skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The issue isn't a really a physical one in principle here. It's an issue of corporate accountability.

You had corners cut to deliver a product that ended up killing people. There is no real room for doubt in that just from the material we have available.

So, what? What happens? What should happen? Everything go back to "normal"? Let the same people who ran things continue to profit off their wrongdoing? Accept that as long as you're one of only two rides in town that you have the security to deliver and recover from delivering a lethal product?

That's the issue. That's the reality we're taking out of this. It isn't even self-regulating anymore. There is no bankruptcy, no hammer, no reallocation of assets to those that can wield them more responsibly, no reset. Just a token gesture. The same Goliath just shrugs and moves on.

While I get that might be tenable or desirable to some, I'm not one of them. Realistic risk of falling flat on your face, being held to account, and not being able to just shrug it off and keep going keeps you honest.

Once you lose that, "What's a life here and there? Doesn't bother me. Can't make an onelette without cracking a few eggs."

The economy is not an omelette, and people are not eggs. Either we serve it, or it serves us. I know which side of that assertion I'm on.
Ask HN: YC Startup Expo 2020-12-03 without Hopin accn.?
I'd really like to participate to tomorrow's Online Startup Expo with YC, but to claim ticket the site requires me to agree to Terms and conditions (https://hopin.com/terms) and Privacy policy (https://hopin.com/privacy).

I'd prefer to avoid agreeing with them, or frankly reading them. How can I participate in the Expo without that?
Yes, the singularity is science fiction, but I don't think that's a fair characterization of Kurzweil. If you've read any of his books on the topic he lays out a pretty meticulous if flawed case for the singularity, he may be wrong but I don't see any reason to suggest he is anything other than earnest.
Twilio | Senior Solutions Engineer (Pre-Sales) | Atlanta, GA | Remote or Onsite | Full Time | VISA | https://grnh.se/cb7008321us
The various Amish sects that I'm familiar with in PA use technology much more recent than the 1700s (including smart phones in some cases).

Most of it is via generators and gas-powered appliances, as they won't have electricity running into their homes.

I'm not an expert by any means but it's just not correct that they stopped using technology developed after the 1700s.

I agree with your larger point that people may be better served by simpler technologies in many instances.

Alan Watts has some interesting (and prescient) writings about how misuse/misunderstanding of new technology leads down a hostile path to societal destruction. Sounds like you may find it worth reading.
My son has learnt to pronounce "Nate" as "Neat" when convincing Alexa to play DJ Nate songs from a game soundtrack.
Yeah, they're saying that it's cheaper to build renewables than continuing to run fossil fuel plants. The marginal costs are for additional power once you own the plant.

I believe around 80% of the lifetime cost of a fossil fuel plant is the fuel itself, so even if you're gifted a plant for free it may not be economical to run.

The fly in the soup is intermittency, but grids are generally able to absorb more renewables (wholesale price dropping below 0 is the indicator saturation has happened). And electric cars are going to mean a bunch more dispatchable demand and eventually V2G.
The first son would inherit the family assets. Second son would join clergy. The third son would be sent off to join a knight's group such as the Knights of St. John.
OK, shipping batteries between continents is far from feasible now.

But what about electrifying a small collection of households by batteries that are replaced from a truck every N weeks, instead of building many miles of power lines through (perhaps flammable) wilderness?
> I think the difference is I write tests. I usually code everything while writing/running tests. Then it always works the first time I run it, so there’s no need for “edit; reload”.

I write tests, too. I guess I'm not as good of a software developer - because just as my code has bugs and unexpected edge cases, so do my tests, and they don't catch every mistake I made, since I'm the one making them.
I don't actually think I'm missing that context. I'm just struggling to cross the giant gap between the baked in assumptions in my mind and the baked in assumptions out in the world and there never seems to be a good way to do that.

Trying to be diplomatic about it ends up making me "look stupid." Trying to be confident about my views ends up making me look like a narcissistic and contemptuous asshole who thinks everyone else is stupid.

