skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Everyone is doing it to escape the system.

This really resonates a lot with me. Yet it's really rare to hear people talk about it in the startup world.
A govt ban on exchanges would do it as well, but the US response thankfully has been pretty moderate.
It is enabled by default. I think there was a beta period where it was an option.
Your post seems to contradict itself. If it's not possible to have a middle class existence in SF, then surely it's even less possible to have a working class or poor existence in SF. Therefore, since the city is now exclusively populated by rich people, wouldn't the average person be rich, and therefore have a better quality of life than the average middle class person ~30 years ago?
Ask HN: Apple Bias – Real or Imagined?
I think it's apparent that discussions about Apple tend to be noticeably more polarising than similar posts about other Big Tech. I have got myself into some heated exchanges in the last couple of days. I was presented with the following claims (paraphrased):

HN commentary and commenters are biased in favour of Apple.

Only Apple has defenders in the community who counterclaim against negative assertions.

While I argue that this isn’t true, based on my (biased) opinion and minimal experience, I would like to know if others have experienced the same claim, wish to present evidence to back that claim, or could present a different take on the situation.

In responding to the original claim, I went rooting through posts on major tech companies looking for those favouring other giants, and I found some. Then I was reminded that I was looking for people speaking up in favour, to oppose detractors, and again I found evidence.

The search caused me to ask: can we prove, or disprove, that HN has a specific Apple bias? Whether it's positive or negative, whether it's stronger than bias around other tech companies?
And normal Chromium, which gets faster patches, and can be configured not to send telemetry etc.

Do it carefully, though.
Satya Nadella, CEO Microsoft about Folding Home
It's the symbol for Angstrom, a unit of length 10^-10m https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angstrom
The unmentioned reality is that tying these payments to SS payouts helped millions of people - the ones who are least able to navigate complex government systems.
It depends on how you define a "startup". For me this term has nothing to do with growth rate -- simply, a startup is a company that is still looking for its (first) product-market fit.

Just to be clear, I didn't mean the previous comment in any disparaging way.
I'm going to differ with you and all the other (so far) replies: you start with end games. Until you can solve simple mate in one puzzles there is no point in going farther as you will never be able to win. You then study tactics (which is what most others are saying start with), and more complex endgames.

The above is the Soviet school from the 1920s. There is a reason it produced (and continues to produce) so many great chess players: it works.

I suspect many of the other replies to your post agree with me, they moved a step beyond the basics in their replay because there are so many tactics to learn that they still find lack of tactics is their personal limit to greatness and so that is where they are working.

I think
>Credit-card companies consume a few percent of revenue

And anyone that "accepts" bitcoin as payment probably takes more than that due to Bitcoin's volatility.

If at the moment of a transaction, 1 BTC = 20k USD and I go to buy something that is $20k USD, it's not going to show up as "1 BTC" on the checkout.. it will probably be like 1.05 BTC.

Also, credit-card companies give guarantees to both the buyers and sellers, so they are providing a service. Buyers get extra protection with extra warranties, ability to reverse fraudulent/deceptive sellers. Sellers get extra revenue with people buying stuff they don't have cash for, and don't have to worry about fraudulent cash/checks etc. Yeah sellers overall take a bit of a hit, but the argument can be made the couple percent is worth it to never have to worry about getting scammed by a buyer.

Anyway.. crypto offers absolutely NONE of that. So comparing it to credit card companies is honestly quite laughable.

The only thing you can try to argue is crypto offers anonymity to a degree? Although it sure seems like you have to jump through a lot of hoops for this to even be true since it's a public ledger...
You're making two mistakes.

The first is that scaling Bitcoin up to the size of visa is not particularly possible. You might be able to match visa's throughput by greatly increasing the block interval (e.x. one block every week) but the protocol cannot reasonably scale past a couple hundred transactions per second without taking a massive hit to transaction latency. So, in this sense the question of how much energy Bitcoin would consume if you scaled it up is meaningless, it cannot be scaled up.

