skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Alright, let's actually follow up on two of your links for once.

Regarding "The IMF was unable to reproduce":

"Piketty's response[54] noted, however, that Góes used measures of income inequality rather than wealth inequality, and inappropriately took the interest rate on sovereign debt as his index of the rate of return on capital, which makes his results not commensurate with those of Piketty's study."

Regarding "Auten & Splinter further refuted":

"There’s plenty of other literature, mentioned in the Auten-Splinter paper, the Economist articles and elsewhere, that challenges the methods used by Piketty and his collaborators. Such challenges are mainly possible because tax data draw an incomplete and often difficult-to-interpret picture of the income distribution. Tax systems are complex, different governments choose not to tax different kinds of income, and of course people, rich and poor, cheat on their tax returns. Measuring wealth inequality rises to a whole new level of difficulty: Since so few countries have wealth taxes these days, only guesstimates of the wealth distribution are possible.

So on Tuesday, Piketty, Saez, Zucman and a long list of other signatories issued a sweeping response to critics of the popular inequality narrative, pointing out that all the data-based arguments can be settled by making solid data available."

Unsurprisingly, these two doesn't seem to very convincing "refutations".
Certainly not the only one. I once took too much (only obvious in retrospect) with friends, and the scene replayed what felt like thousands of times. Each time was subtly different than the last, but cumulatively it felt like a whole different world. Eventually I ran into the very difficult dilemma of having to "reconstruct" my original timeline so that I could return safely to it, rather than to the bizarre new timeline we all seemed to occupy. It felt like a Herculean (or maybe Sisyphean) effort to rebuild all of reality to the place where we had left it, but juuust as we managed to do it (seemingly eons later), the trip coincidentally ended. Haven't touched LSD / AL-LAD since.

If I were a materialist, I'd find this hard (but not impossible) to explain. The only permissible explanation would be that the whole thing was an illusion of some sort (insert lots of handwaving), brought on by chemicals in a very real brain. But I'm (roughly) an idealist, and this isn't even the strangest experience I've had on psychedelics, so there's a much broader set of possibilities here -- some of which actually inform my sober life in practical and beneficial ways.

Tangentially related, I found this to be a fun trip report: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEg70Tf_V5A
I believe manganese does naturally, but only with a UV laser:
https://youtu.be/KdfHVcU8U7U?t=625

Artificially, one that works with probably most/all lasers would be an active phosphor display(I forget the specific cocktail it's composed of), like the kind from an oscilloscope
I can barely recall a time in my life where saying 'no' to an exploding offer resulted in regret.

I'm not sure when I learned this 'power'. I don't think it should be a power, but I know way too many people who don't have it, and watched a number of them go through a bunch of bad excitement followed by regret.

If it's not someone including you in a spontaneous social activity at the last minute, just say no. They know that if you have time to think about it you'd realize it wasn't that great, which is exactly why they aren't giving you time to think about it. It's an attempt to evoke the same feeling of scarcity you experience when your buddy says, "Hey there are only three beers left. Who wants one?" to a room full of people.
Do you think asset inflation due to artificially low interest rates has anything to do with this trend?
The opportunities I talked about is of course only same example, certainly not everything there is.
In other words, "If you believe my unproven theory of physics, and also had access to an unavailable amount of computing power, there might be a way to go faster than light."

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.

See https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/physicists-critic... for more.
Except your premise that returns to capital are going up is false: https://www.vox.com/2015/4/1/8320937/this-26-year-old-grad-s... ("Rognlie finds that when you account for depreciation properly, the capital share's increase has been entirely about housing.")

Returns to owning land and housing (rents) have gone up. That has come at the expense of both returns to labor, and returns to all other kinds of capital (stock ownership, etc.). This is obvious. Stock market returns aren't what they used to be. Banks are making 4% on mortgages, versus 8% back in the day. The country is awash in 0% financing for cars, refrigerators, etc.

There is increasing inequality in how labor income is distributed. CEO salaries have gone up, programmer salaries have gone up, but secretary salaries have stagnated. But that's a separate issue than returns to capital ownership going up.
I migrated from Pelican to Hugo. Build/render times are a fraction with Hugo. But my main issue with Pelican was git submodules for plugins. With Hugo I just find a theme I like and then everything works.

For the record, I use Python daily and I’ve never written a line in Go. But with these static site generators, most people won’t ever need to look under the hood.

Edit: I see the main feature for Pelican 4.5 is namespace plugins, which should prevent some headaches.
AFAIK Svelte doesn't have memoization because, unlike React, it does't really need it. Svelte tracks reactive dependencies at compile time so that only the necessary parts of the DOM are updated when some state changes.

