skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You definitely are being hyperbolic here. There's no world where the only jobs available are food delivery, even in the fucked up world of Covid.
Linux is hardly unusable, it's just a worse experience, and for something I spend 10 hours a day on and earn my living with, I want the best experience.
Those videos are the equivalent of the DARE junk of the 90s but for cars. You should wear a seat-belt because it improves your own survivability not because some scare tactic told you to.
Who would've thought Communists would've made the best capitalists? China is a "managed economy" and about as far from "free market" as North Korea[1]. Does it work the same way? I don't think so. We know that corruption and graft have become the norm in China[0], not the exception, so I would contend it works nothing like a free market economy.

[0.] https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/09/opinion/no-roads-are-stra...

[1.] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_China
You were comparing a Walkman which is only offline last I checked.
Assume Covid didn't happen. Are you absolutely sure the voting outcome would have been the same?
> 7. AI will achieve human-level intelligence

Instant eye-roll from me.

Counterpoint: https://locusmag.com/2020/07/cory-doctorow-full-employment/
Resilient sounds more medical than sustainable.
That's their point. It would be creepy because the rider is not actually contracting with the driver.

The driver is an employee of Uber, so it would be creepy for them to have your info. If they were someone you hired, that's not weird.
Does shelf life play a role in this? My understanding was that SSD has a short lifespan [0] and so a focus on memory might be better for long term planning, and reliability.

[0.] https://www.solarwindsmsp.com/blog/ssd-lifespan
You probably could if they'd let you heh, it's really well optimized, and works great on 5 year old Apple hardware with much worse specs than a $300 modern Acer. This is especially true as low-end cheap devices tend to be much more "standard" -- no exotic hardware.
Something that I would include with the apology part (the text may have covered this and I missed it) is that apologies don't have but's.

"I'm sorry I funded Wikimedia Antarctica but..."

Everything you say after the but negates everything you say before it and now you're only trying to justify your actions. Simply, "I'm sorry I funded Wikimedia Antarctica." and proceed to describe what you learned: "I neglected to look at relevant data before doing so. I see how that affected my thinking and I'm committed to doing that in future deals."

I can't stress how much more impactful my apologies have become with people simply by leaving out that "but". Even my relationship with my wife has improved because of it and I've noticed she's started to leave off the "but's" as well, which really makes me appreciate her apologies a whole lot more.
The US constitution has a very long history of being selectively enforced whenever it is convenient for those in power, be it on issues of civil rights, the HUAC, various CIA and FBI programs exposed in the 70s, mass surveillance and "national security", etc. It needs to stop, but those in power seldom want their own powers curtailed.
I think this is a textbook example of hindsight being 2020. Of course it's obvious now.
Feel free to reach out (email in parent post).
It's hard to imagine any worker staying non-partisan when one party is threatening their paycheck.
> AI will achieve human-level intelligence

I just have a passing interest in the AI space, but I feel like we've been hearing that this is "10 years away" for the last 20+ years.

Maybe I'm wrong, but with technologies like AI and self driving cars we tend to make a lot of progress and then hit long plateaus of minimal improvement. It feels like someone makes a breakthrough and then everyone rushes to solve all the formerly hard problems that are now easy to solve because of that breakthrough, but once those dry up, we run into a different "unsolvable" problem. The general public keeps assuming we will advance in a linear (or logarithmic) fashion during those times of growth and fails to account for the fact that there are large plateaus of minimal growth in between them.

I do think at some point we will achieve this, but 10 years feels like an incredibly optimistic timeline.

Also, as a side note, over the years I've found that anyone who describes themselves as a "futurist" tends to have a bit of optimism bias toward how quickly we will reach certain technological milestones, which makes me believe this timeline even less.
It does allow disabling settings, indeed, but it's a trove of dark patterns, including updates resetting your privacy settings.
Bro, I'm picking up the bill for your kids (or if you're childless then someone's kids) to go to school. So maybe stop with this nonsensical view of society where you have to cover all your costs.

Obviously some of us net positive into the government. That's how society works.
It's also intimidating to try to counterprotest in the face of such a huge mob when there's been numerous instances of violence from them in the past. I certainly wouldn't go without a gun if I were to show up at one of these things lest someone see me as an easy victim.
people keep assuming that technology just needs to be developed when in actually it's the cost that matters most. No technology will ever see widespread adoption without a low enough cost, not to mention it needs to be allowed legally as well.
Not sure why this is downvoted when its apropos. ^Trumps behavior is an effective counter example to the evolved list of rules, wikipedia puts forth as good autocratic process...insofar as wikipedia is more autocratic than communal by contribution.

^Obviously trump is not a genious
My understanding was that both yes and no on prop 22 are net positives compared to the status quo ("yes" providing 120% minimum wage guarantees and some benefits, vs no obligations currently), and I recall reading Uber saying these will indeed incur extra costs that will get passed onto consumers.