The second mistake is that Bitcoin's energy consumption has no relationship with its scale. Say you built a hypothetical MiniBitcoin which was exactly the same except each block was so small they could fit just one transaction, MiniBitcoin would consume almost exactly the same amount of energy as Bitcoin does now. The energy usage goes up as competition between miners increases. The energy usage does not go up as more transactions are processed.
I would hope the ingredients on the label would be accurate.

The reason HFCS took off in the U.S. is the high tariffs applied to sugar imports to protect the domestic sugar manufacturers. Without that market distortion in place, sugar is probably cheaper than HFCS.
I agree. The failures have to be explicable if we are to trust a model.
> essentially an unproductive project

Who are you to judge? There are lots of things that I find useless that the world uses a lot more energy on.
DBeaver 7.3
> than by a classical solution

cash
Smartphone upgrades contribution to growing e-waste
AlphaFold: The Making of a Scientific Breakthrough
> why do consumers need the government to tell them this is a valuable aspect of the technology they've purchased. It they don't value it they don't value it,

I would argue that a lot of consumers _do_ value it, but they don't know enough to ask about that up front.

Most people want to buy a thing, then use that thing, and when it breaks they reasonably assume that they should be able to get it fixed if they'd like. Cars work this way, appliances work this way, etc.

I think the reason why people don't ask for this up front is that

(1) most people would assume they have the right to repair (and thus don't think to ask) and/or

(2) life is short, and we shouldn't need an advanced degree specializing in a particular category of products in order to know all the ins and outs of buying one :)
Thanks for the ROMs you produce. Do you recommend any particular devices (phones and tablets) to use a device-independent ROM?

As far as I could see in your GitHub project wiki, most devices tend to have a few glitches (probably due to issues in the hardware abstraction layer from the manufacturers side?): https://github.com/phhusson/treble_experimentations/wiki

I could see some that look mostly flawless, like Samsung Galaxy Tab 8.0 2019. It'd be good to have a curated list of preferred devices. Buying Android devices with ROMs in mind is quite frequent, and your generic ROMs are a huge leap ahead!
It's an incredibly myopic, and frankly, greedy, view of the world.

What's greedy is thinking that one has any right whatsoever to the land and community that other people have invested decades of their lives to build. Democracy is and should be run by the people who actually live in an area, not by literal invaders who want to take it away.

The place to apply leverage on the housing problem is on the employers and investors who are forcing concentration of industries in one tiny area. There are plenty of places in the US with plenty of land and a willingness to build.
Mohsen Fakhrizadeh: Iran scientist 'killed by remote-controlled weapon'
I'm using mine right now to imagine one.
There isn't "the" vaccine, but many of them that will likely enter the market. This is nothing like the 1976 swine flu vaccine rushed out without proper science and clinical trials. The Moderna product has been heavily-tested. Waiting is throwing life away, and living like a hikikomori isn't an option unless someone doesn't have a life to live. In conclusion, I'll most likely get the Moderna one as soon as possible.
Covid Moonshot: crowdsourced initiative for a Covid antiviral
Isn't the basic idea of ETH still "distributed computer" a.k.a. "pointless redoing every computation over and over" albeit with 2.0 it's sharded (i.e. only a subset of verification nodes redoing each computation)?

Still sounds wasteful, except slightly less massively so.
A funny story I tell from time to time, is that I was with a company as the CTO that was acquired by a huge conglomerate with headquarters in Spain, so we had a lot of Spaniards that would come over to work for 6 month to several years. Anyways, one of them, Valentine was the CTO and my Spanyard counterpart. Soon this game began among several of the Spaniard executives to see who could learn obscure US colloquialisms and use them in conversation. That being said, the south has a master on them in spades. So me and one of my senior developers set about to teaching Valantine southern colloquialisms. Which would sometimes come out of his mouth hilariously wrong. Anyways, Valentine and myself end up late to a meeting one day and some decision were made that neither of us agreed with and Valentine says listen you carpetbagging hornswogglers, that dog is not going to hunt (translation, you untrustworthy, scheming people, that idea is stupid and it's not going to work). You could see the absolute defeat on the other Spaniard execs faces. It was a hilarious interaction, in which the other execs where trying to get me to cough up some colloquialisms they could use.