Svelte has a derived reactive store similar to a computed value in Mobx:

https://svelte.dev/docs#derived
Luckily, I believe the legal standard may be a reasonable person would understood it. :)
I am very proud of some of the code I have written, some of it I am less proud of. Today I am working on a project that other people started and that I've contribute a lot to. In the course of the same day I will work in some areas that I think we're doing much better than most of the industry but also find some things that are worse.

Whether or not these feelings are "correct" I do know they change over time.

A long time ago I wrote about 1500 lines of PHP that looked like FORTRAN, not just any FORTRAN, but the kind of FORTRAN people wrote when FORTRAN first got "HOLLERITH" Strings and a few fanatics wrote FORTRAN compilers in FORTRAN.

I revised that code about once a year for the next five years and always went through a cycle of: "that's insane", "oh yeah, i did think this through the first time" to "wow!"
But isn’t that just the lie they tell us to justify it? Ads don’t bring in much money on a per individual basis. But if you sell the Tv with ads and tell people it’s the only way it is affordable, then you can double dip. Two revenue streams is always better than one. It also explains why no manufactures give you the option to buy a version without ads or to pay a onetime fee to disable the ads part of the software.
This is really the critical question here: Are these phones actually unfixable? If they are, reusing them will only cause more problems (not to mention burning more fossil fuels as they are shipped to consumers and then shipped back within a few months for recycling a second time). If they aren't, then recycling is the wrong destination for these units.
I think that if your motivation is to gain knowledge and you have the discipline then online courses can be a great solution for you.
From the article it seems they're far more concerned with not getting their cut of the resale profits.
Alchemy is about transforming elements (regular metals into precious metals), which involves adding/removing protons and neutrons to atom nuclei.
Nearly 2k Former DOJ Lawyers: Barr Wants to Rig Election for Trump
Claim Your Netflix 60 Dollar Card
Right. The point is, the definition you posted is one of several, and doesn't really address the issue at hand. You can't pretend that "guys" is gender neutral; that's one of many "tainted" contexts that invalidates the claim.

When folks say "software guys", does "software" similarly taint the meaning because our society has decided that programming is "men's work?" In my experience, as a woman who talks to other women about this precise nuance of our language, it does feel othering to many if not most of us.

Furthermore, when I overhear a coworker talking about a need to hire "a packaging guy", and then refer to this hypothetical person (comprising zero actual candidates for an ad which hasn't even been written) with he/him pronouns exclusively, am I then expected to believe that this use of "guy" is gender neutral?
The parent is a sarcastic exaggeration but it is not totally false. The IMF has changed a lot in the last 20 years, but they had a streak in the 80s where they would force third world countries to scrap their social welfare systems to pay off debt on loans that were foolishly made to previous unelected dictators.
What is the purpose of discussing a made up scenario? Obviously there are contract terms that Geep violated, and it even admitted it by blaming it on its employees. I don't know what you mean by capitalism, but two businesses voluntarily entering into a contract, and then litigating when one of them breaks the terms of the contract is pretty normal stuff for any society, capitalist or not.
There is also plumbum for more ergonomic pipelines in python:

https://pypi.org/project/plumbum/
The queue entrypoint is not always the same process either, especially in a system like Pub/Sub.
The problem of companies abusing privacy and ads is not the issue being discussed. The problem is that most "good" news publishers has no way of making money without churning a lot of low quality content. Currently, the only high quality for-profit news publisher completely immune to this is the Economist, but there isn't much room in that corner of the market.
What the Federal Reserve Owns
Citrix LBs come in many flavors. At a guess, since you talk about it being externally managed - I'd ask your vendor if you are on dedicated hardware/instance vs being yet another tenant on an (and I might be forgetting my terminology) already oversubscribed VPX instance.

I can tell you from my personal experience that +85ms overhead is definitely not what I'd expect for TLS termination.
Maybe it’s just more common to have heart “anomalies” than people think. Historically it’s never been common for people having heart monitors strapped to them all the time, so now we’re In uncharted territory. Maybe there’s some scientific learning we still have to do about how the heart works, and what is considered “in spec.”
> Why do people equate capitalism with "Fuck everyone, get money"?

That is exactly the behavior that capitalism incentivizes. Two facets:

1.

I'm assuming we agree that capitalism is mostly about markets and free consumer choice. So you have a set of produces competing for purchases from consumers. Consumers have finite resources to acquire information about the producers they consume from.

This means that if it takes less resources for a producer to hide a negative externality than the externality provides, that producer will be more efficient on the market and defeat other producers who don't. Thus the market rewards negative externalities and deceit.

Meanwhile, the market incentivizes no systems to produce consumer organization or better consumer information. We do see that happen sometimes with things like the USDA, Consumer Reports, etc. but all of that happens outside of and in opposition to the capitalist system.

2.

Producers don't want to compete, they just have to if one producer feels they can secure a relative advantage by competing with another. But it is almost always more effective for both producers to instead collude and cooperate against consumers. Since producers generally massively outnumber consumers, and have a lot in common culturally and structurally, it is natural for them to form anti-competitive cabals or to simply merge into larger and fewer corporations.

