This would be an awesome application towards waste disposal and recycling! Take a huge hunk of garbage, and try and rearrange all the atoms of it into something that can be reused as opposed to us leaving these in landfills. However it does make you wonder, would movie aliens really invade earth for water if they could just use a laser to create water from any other substance using its atoms and molecules?
What makes that a problem? Both of those programs increase Apple's control and power in the market.
Given their tracking pixels are installed on at least 8 million websites(1), they are effectively watching everything you do on a large proportion of popular/commercial websites.

They were also caught a few years ago asking users to "verify their emails" by providing Facebook their email account password(2), after which FB's servers logged into the user's email account and scraped their contacts out without warning.

They also acquired a popular VPN app explicitly so they could comb through the users' traffic data and identify competing apps for acquisition.(3)

In my opinion it's core to how the company has always been. Facebook's predecessor, or perhaps first iteration, FaceMash, was a hot-or-not game based on student photos scraped from Harvard's internal websites(4).

[1] https://theoutline.com/post/4578/facebook-is-tracking-you-on...

[2] https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/18/18485089/facebook-email-p...

[3] https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/21/facebook-removes-onavo/

[4] https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2003/11/19/facemash-creat...
Your example is entirely about intangibles. Industrial development and associated intellectual capital is literally a textbook example. Portugal could have chosen to subsidize industrial development in some other way or for some other sector. That they didn't do so is in no way an indictment of Ricardo's theory. Why didn't they invest in some other industry? Why was a complex historical situation reduced to a bifurcated choice between making cloth or making wine, as if there were no other alternatives? Why didn't the author you quote explore this? Is it because it's not applicable or is it because the above passage was written to justify the a priori conclusion that Ricardo's theory was harmful? Knowing the Marxian[1] bent of the quoted author I know which way I'm leaning.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_Robinson

> In 1942, Robinson's An Essay on Marxian Economics famously concentrated on Karl Marx as an economist, helping to revive the debate on this aspect of his legacy.
This is a false equivalence. The obvious difference is that states are bound by a shared legal, financial and political system. The externalities are internalized.
Why are we assuming that these are usable devices? Apple recycled them for a reason. They are obviously cosmetically fine and so people bought them. Who knows what is going on with those devices and what issues they will create for the user.
The ordering keys feature supports a large number of keys (though since the throughput limit is 1 MB/sec per key, many applications shouldn't have issues scaling up on a given key).

Imagine you have an order processing system where you have to 1) write to a database 2) write to a metrics log 3) and send an email to the customer. You can publish a message with the ordering key being the user who initiated the order. This means you are guaranteed to see message 1 before 2, which is seen before 3.

You do have to account for possible message re-deliveries. In this example, you can 1) write to the database with a order's unique ID (to prevent duplicate rows) 2) be fine with duplicates for metrics since a bit of duplication is okay (or maybe you have a job later that removes duplicates offline) 3) and be okay with sending emails to customers twice (pretty harmless). You may also keep a side-cache of processed messages to reduce the processing of duplicates, but that's a bit heavy and may not be necessary.

What Cloud Pub/Sub with ordering keys gets you in this scenario is 1) durability of published messages 2) scalability across keys 3) ordering between messages in a key 4) retries in case one step fails 5) buffering in case your subscribers are slow or down 6) a fully hosted service (no dealing with your own cluster, scales automatically) 7) global availability (no need to shard your subscription by region, simplifying your app).

Disclaimer: I work on Cloud Pub/Sub, but this explanation is my own.
The difference being if you stop the pulses the changed behavior would also stop. Transmutation would be permanent.
haha, this is great! i was thinking about making something similar to skip youtube ads on my ipad!
I find reading before bed really helps to get them to sleep. It gets their minds off what ever they were thinking about.

I myself get extremely tired when I try to read something close to bed.
Railroad Tycoon and Railroad Tycoon 2 are two of my all time favourite games. Along with Sid Meier's Colonization, they are actually the only games that I've gone back to time after time for years.
I used to use Feedly, but found I didn't check it often and lost track of things, I wanted a way of getting RSS by email so created https://rssby.email/ during lockdown.
> To give a preview of why doing this might devolve into an “engineering problem”, let’s consider a loose (but, in the end, not quite so loose) analogy. Imagine you’ve got molecules of gas in a room, all bouncing around and colliding with each other. Now imagine there’s a special molecule—or even a tiny speck of dust or a virus particle—somewhere in the room. Normally the special molecule will be buffeted by the molecules in the air, and will move in some kind of random walk, gradually diffusing across the room. But imagine that the special molecule somehow knows enough about the motion of the air molecules that it can compute exactly where to go to avoid being buffeted. Then that special molecule can travel much faster than diffusion—and effectively make a beeline from one side of the room to the other.
Of course this requires more knowledge and more computation than we currently imagine something like a molecule can muster (though it’s not clear this is true when we start thinking about explicitly constructing molecule-scale computers). But the point is that the limit on the speed of the molecule is less a question of what’s physically possible, and more a question of what’s “engineerable”.