I never suppressed my accent in my career and have done well for myself. That being said, there have been occasions where I could tell I was in a room full of people who assumed I was a dumb southerner. That was to their detriment not mine.

As a side note, I did teach myself how to speak in a completely mid-atlantic accent which is pretty cool because it's not a real accent so nobody knows where you are from. If you want to teach yourself an accent, I would suggest learning mid-atlantic, as you will never run across a native speaker, it will throw people off and strike up a lot of conversation.

It's funny but accents, at least in native language are actually fairly fungible. If someone takes the effort, they can easily fake an accent to fairly realistic abilities so long as they are familiar with the dialect. I can fake a Italian/Brooklyn accent to fairly decent accuracy as most native English speaking Americans are able to. It might not fool a Brooklyn native, but it is good enough to fool the average American. We can thank Rocky Balboa for that. I can fake most southern accents to the extent that I can fool native speakers, but unless you are intricately familiar with the region it is hard to fool natives because there are usually hyper-dialects, I can tell where a person is from if they are from the south based on the southern accent. Yet, most people out of the south cannot tell the difference. For example, a Texas draw from the Old Florida draw, I can tell because I am from Florida, I have it and I get asked if I am from Texas all the time, yet I know when someone is from Texas as it is different in it's inflections. As well Georgia and Alabama are distinct from North Carolina and Tennessee wheras Mississippi is a mix, get too far north and they sound like Tennessee, east and it sounds like Alabama, south west and it sounds like Cajun, but it blends and that is how you can tell they are from Mississippi because they will use colloquialisms from other local accents.
They hired Max Howell, the author of Homebrew. I don't think he works there anymore though.
This will undoubtably change our understanding of human health and biology in many impactful ways in the years to come!

The same information we get through x-ray diffraction will now be available 100x or even 1000x cheaper, and using this model can even aid the interpretation of xray diffraction data!

What excites me most isn't doing what we can do now, for cheaper (which will surely lead to more effective research methods), but the potential to gain a systematic view of protein structures, either across the genome, species, or through time which will give us a deeper and more fundamental understanding of biology.
> I had my fair share of uncheatable open book exams, calculators allowed back in college. One I had on Calculus (or was it Linear Algebra?) was way harder than a comparable closed book exam. You really needed to know the subject to pass vs just memorizing a couple of formulas and plugging them in the right place.

We're discussing this in relation in relation to COVID, so no large gathering. This means no open book in person exams, I'm specifically talking about take home exams.

> Another professor devised an exam that used your student ID as a variable of the first question, and subsequent questions used the previous answers as inputs. Impossible to cheat.

Really easy to do so in a take home exam.
You make a good point that I tried to address but didn't do so very eloquently. My "never happened" was to a sustained period (12, 15+ years) of returns where your contributions weren't worth much more than they were when you put them in. That would destroy an entire generation's retirement. Your point about losing 5-8 years in your goal was to retire in 2008 is well taken. Folks in that position, assuming they had massive market exposure (which like you said is a mistake and extremely risky), had to either take a standard-of-living cut in retirement, continue working, or draw down principle and risk running out of money early.
Minesweeper in 83 Lines
It is not very beautiful or complete (marking mines is missing) but I am still amazed by the size:
https://gitlab.com/FalkF/Minesweeper/-/blob/master/minesweeper.au3
A 2017 link by Apple itself is the trust-worthy link you spam when someone accuses Apple of tax dodging. Are you serious?

Well here are some non-biased results from Google's first page for your education:

- Apple Avoided $40 Billion in Taxes. Now It Wants a Gold Star https://fortune.com/2018/01/18/apple-bonuses-money-us-350-bi...