Capitalism produces monopolies, which history shows any time you have a "free" market without very strong trust-busting from the government.

These two points exacerbate each other. The fewer producers there are, the more they become the sole experts in their field and the better able they are to hide their negative externalities.

"Economies of scale" work in harmful directions too. Bigger companies are more efficient at scaling up the damage their negative externalities cause.

Capitalism may form a part of a functioning, efficient system, but it is always only a part. When you treat it as the whole, you get... well, climate change and a dying Earth.
Hacked up a landing page to outline the idea better if the problem sounds interesting, https://trychitchat.web.app/ . Would love to hear everyone's thoughts!

P.S. https://uselander.xyz/ is a fantastic way to hack up landing page to explain your idea. Super clean format, GUI if you just want to change text, and you can download the source code if you want to go deeper. No association to them, just a big fan.
m000 is saying that the usage of Jekyll (Ruby) and Hugo (Go) are driven in part by hip trend-following programmers not wanting to use Python, not that Jekyll and Hugo are written in Python.
“Our infrastructure to deploy a single Docker container on AWS.”
Edit: I misunderstood the article and thought that the devices were sold. Indeed a service contract for recycling should be enforced, unless health & safety reasons preclude.
> Thalia is paying for the prominently displayed shelves - there is no critical classification.

Google Translate gets this wrong completely. Actually Thalia is getting paid. Original:

> Thalia lässt sich für die prominent ausgestellten Regale bezahlen – eine kritische Einordnung erfolgt nicht.
It's almost hysterically funny how wrong Ricardo's theory is; even in the example he used of Portugal and the UK. Great job destroying Portuguese industry at the behest of UK capital though.

As Joan Robinson put it

“but in real life Portugal was dependent on British naval support, and it was for this reason that she was obliged to accept conditions of trade which wiped out her production of textiles and inhibited industrial development so as to
make her more dependent than ever”. She further notes that: “What Ricardo was really concerned about was to abolish the Corn Laws so as to lower the real cost of wage goods and
raise the rate of profit... When accumulation is brought into the story, it is evident that Portugal is not going to benefit from free trade. Investment in expanding manufactures leads to technical advance, learning by doing, specialisation of industries and accelerating accumulation, while investment in wine runs up a blind alley into stagnation”

“Ricardo took the example of trade between England and Portugal. He argued that England, by allowing
imports of wine from Portugal, would expand the production and export of cloth to pay for it. Ricardo, of course, was thinking of the English side of the exchange but the analysis is perfectly symmetrical; it implies that Portugal will gain from specialising on wine and importing cloth. In reality, the imposition of free trade on Portugal killed off a promising textile industry and left her with a slow-growing export market for wine, while for England, exports of cotton cloth led to accumulation, mechanisation and the whole spiralling growth of industrial revolution”

As I've always said, this sort of economics is linear regression in service of the ruling class rather than anything resembling science.
> It's Apple's reputation that gets tarnished by this.

We should care more about the sustainability of environment, consumer benefit and consumer rights and not the reputation of rich megacorporations.
I think what he means is that people who are already really successful have so many options they get to pick only the best ones.
Move2Kube – A tool to accelerate replatforming to Kubernetes
Back when I had first played TTD, I had a demo of the game and it came on a single floppy disk. And it ran smoothly on my 486 with 20MB or RAM. I played that demo for hours and hours...
I don't know the "official" policy on this yet, but anecdotally they do not decrease your existing grants (which vest over 4 years), but the new location could affect the new RSUs you will be granted while in the new location.
The crime was, and always was, the first action (transaction?) between the people doing the heist and the bank.

Whatever happened afterward is irrelevant. For at least one instant, in the hypothetical we had $1,000,000 in ill-gotten gains. I assume that's some sort of crime in whatever jurisdiction you are in, and if not, well, there are banks waiting for you friend.
Show HN: Manage AWS Console Sessions with Firefox Containers
This is a perennial issue in software design and business, something I struggled with in the 1980s, and I don’t think it was a new problem then.

Most users need only a few features and the UI can be made very simple and easy to learn. However, a small percentage of users need more powerful/hard to use features, and the needs of these users usually determine which product is purchased.

Since it’s advantageous for everyone to use the same product, most corporate employees will be stuck with a hard to learn/use product. Vendors of low-end/easy to use products won’t be successful selling to the corporate market.

What’s different now is that there is a large market for inexpensive easy to use phone apps selling to individuals. You can make a living selling to that market, but you will never be as big as a company that sells an expensive hard to use product to the corporate market.
If we will generalize about "freedom" types supporting Palantir, allow me to generalize about the opposite as well - the people who never care about pro-privacy and anti-censorship matters, unless they believe there's an angle from which they can attack "American imperialism" or the "industrial-military complex" or what have you. I suspect the only reason some people get upset about Palantir is because they provide tools to the government and military, and it is popular to bash the American government and the American military. At least on the left, where building software for national security is seen in the same light as supporting hegemony and imperialism.