I feel that prop 22 is often incorrectly characterized as either an attempt at maintaining the status quo or a step backwards, but it's neither.

It's easy to say "well I support everyone making more money", but that is an idealistic position that ignores the basic fact that there's a limited amount of money that needs to be distributed among a lot of people. If you were in charge, you might be of the opinion that only some stakeholders should get that money and others get nothing in order to allow at least some people to meet some arbitrary minimum threshold (the "no" in prop 22), or you could choose to distribute evenly across all existing stakeholder even if it doesn't meet the threshold for anyone (the "yes").

I don't think there's necessarily a right/wrong stance here; they're just different philosophies, and it makes sense to then vote on which people prefer. The people voted, and I imagine they did so with understanding of the propositions.

I think it's dangerous to insinuate that people can easily be manipulated to vote one way or another. If that were indeed the case, then what exactly is the merit of a democracy over a dictatorship? I'd rather believe that people do indeed take their civic responsibility seriously and vote in an informed manner.
Modern day struggle sessions!
So, if the planification was on the hands of the people via direct democracy, like Cockshott proposes, then problem solved, kind of?
Depression does not have to be moral failing of will power, but it definitely can be cured by moral success of will power.
I use both Windows and Mac but I would never consider Windows some patron saint. The telemetry and dark patterns in Windows are much worse than what Apple does. Windows literally advertises its own browser in different parts of your OS and will regularly change the default back to Edge after updates.

But overall I am pretty happy with Windows being my daily driver now that they have WSL.
"Regular masks absolutely provide substantial - admittedly, not perfect, but substantial - personal protection."

There is no evidence for this, and if you read the CDC guidance document that suggested it this week, you'll see that every citation in the newly added section refers to studies about filtration efficiency, which is a very different question:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/masking-scien...

The high-quality evidence for masks has not changed substantially since March. The few lines of direct evidence suggest that it's possible they help a tiny amount, but we haven't been able to detect much evidence of this, either way. Only by combining multiple (poor) studies together, pooling the data and statistically re-weighting the pooled results was the WHO meta-analysis able to find any signal at all, and the signal wasn't strong:

http://www.economicsfaq.com/retract-the-lancets-and-who-fund...

In 2020, we've had a number of studies that attempt to use statistical analysis of infection data from late spring (when cases were declining in the northern hemisphere) to draw conclusions about masks, and a handful of anecdotes that are repeated frequently by the media -- the Missouri hairdresser, the Korean Starbucks -- that were neither controlled, nor subjected to statistical analysis of any sort.

The only randomized controlled trial conducted on masks for personal protection against Covid -- the highest quality form of evidence for a health intervention -- has been completed since June, and rejected by three major publications:

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04337541

https://www.berlingske.dk/videnskab/professor-stort-dansk-ma...

Moreover, as we have now seen, most of the places around the world with mask mandates and high rates of self-reported compliance are experiencing spikes in infection. At the very least, these call into question the publications that attempted to make claims based on data from the spring. We're starting to see retractions related to this:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.21.20208728v...
Show HN: GitHub Contributors – who from which companies contribute to a project
I trust one every time I get in our Leaf.

But your comments in this thread indicate that you'll just find another objection to keep that narrative supported. Fact is, you actually can buy a Leaf that doesn't have "major problems" for < $8K.
Within my family I use Peergos for sharing photos and videos. Disclaimer: I'm a co-founder. Individual files or entire folders can be shared securely in band, or via a secret link. Everything is E2EE including metadata. e.g. here is a secret link to some media files:

https://alpha.peergos.net/#%7B%22secretLink%22:true%2c%22lin...
I want the option for my 12 year old to work in a coal mine. It's good for people to have another option.

Lots of labor laws exist that prevent people from working jobs they could work without those laws. This individuals will likely be against those laws. It doesn't mean those laws are bad for society.
You wouldn't fork() for performance, but for security reasons.
I think the choice to merge Google Play Music into YouTube makes perfect sense. When you have the largest music streaming service (probably YouTube) why would you want to run another one.

I love the idea that anyone can easily publish songs that I can listen to (no need for music labels) and that I can share playlists that friends can add arbitrary YouTube songs to without a subscription.

The major issue is that they did a terrible job at it. To list a couple of issues:

- Your uploaded music and the YouTube collection are completely separate (unlike GPM)
- It buffers almost nothing ahead, even in bad network conditions so it fails on road trips.
- The song suggestions are awful. (way worse than GPM)
- Even if you dislike a song it will still suggest it for you (often frequently)
- A lot of features missing (sure, they wouldn't get them all, but so many are gone).