- Silicon Valley giants accused of avoiding over $100 billion in taxes over the last decade. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/02/silicon-valley-giants-accuse...

It's amazing how far Apple supporters will go to defend Apple stealing their own money.
Can't wait to join a distributed computing bacchanalia.
> Hasn't Nashorn been superseded by GraalJS?

It depends, do you want support for your JVM? If so:

* Graal CE has no support

* Graal EE requires either running on Oracle Cloud or calling Oracle Sales for a custom quote. These are non-starters for many.

* JVMCI requires `-XX:+UnlockExperimentalVMOptions` which often voids support.

* I believe Mandrel is supported but requires RHEL
Of course, that's why I focused on degradation. There's plenty of room for improvement. For instance, PETase is not very efficient actually, and many research groups are working on its engineering.
Too late to edit my comment now, but obviously if you were going to use that test, you have to make sure to make it clear (without being too obvious) that you were talking about the MS-DOS version.
> this isn't the typical HN pedantry

This is the absolute definition of it.
To Help Kids Find Their Passion, Give Them Free Time
I got the Silent Circle Blackphone [1] (or silent phone) back in 2016.

My experience was terrible battery life, slow to update operating system, overall lack of attention.

E Foundation strikes me as quite similar, I have high hopes for privacy in the mobile space but unless someone really can fund that indefinitely, I don't see updates going out for a $600 smart phone (499 euros) for the lifetime a phone should have.

[1]: https://www.silentcircle.com/products-and-solutions/silent-p...
This "institutional investors" meme is a bit like God: no one can prove it, but it gives its believers all the hope. There is no evidence of that happening on massive scale and no reason for them to do so.
Bitcoin is perhaps the most important project we'll see in our lifetimes.

The liberation of the most important asset in a capitalist society, money, from the tragedy that has been the current fiat system can not be over emphasized.

Money touches everything and is about time the market takes control of it, takes it away from the crony-states destroying the value of our savings, hence destroying our productivity, undermining the law at every turn in defense of a faux-egalitarianism when in reality that power has only been used to inflict (unwillingly or not) more pain to the marginalized sectors propping up a financialized economy that only exacerbates the wealth gap and radicalizes society to a dangerous level that sadly we all know where it ends up.

Bitcoin may not end up succeeding, but its fight is worthwhile, and necessary, and in the end inevitable, and because of that if the price now is 7 nuclear power plants we should pay it, as god knows we waste enough resources in lobbying, war and corruption already, because the cost to society of not doing it will be even greater in the future, and most probably, bloodier too.
I do think you missed the point.

Parent: The software itself shouldn't have any control over the student's grades. A person should have to review the flags and actually find some wrongdoing. Not just push 'yes' and walk away.

You: Let’s say you’re only using the software to flag suspicious behavior, and bringing in humans to make the final decision. What happens when (inevitably) the software disproportionally flags people with dark skin because it is not trained to recognize dark-skinned faces? Or when the software disproportionally flags poor people, or people with families?

Answer: A person should have to review the flags and actually find some wrongdoing.

You: It means that those groups of people will be targeted by the (human) bureaucracy and tasked with defending themselves, when they’ve done nothing wrong

Me: The human bureaucracy is suppose to be there to determine the quality of the flags and analyze whether there is any discrimination at play. A company that lacks this human element is negligent and should be held responsible.

> And my response is—that’s not enough. It sounds like the algorithm, because it is biased, has the effect of increasing the bias in the whole system.

Hence why the humans should be held responsible for not addressing bias in their system. And why the actions of an algorithm should be the responsibility of its creators.

> If your response is that humans should work harder to counteract biases in machine systems, well, I think that’s just a way to CYA and assign blame but not a way to solve the problem—humans will remain biased, and they will trust automated systems even when that trust is misplaced.