This is posed as a computational resource problem, but it strikes me as an information problem.

How do you know where the aggressor molecules are and what their paths (i.e. future states) are?

Perhaps it’s possible to know the very local conditions and dodge an imminent collision, but does that generalize to arbitrarily long paths? Can I make it to the other end of the room, dodging only the molecules right in front of me? Or can I set out on a path from the beginning that has no solution in the end because it results in an unsolvable state?

And if the only way to know is to know the full state of the molecules that may affect my journey, beginning to end, doesn’t their state have to be known at the outset of the journey? If the information about their state itself has a speed limit, and if their state is not fully observable or fully deterministic, what sort of computation can defeat that?
"Most scientists take a full stop at "my unproven theory of physics". He has yet to come up with testable predictions. Let alone trying to test them. Only then there might be a point in listening to the rest."

This is dumb.

Einstein's theories were not proven overnight and many were skepticals at the time.
One of the reasons Apple does this is to block repair companies from buying broken Apple products to stock up on parts. They choke the repair supply chain by forcing parts manufacturers to only sell to them.
lol, imagine you paid a company to recycle old hard drives or documents and they resold them instead.
Strength of the state universities in a desired field. Some state universities offer much better quality and reputation of their programs than the ones in other states. The way that college is marketed as a social vehicle is that you choose the best one that you can get into, and it's worth paying for because of the connections and job opportunities you'll get there. (Scam! Holding people hostage for runaway credentialism!)

For instance, several state universities are listed as top-tier mechanical and aerospace engineering schools (consider Purdue vs. Mizzou aerospace engineering), so if you want to seriously compete in the field, it could be worth your money to join the "better" school from out-of-state, assuming you're a competitive student. The recruiting, research, and internship opportunities at top state schools are way better than at low/mid state schools.

However, from a pragmatic standpoint, you are correct- it is unwise to select these schools if you can better afford the in-state discount. You just have to deal with the limitation of your selection of available fields and prestige of chosen degree. (That's why I think it's a scam; as any honest manager will tell you, degree/curriculum content means very little relative to job performance; the top performers come from top schools not because the top schools made them top performers, but because they were already top performers in high school and just got chosen by top schools.)
The article says that much of this is driven by Web development. 100x the code to do the same thing as ten and twenty-five years ago: serving web pages.
A very Stephen Wolfram article. As usual, if you assume all his unproven priors (ie, reality is actually a hypergraph with well defined update rules, the hypergraph has premade nonlocal 'long threads' in it) and go along with his redefinition of the speed of light as the speed of causality then the article makes perfect sense.

Where the trouble starts is that there seems to be no evidence whatsoever to support the axioms, and also no way to actually measure the predicted effects. It is not so different from saying "There might be a godlike being out there that can just teleport us anywhere we want, but we have no way of contacting it or even of being sure it exists". A cool theory, but until any proofs or falsifications come along it is indistinguishable from science fiction.
Almost every package manager on Linux distros allow you to install packages outside of the main repositories and still manage dependencies using the repos.

I agree there are a lot of distros to package for, but I'd say the bonus of not having to maintain and update all the dependencies outweighs that fact.

For example, there are a lot of tools that can generate Debian packages for you if you don't want to spend any time learning the manifests. I assume these exist for most distros.
> It's Apple's reputation that gets tarnished by this.

I guess we can't buy used or salvaged cars either now. Can't have manufacturers' reputations tarnished. What a load of crock.
Reify Health is hiring remote engineers Clojure developers, test, and SREs
The "debt show-downs" aka political theater.
Yes. "no matter what the ethnic group is"
First, I want to state that I agree with the premise of this article. While I do think the US is more than just a capitalist oligarchy, from a certain perspective you can see America as being the world's main laundry service for capital.

However, the cat's out of the bag. The only historical precedent for limiting capital's ability to flow are periods of societal collapse and feudalization. When capital gets going nothing seems able to stop it (considering that IBM did business with the Nazis, even horrible things like war only seem to slow it down). I think the evidence is strong that capital has never been more powerful relative to the state than at this moment in history (the IRS freely admits it has become too expensive to audit the wealthy[1]). So the idea that we have any advantage over the past in being able to limit it seems ludicrous on its face.

The best (only?) approach is to try to manage the negative externalities that the free flow of capital creates (rapidly accelerating wealth inequality, etc). Personally, I'm on the UBI bandwagon for this reason.

[1] https://www.propublica.org/article/irs-sorry-but-its-just-ea...