My mental framing for the space is different than yours. That doesn't, per se, mean I'm wrong or stupid.

My mental framing is rooted in having lived with a genetic disorder my entire life and having raised a child with the same disorder and getting diagnosed late in life.

The problem space for a dominant genetic disorder like Huntington's Disease is fundamentally different from that for a recessive disorder. Mental models for how to address them should be fundamentally different as well.

So telling me "That doesn't work for a dominant disorder" isn't really a valid rebuttal of anything I've said. I'm not suggesting it as policy for dominant disorders.
Need better car, or add dynamat to your old car's doors.

Or, possibly different tires.

This is an unusual problem - sounds annoying in general!
I think you are commingling "Think it should be fixed" with "Think it should be trashed entirely". I like the idea of warning labels. I don't like that they are currently not very good at communicating what is actually dangerous. That doesn't mean I want to get rid of them, it means I want them improved.
This doesn't bode well for Intel's 5nm and 3nm processes. Part of the problem with their 10nm process is that they tried to scale transistor density far more aggressively than their competitors. Jumping 2 nodes in one go is far more difficult today as feature size approaches atomic scale than it was 20 years ago. Better to have a process that's an improvement over the previous generation than to have a process without the yields needed to support commercialization (which is effectively no process at all).
This is what has led us to stop using our assistants around the house. I have 4 of those little google pucks around the house that we used for various tasks and automations. Now that we have a 1-year-old we almost never use them because I don't want him learning the phrase "ok google".

It sounded dumb enough for two adults to say it all day, but the convenience was worth it. Having my little one start using the phrase to talk to things is definitely where I draw the line.

Besides, now that it tries to make suggestions after every other command all you really hear in my house in regards to them is "hey google shut the fuck up and do what you're told". Unfortunately the stupid puck doesn't allow you to interrupt the unsolicited FAQ any longer.

Come to think of it, I think I'm getting rid of most of these things this weekend.
Love this - I actually started implementing these circuits in C [0] a while back but never got past combined memory.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23672470
Any links as to where one can play this game?
Why is this being downvoted? Is it not accurate? If so could someone explain where djrogers is wrong?
Well, it helps you decide whether to sign, or to walk, right?

But who would pay $3K for a contract review??
> it has some plausibility

I think talking about 'entryist parasites' and 'urbit insiders shielding themselves from people wanting in', is on its face pretty obviously cringeworthy.

Like, is that a problem that Urbit has, hordes of people at the door wanting to jump in, like some coveted nightclub?

William Gibson called this very aptly anti-marketing in his Blue Ant trilogy, and like you point out in your first sentence, it's nothing but a manipulative tactic by people who want to inflate the value of what they're selling by making it artificially scarce and exotic.
Yes. A son in the Church was sort of a hot-swappable backup, as the Church would cut him loose if you had a good reason, such as the primary heir having died (and, of course, subject to the payment of a ...modest donation...), but while he was in the Church he was no threat to the primary. Any children he himself had (this was far from unheard of) would be automatically be illegitimate and not in the line of succession.

Extra sons were, yep, often sent off to war. They'd either conquer their own territories or be killed. In either case, they were no longer a threat to the primary heir.
Agreed. It's not surprising at all since they don't want to manage a bunch of different contracts. However, I'm of the opinion (and I am a lawyer) that the contracts should then always be especially construed even more strictly than usual against the drafter.
Show HN: My source code scaffold tool for C#, Java and PHP
My source code scaffold tool for C# (ASP.NET), java (spring MVC) and php (laravel).

There is a need to signup to access the app, the link for that is on the website, so also is the login link.