The list goes on. I was a GPM subscriber for a long time. I used to work at Google so I decided I would help beta-test YouTube Music. However it quickly became clear that it wasn't going to be a good replacement for GPM. I ended up switching away from YouTube Premium and YouTube Music.
I'm not necessarily saying that it could have happened, I'm mostly exploring how it would have played out if it had.

The left seems to suggest that only an immoral (or possibly dumb) person could possibly vote for Trump and that we need to put country over politics. That's easy to say when putting country over politics happens to agree with your own political views. I don't know if many democrats would have voted for a person like Ted Cruz in 2016 if Trump (or someone like him) had been the democratic candidate. I can almost certainly say that I personally would have played the same games of semantics that the right was playing then (and still are).

There's a lot of "right-shaming" going on when I suspect that it's just an accident that the right was the side that fell for it this time. The left should be extra vigilant to make sure that we don't fall for it ourselves.
In college I used a mix of these and PatrickJMT's videos on Youtube.

The awesome thing about Patrick's YT channel is that he walks through a plethora of examples for all kinds of concepts. So if you're more of a hands-on learner who doesn't absorb as much when your instructor just lectures without showing/demonstrating a concept, then the channel is a great supplementary tool.

I wouldn't have made it to my degree in CS without his content.
Are these reports worth much in the US with NSL's? Its nice but I always assume its half the picture.
The gig economy doesn't disintegrate the firm. It just consolidates lots of smaller firms into a few gigantic ones. We just call them "platforms".
Don't you think it depends on the existing players' cash horde after an IPO? I am very interested to hear a successful VC's response to "I want to go against Uber, DD, and GrubHub. Money plz!"
Yes, we can simultaneously recognize that the Electoral College was intended to stop candidates like Trump, while also accepting that once it actually voted for Trump, he was in fact the legally and constitutionally legitimate President.
>2. Due to increased automation(spreading through all industries) income inequality will hit an all time high.

>9. A reverse of the people moving to big cities occurs, more people moving into smaller towns happens, this was triggered by covid but continues as more and more jobs are able to be done remotely.

These seem opposite, to me. I agree many jobs will eventually be automated. Especially manufacturing and other things small towns are known for. Can small cities survive with remote workers replacing the lost jobs?
>Because the average person has a very bad understanding of risk and consequences?

When it comes to things that are defined by social consensus (like whether or not one should wear a seat-belt, or smoke indoors, etc) like the hypothetical "average person" is always correct by definition.
Are you aware that ~80% of antibiotics are used for animals? This and similar practices are making "super bugs" (bacteria that is resistant to treatment by most antibiotics).

We may be on the cusp of a massive crisis.
I was not referring to any specific group of people. And you are right, there has been a great deal of attention and action. I think it is a healthy sign and may be a reason for cautious optimism, but this is a continuous effort and we need to remain vigilant.
Recently, the most notable is Xi has not congratulated or acknowledged Joe Biden’s victory.
Thank you for the succinct summary. You might be interested in one theory on why Elizabeth Warren was so popular: https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2019/11/the-real-class-wa...
Using SSDs for ML is what vendors like NVIDIA and AMD are trying to solve because this is a fallacy as you will never have as much RAM as you want / need compared to the size of your datasets.

https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/gpudirect-storage/

It’s the same fallacy as RAM size
impacts video editing, it doesn’t.

8K RED raw is 4.374 terabytes per hour... at that point it doesn’t matter if you have 8, 16 or even 256GB of RAM there if your storage is too slow to support it you’ll drop frames and or have huge seek times, more memory won’t really help you there is no amount of prefetch you can do to bridge gaps that big.

There is a huge advantage of having a unified memory architecture where the application can address a single memory address space to access your data and you do not need to perform memory copies, allocations and all that stuff between your storage, CPU and GPU...
Well... most quants are recruited straight out of engineering schools so you are probably right. About the IDE, honestly once you think about it, it actually achieve many thing at once. I am not sure what they could change to make it better.
If you have a family, you flee. If you are willing to commit, you infiltrate and sabotage. Once the mass turns, as described in the article, you have to subvert or you may as well just get out.
That is great book and every engineer should read it, but not because its correct, because it isn't - now I know enough of medicine to know that solution works because it is another way to say lets do IF.

The book is great because you can follow how engineer tries to solve a very hard problem.
I think I understand where you're coming from, but I see the "never apologize" philosophy as having an utterly corrosive effect on the person who made a mistake.