So...? What’s your solution? All you’re saying is that humans will remain bias, yeah they will. That’s why we have laws that punish discrimination and bias. If your company creates products (algorithms) that discriminate, you should be held responsible. The human element is not there to “work harder” but to assure that what you’re releasing works properly. If you don’t think increased accountability fixes the problem, please tell us what would be “enough”.

> This argument assumes that EITHER access to guns is to blame OR people are to blame, but not both

No assumption. If you think a cop can have a gun but a criminal can’t then the gun isn’t the problem. If you believe cops can have guns but civilians can’t then the main factor is the person with the gun and not the gun itself. This isn’t an argument against increased restrictions and if you believe no one should have guns (including the government) im all for it. But if you believe someone has the right to have guns while others don’t, im hard pressed to see any other determining factor except who has the gun.
This is a great comment because it recognizes that all of what's happening is cyclical. San Francisco has boomed and busted in the past, it will boom and bust again. People comparing it to Detroit seem to ignore that that city itself is in the throes of a revival. How could S.F., which even without tech is in a prime geographical location and climate, do even less?
Thank you for the elucidation of the M1. It is odd that chip manufacturers are moving more and more to ASIC approaches again. I do fear they will be less flexible than traditional ISAs. However, GPUs started out as custom silicon, and they have been very useful.
Does it make up for running on well designed hardware? Well, yes it does. That’s also irrelevant to your question I was answering (well, I know you were trolling, but anyway).
"We Make Shitty Software... With Bugs!"

Ha Ha!
> The first is that scaling Bitcoin up to the size of visa is not particularly possible.

That’s no mistake, folks are suggesting that on a per transaction basis - today - Bitcoin is cheaper or more efficient if you take into account hand wavey externalities not captured in the classical transaction cost model of a payment processor like visa.

What I’ve done is invalidate that argument not by scaling visa down to a single transaction (as that doesn’t capture externalities, per the argument posited) but scale BTC up as the argument is BTC captures all externalities. By then showing that it’s physically impossible I’ve disproved the thesis.

You’re making a different argument about avenues for scaling and that deserves its own conversation.
We Rewrote Our JavaScript SDK in TypeScript
Is this a serious reply? The real world isn’t a logic problem.

SF today is mostly inhabited by two groups: the rich and the working poor. The rich can afford to live wherever they like and take Ubers or corporate shuttles. The working poor commute in on decaying, often dangerous public transit from an hour or more away.
This sounds silly but what does it say (am in a restricted environment for the next few hours...)
Solar Software Provider Aurora Raises $50M in Series B
Preface: Bitcoin is a neat idea (decentralized currency), but it’s not practical at scale.

Reply: To be fair, the US’ currency has no intrinsic value either. Prior to the removal of the gold standard, your $20 bill was backed by exactly $20 worth of gold in some vault. Mid-1970s, the gold standard was stopped and the US’ currency became “fiat”; it only has value because the US says it does. Should the US’ economy collapse, the bills become literally worthless.

It’s not exactly the same, but Bitcoin is essentially fiat money as its only value is what people say it is (somewhat similar to the stock market). So I think it’s an apt comparison.
The React Hooks Announcement in Retrospect: 2 Years Later
Ask HN: Managers, how are you organizing your notes?
Ive been using notion some to bring order to the chaos. Im specifically interested in the information architecture of your notes. Is everything sitting in a scratch page and you just search? Do you have a page per team? etc.
How debuggers work: Part 1 (2011)
I'd say give us another 5-20 years before saying we dodged it.
It might be the case that the relevant, practical threshold now tightens. For example, perhaps it is easier to experimentally verify a protein shape predicted by an algorithm than it is to experimentally determine the protein shape?
I admit $6 is very expensive when compared to credit card fees, but Bitcoin is the only way I know of sending someone in a different country $10k for just a $6 fee. It would still be $6 if you sent $1M.
FWIW unless you meant "unmarried, living without family members", the benefit was indeed higher for many households.

As an example, a family with two middle-class wage earners and 3 kids received $6,000. For a total household income in the "middle class" range, that's a nice bump.