For more clarity on how it works, i have an article on linkedin with embeded videos

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/code-joh-shorter-version-code...
My bad, I meant WhatsApp.
But that's no longer "spying", is it? You just shifted the goal post.
Most people don't know what manufacturer of the aircraft they are flying in, let alone the specific model. I haven't flown in quite a while, but when I did I didn't research what model aircraft I was flying in. I doubt more than a small handful of people do.
One mistake I (and no doubt other founders) made was assuming you'd "get it right" because you were scratching your own itch. My cofounder and I started our company [0] literally based on the pain points we were feeling and still, when the first user tests on the first version of the product came around, users didn't get it. Or they didn't see the value. It was a tough lesson - we were building the thing we thought we wanted and others didn't want it. But we persevered, pivoted a little here, rewrote a lot there, and ended up with something that users not only liked a lot more, but also worked better for us too.

Moral of the story is scratching your own itch makes you qualified to talk about the problem, it doesn't make you an expert on a good solution.

0: https://kitemaker.co, the super fast, hotkey-driven product management tool/issue tracker that has deep integrations to GitHub, Figma, Slack, etc.
No, it's like saying gold isn't scarce because anybody with a bee in their bonnet can launch "Gold 2.0" and create their own supply. Which is definitely not true for gold, but is demonstrably true for cryptocurrencies.

I grant that crypocurrency fans will look at me weird, which I'm fine with. But economists (and most others) won't, because they understand that substitutability [1] affects scarcity.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitute_good
As an employee I might have $100k in MSFT stock after five years. Those buybacks gave me what, a few hundred/thousand bucks at most? Come on. For such a supposed math-literate profession this objection is weirdly common.

If you get cash you can turn around and buy company stock. Nobody is stopping you. Unions would also certainly see the value in employee ownership of stock, which broadly aligns with ideas of workers capturing more of the value they
produce.

A union enables workers, in aggregate, to capture more of the value they produce - value which would otherwise flow to the pockets of shareholders, the overwhelming majority of whom contributed nothing to its creation. Talk about employee salary distribution is orthogonal to this debate.
This is a fantastic comment!

One small thing: we do now have tables[1]! At the moment they are ephemeral and only support inserts -- no update/delete. We will remove both of those limitations over time, though!

[1]: https://materialize.com/docs/sql/create-table/
Example: https://www.uk-lotterysyndicate.com/
But it's not the this level of wealth is never spent - it is being ("invested") used in hoarding valuable resources, that others cannot then use.
Some cultural notes: the UK is in a culture war, and some will shine the most negative light on anything the opposing side do.

Taking a more charitable approach... is it possible those suggesting Brexit has allowed a quicker rollout aren't referring to regulations?

Perhaps the early rollout is facilitated by UK doing their own deals with vaccine manufacturers, rather than as as a package deal with EU (and thus having to wait for their slower and safer process). Is that it?
Big disasters too happen with fossils and hydro.
There are two very different questions:

1. How often does this happen? This is a question about expected value, and the answer could be anything zero or above.

2. What are the chances that this will happen within a year? This is a question about probability, and the answer must lie between zero and one. There is no such thing as "a 775% chance it would happen yearly".
His imagination is limited. He is a statist and thinks if a persons opinion doesn't matter (subjects of the state) Then they have ultimate freedom. He equates having zero power as freedom.
> RAII can be decoupled from ctor/dtor mechanism, see Python's 'with' statement

That may be a useful language feature, but I don't count that as full RAII. I'm inclined to agree with Wikipedia's definition that the destructor must run whenever the object's lifetime ends, to count as proper RAII:

> resource deallocation (release) is done during object destruction (specifically finalization), by the destructor

As x can presumably leak from the with block of your example, it isn't full RAII. I think it's equivalent to the confusingly named using feature of C#. [0]

> throwing exceptions from ctors or, worse, dtors. Herb Sutter used to have a loooong list of what can go wrong in such situations

Thanks for the pointer ( or should that be reference? :-P ), these are an interesting read. [1][2][3]

> Explicit error codes happen to make it impossible to write ctors / dtors that can enter an error state by virtue of the fact that there is no way to return the error

Yes, but this approach detracts from the RAII somewhat, as it means the programmer must move the substantial code out of the constructor and into a post-construction initialization member-function capable of throwing. That may be a price worth paying, but I do consider it a price, as we've lost a useful invariant: we must now keep track of which instances are in the constructed-but-unready state. An unfortunate slide back toward C.