What I try to do is apologize concisely, but then feel free to ignore people who want to drag this out into "that was not a REAL apology" / "now confess to your OTHER crimes" territory.
Show HN: Growth Digest of curated startup growth tactics and resources
To me it's not even in a vacuum about whether Bannon meant it jokingly or seriously, it's how this all fits in with the rest of FB's behavior. Like Zuckerberg speaking to right wing politicians exclusively, or throttling traffic to Mother Jones, or the fact some people get banned (I think Christopher Wylie still is...) and not others... it's a real bad look and it should make people question whose side Facebook/Zuckerberg are on

Not even to mention other predatory practices like Whatsapp (Onavo) or Oculus (hey we know we said you didn't need a Facebook account for it but oh well, we lied)
Do you think China suffers from a collective inferiority complex? By that I mean: Any attack or criticism is fiercely resisted because it challenges the party narrative that the party can do no wrong?
> Abridging the 4th amendment rights of users wasn't enough: they had to abridge Apple's 1st amendment rights to even say how many times it happened.

The other (potentially more important side) of Apple's 1st amendment rights to speak are the subjects' and everyone else's 1st amendment rights to hear / receive information.

In telling Apple that they cannot reveal the identity of these requests, they are saying that I am not allowed to learn whether I was subjected to ones of these searches. Without being allowed to know, I cannot challenge the search, etc.

The same contra-positive-analysis is helpful with claims of "foreign interference" in elections, where I may have little concern for a foreign adversary's right to speak, but also take serious issue with the idea that I should not be allowed to learn about matters that may be important to and relevant to my vote.
The question, then, is whether DoorDash is more like Amazon or WeWork.

By everything I see, they are a company that pays people to deliver stuff. That is a very crowded marketplace. Without groundbreaking innovation the likes of which companies an order of magnitude bigger have failed to deliver (like Uber and self-driving cars), I personally don't see how they create a revenue stream as lucrative as AWS.
An interesting point here:

>would correspond to an optimization problem that would take a thousand years to solve on a modern desktop computer

If this really is so, then the problem is tractable nowadays - a thousand 2016 desktop computers years is something we could do multiple times a day with a modern supercomputer, so definitely feasible.

Same for data, modern networked devices could provide data of sufficient quality.

That being said, the big one is of course to find the function to optimize. I had an idea about this not long ago - the issue communists have with capitalism is that it has a class divide in production. So why not try this: all consumer goods must be sold on a pseudo-market. So, after production, a second algorithm sells the products at such a price that supply and demand is solved.

Using the prices determined by this market, one calculates the ratio of labour (time x complexity) and resources per dollar of price found when watching supply and demand, and the optimization system could be run so as to attempt to maximize the ratio of labour+resources/price.

This way, people will get what they want the most, and the system should optimize for the best way to make people work the least, which seems like the primary contradiction between an individual's work as producer and consumer.

Of course, there would still be quite a few inefficiencies, but given the fact that the Soviet economy was not that far from that of the US, it could be a net positive in pure economic output? Especially since this wouldn't suffer from any economic crises at all.

What would remain is a way to incentivize innovation, maybe somehow by including successful innovation into the labour price of a commodity?

Of course, outside of this, there would also be serious political issues with the necessary centralization for this, and you'd need to find a way to trust the economic calculation process.

All in all, this feels... much more tractable to accomplish than what I would've thought. Maybe even tractable enough that it could be, in theory, implemented today, given sufficient political will and a way to get the most competent people possible on it, which of course is far from a given.
Just did today.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/biden-elec...
Show HN: Get Your Startup Pitch Deck Updated Instantly by a Pro Designers
Infrastructures (2010)
Indeed, in those case the duty of care was explicitly (legally?) delegated to someone else. Someone in the chain of transmission had a duty of care, and failed in that duty.

> Despite having obvious signs of illness, the Maplecrest employee went to work that day, and the next.

It wasn't a partygoer. I'm fine with holding specific people responsible (even legally) if they failed their explicit duty of care, but assigning blame to the whole population just because they don't comply with your narrow moral senses is intellectually dishonest. If we stopped doing that, maybe we could also focus on actually being effective (e.g. specifically protecting the old / vulnerable & their caretakers with specific, targeted and (most importantly) effective measures), not just requiring that everybody abide by arbitrary rules.
The numbers you describe are an opportunity but also a big risk. The problem with these app-based businesses is that there’s little brand loyalty. They spend a ton of money to create a market and customer base and round about the time they start making money a copycat comes along and customers flip. It becomes a race to the bottom. Few would dispute the profit that could come from holding onto a user for years. Many will dispute the likelihood that this will actually happen.
Sounds like it can apply to both.
As long as they could settle on a good cost function. I think my proposal for how the cost function should be found is better than Cockshott's in the short term.
The game breaking Deal Breaker card
This is our wonderful new internet at work. Thanks all you Silicon Valley types....
Because part-time has been the main description of the job since the company started.
Pixelmator Pro 2.0
They oppose the government regulations. Not necessarily rules and standards in general.

The thinking is that the restaurant should be certified by industry not by the government, kind of like how the ASE certifications work for mechanics.