I am skeptical about the people who complain about liberty or democracy being at risk because of Palantir, Facebook, etc, because my experience with these people has been that they are never anti-censorship, pro-democracy except when it suits their own partisan side. They'll easily welcome censorship if it means Facebook shutting down "dangerous" groups, where dangerous is any group that is not their group.
In my experience users generally do this when their computers are locked down and IT departments are not responsive enough to meet their needs in a timely fashion. It's a paradoxical case of more restrictions making things less secure.
FWIW, I also had the experience/sensation of being "removed" from the standard reality we experience daily, and put into a slightly-altered one that had been "created" or brought on by what was happening. And it felt very clearly like "the rules do not apply here".

This sort of sensation only happened in those particular experiences, all the other ones just felt "normal" (ironic term here).

Look at how absurd all of this sounds when you say it publicly. Psychedelics are something else...
Quartz is 100 bucks a year...

https://outline.com/v9fWFk
Why not? By asking things like that, he gives the experts the chance to address those ideas and present a more informed and/or grounded perspective of them. Honestly I think a lot of the time this is exactly why he asks things like that.
This does seem like a potential path towards transmutation
> wasn't shipping in any browser

I've seen it work on Chrome, Firefox and Edge. But at the time I discovered it, Chrome had already scheduled it for exclusion.
If you avoid duplication of effort by doing something worse than existing solutions, is that progress?

Distro package managers have more than 20 years doing this. If you want to replace them I think there should be fewer drawbacks. Otherwise you are throwing out decades of design, thought, bug fixes for something more problematic.
That would kneecap first party recycling and trade-in discounts. Apple's incentive to provide those services is to reduce the size of the secondary market.
Now that Python 2 is deprecated, I think that settling on Python for scripts is the happy medium. It is available in all but the most stripped-down linux builds, and those are commonly seen today only in docker images or hardware. And adding it to e.g. Alpine is trivial.
What a silly reason to ruin the environment! Apple (and to be fair most electronics companies) are already designing irreparable land-fill-ready devices. We have companies who are willing to do the hard work of repairing/refurbishing them to prolong their life-span, only to have Apple block them.
Location: NYC

Remote: Remote for now but available to meet regularly in NYC.

Willing to relocate: No

Full time/Part time/Contractor: Contractor/Freelance only (I invoice through my single-member LLC)

Technologies: React/Redux, CSS, JavaScript (ES6+), PostgreSQL, Golang, Node.js, Swift/Obj-C, CosmosDB (NoSQL DBs), and more

Résumé/CV: https://dwayne.xyz/resume

Freelancing Services: https://dwayne.xyz/services

Blog: https://dwayne.xyz

Email: dwayneh@gmail.com

I’m a web and app developer with over 15 years of professional experience. I’ve worked at startups, mid-sized companies, and large corporations including Apple, eBay, and the Comcast Silicon Valley Innovation Center. I specialize in full stack web development, and I'm experienced in iOS development, server administration, database design, and more. Currently available for freelance opportunities!
That's not their real concern anyhow. They just want to monopolize the supply by crippling the aftermarket as much as possible.

That's been their MO for over a decade. It's also why they fight the right to repair court cases and third party repair services tooth and nail ( https://www.ifixit.com/Right-to-Repair/Intro )
Anyone using wordpress is an idiot. That is why they are using it.

I've developed for the web for years and I hate that system with a passion. Bottom line, CMS is for idiots and the lazy. Sometimes I'm lazy too but never dumb enough to touch that shit show. Also, being introverted does not make it hard to post questions online, you may want to look into another diagnosis.
Very much this. The only reason I use Apple computers today is because I need access to their walled garden of apps (Safari, IOS) and (now slipping) legacy of workhorse hardware. In the past Macs were great for commercial graphics and other niches.

Today Xubuntu makes for a better *nix environment (IMO) and Windows has better gaming graphics and backward compatibility. With WSL maturing there's less reason to have a Mac except to compile for the lucrative garden dwellers.
Not all ARM CPUs even, there's a wide range between those using the relaxed memory model in the spec, some server CPUs having TSO (roughly matching x86) and others having sequential consistency (NVIDIA in-house CPUs).
At face value, it seems like Apple is choosing not to reuse the devices. Apple determined that the devices were beyond repair and needed to be recycled for a reason (Potentially safety-related reasons). Geep decided to reuse them anyway, disregarding any potential safety reasons that Apple found not to be repairable. As much as I'd like to say that Apple is in the wrong here, I trust Apple's quality control guidelines over some device recycling company executives trying to make some extra cash.