> My suspicion is that this is 50% of the reason of banning C++ exceptions in solid C++ style guides.

I suspect these weird edge-cases where intuition diverges from reality, are much of the motivation for those prohibitions, yes.

[0] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/language-refe...

[1] http://www.gotw.ca/gotw/047.htm

[2] http://www.gotw.ca/gotw/066.htm

[3] (Rather more basic) https://herbsutter.com/2008/07/25/constructor-exceptions-in-...
This is a great tip. `Hey Boo Boo` is much easier to say too.
But in order for Google to catch people spying on other people by viewing their calendars, Google would have to surveil the activity of the people doing the spying. Maybe that's what the headline is referring to, but the article doesn't spell that out explicitly (which makes it a very poor piece of journalism in my opinion).
In the context of the movie, Rickert had already retired from finance to own an orchard, and was dragged back into it by the two other characters in the clip. I can't remember how they know each other. He's a fairly reluctant player the whole time, but he does help them out.
Maybe it hasn’t been long enough yet but I hear Red Hat hasn’t changed much post IBM acquisition.
This is a really bizarre generalization. There are good managers and bad managers, it just depends on the organization and the individual. Bad managers aren't always easy to spot, but it's very obvious who the good ones are because everyone in the organization implicitly looks to them for guidance and support.
Here’s what this means for real-world kubernetes deployments:

- 99% of Kubernetes deployments use dockerd as a runtime

- 99% of dockerd deployments use containerd as a runtime

- containerd can be called directly by kubernetes via cri-containerd

- Therefore most Kubernetes deployments can, and should, be simplified by calling containerd directly.

- This deprecation notice will make this transition happen sooner.

This is the natural consequence of Docker itself splitting out its runtime into containerd.
YouTube deleted one of my videos, and I'm done debunking conspiracy theories
As per your second point, realistically it was probably even done on work devices and not personal phone anyways. As for the second example, the person actually submitted a change to a corp extension, so that must've also been done on a work device. So none of these example have anything to do with personal devices.
You are Number Six.
The article doesn't mention anything about mobile devices though?
Pain is not the unit of Effort
How about: "Hey, this is your first day, now you need to take this final difficult test and if you fail we will fire you"?
No idea. Never been in the market myself. I do hear that the commercial stuff is too expensive. And why pay full price for a plant, a weed, you can grow in a closet? Everyone just knows someone who grows more than they can use themselves. They then sell it to friends for next to nothing.
Solid prototype! As others have pointed out the clicking is a bit janky on Firefox but the exploratory aspect and world building is well done.

One thing I noticed is that the real online banking window displays "UPC Bank" in the title bar (just like the fake one). I guess that's a mistake since that was one of the main giveaways that it was fake.
FYI 0.129 = 1 / 7.75. I think you and person you're responding to are doing the same calculations, but inverted.
It depends on a lot of factors. I worked at a startup that used PHP and the initial code quality of Product A was godawful because some early hires didn't know how to properly structure their code. Over the next few years, as staff turned over, we were able to clean it up considerably, add a lot of good OO practices, and get to a point where new developers who didn't even have PHP experience could be very productive very quickly.

When we started a Product B about nine months into my time there, the new team wrote new, well-designed code from scratch, and was also very productive very quickly.

PHP lets you easily shoot yourself in the foot, but it also gives you all the tools you need to leave your feet in very good condition, and it's not difficult to do that either.
Surely this theoretical risk of that is dwarved by the concrete risk of climate change.
UK has about 60million people living here. About 60,000 have died from covid (actual number is far higher). That's 1 in 1000 people dead from covid.

How bad are people expecting the vaccine to be?
It's like an ugly C.

It's a perfectly reasonable choice for web development, just like a Chevy Caprice is a perfectly reasonable car for a taxi service (as evidenced by the thousands of them in NYC, still plodding along). You'd still rather ride in a Mercedes E430 taxi (long time European standard)... unless you had never experienced both, in which case you probably think the Caprice is just fine.

And if you knew Ruby, Python, Java, C#, Kotlin, or better yet F#, Clojure, or Elixir, you'd most likely enjoy using one of them rather than PHP.

There are three reasons to use PHP.

1. it works

2. it is well integrated with web servers

3. you can find some of the cheapest contract labor who know how to program in it (compared to other, less common/popular languages)

Bonus 4. you need to extend Wordpress by writing a plugin or theme (and Wordpress is the Caprice of CMSs...)
A new way of ORM in Java
ObjectiveSQL is an ORM framework in Java based on ActiveRecord pattern, which encourages rapid development and clean, codes with the least, and convention over configuration.

Features

Dynamic code generation with JSR 269 for Java API of database access

Automate your methods of CRUD operations in database, and much more

Easy to relation query, transaction and paged query

Dynamically SQL programming with Java syntax, and similar to program with SQL syntax extremely

https://github.com/braisdom/ObjectiveSql
Oh. I assumed consecutive numbers, but not necessarily consecutive on each pull. That is, 1,2,3,4,5 is no different than 2,3,4,5,1 in my calculations, which makes the possible ways got get consecutive numbers at the end quite a bit higher. Still not positive I got it right, but at least I know it shouldn't match your results, as they are for slightly different things. :)

Edit: What I did was take all the possible combinations of 5 balls (5!) by the number of different sets that could be drawn (50-5, based on lowest number), over the total possible draws (50!). I think perhaps what that does it not account for overlap between sets (1-5 and 2-6), inflating the number somewhat, which is why it's a bit more than twice the probability than you got for any possible sequence of 5.
I can now tell an article is from Quanta from the title alone.
> This all makes sense, except for "Don't choose digits from your favorite irrational number"... You can choose whatever combination of numbers you want, and find it in your favorite irrational number if you search long enough

You're not reading it right. You don't disqualify digits for occurring consecutively in the expansion of an irrational number. You disqualify digits if the method you used to pick them was to think of an irrational number and extract some of the digits. That is a method that other people can also use.
5 seconds after sleep, except when kept unlocked by Smart Lock. For Smart Lock, I have "On Body Detection" as well as a trusted Bluetooth device enabled.

Part of the disconnect here is likely how I am understanding "Trusted Bluetooth Device". I likely have to unlock it once while paired with that BT device, while the text says "$DEVICE_NAME unlocks this device when nearby".
They will pay for a phone if they expect you to use it for company purposes. If they don't then feel free to never use your phone for your job.
Hey Alexa what did I just type?
Oh yeah my bad, mixed up my drug plants, thanks!
The organizers are likely YC employees and can be reached at https://www.ycombinator.com/contact/
Yes, I'm aware.
I remember seeing a segment on the harvesting, bleeding, and releasing of Horseshoe crabs on some science/nature documentary channel.

One thing that stood out is that if you looked at the whole experience from the perspective of a Horseshoe crab, it looked quite a lot like the alien abduction stories that some humans tell.
Everything is relative. Back then, for Google's size, their ad business was basically printing money. Today, given their size, Google Cloud and the rest of their non-ad businesses are barely significant—over 80% of their total revenue still comes from ads, and that is only very slowly shifting. Maybe in another 13 years, Google Cloud (or another venture) will catch up to the ad business (though I'm skeptical), but today, that's nowhere near being true, and they still largely depend on that single source of revenue. So are they more diversified than they used to be? Sure. But to say that they have found a second hose that's anywhere near as profitable as advertising is misleading at best, or blatantly false at worst, at least as it stands today.