skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You can host it yourself on your own server. Or, you can run it within Docker locally.

I contributed to Monica a bit and the “desktop version” was always a huge GitHub issue. That, along with an impossible “E2E” encryption issue, devoid of any understanding of RDMBS or TLS, is why I didn’t go much further with my contributions.

Edit: see issues 531, and 543.
> "we added a bunch of complexity on top of the problem without actually solving it"

It solved it as much as is possible within the current state of software design.

> Package managers are supposed to prevent conflicts and manage giant dependency graphs

Actually, they can't do that. They can look for the conflicts they're programmed to look for by packages, and they can walk dependency graphs that are generated by the packages in the repos maintained by a person. The root of the problem is that modern software architecture (even for trendy languages) cannot express the dependencies in the first place.

I wrote you an explanation, but it ran to 1,355 words, so I Gist'd it here https://gist.github.com/peterwwillis/e96854532f471c739983c0b...
My impression is that many if not most mid size and up orgs pay for the MS Suite at the company level. With 365 you can get the whole suite from email to docs, one drive, and teams.

Teams comes free with the suite. My company moved from webex + adhoc solutions to teams and it has worked well, at least for video chat.

MS office apps have decent support for Apple these days
Giftology is a pretty solid book I’d recommend

The sub head for it is
“The Art and Science of Using Gifts to Cut Through the Noise, Increase Referrals, and Strengthen Retention”

And while there is a business context to it I found it helpful in just framing the concept of gifts even on a personal level.
Couldn't agree more! You nailed it
I'm not saying orgs will switch away from slack. It's a great app. I'm saying orgs that are not currently using slack will not want to pay to switch when they've got a free IM app that works fine. For slack to be worth this valuation they need about 10x as much revenue. I don't see how they could possibly accomplish that when everyone has already picked an app at this point.
While not "directly", we can look at the sun through the Earth: http://strangepaths.com/the-sun-seen-through-the-earth-in-ne...
Have you gone through it?
> Computer Science Degree - Is it worthy it? Should You Get it?

The title seems to have an error ("worth it" is the expression).

I bring this up not to be that person, but rather to note that a lot about how you'll be perceived is determined by how you use language.

Those English classes you think are a load of hot garbage on your way to a CS degree? They might be the most important classes you'll take.
No, because there is no reason to assume that would materially improve security. Do you think a bulletproof vest manufacturer hiring the best gunmakers in the world would dramatically improve their bulletproof vests? It could help, and it is certainly essential to have good bullet/gun engineers on staff, but you would probably be better off hiring people who know materials science and the actual job of making bulletproof vests.

It would be far more beneficial for them to just use the tried-and-true techniques that have already been deployed for decades in high-reliability/high-security systems. In the event that such things are too onerous, they could run development methodology tests to remove the elements that provide the least security ROI to produce lesser, but still good, systems at a reduced cost. This would be far more likely to produce a good outcome than taking the standard high development velocity commercial methodology that has failed to produce meaningful security despite decades of attempts and enhancing it to be a high security process. At least in the former you can be reasonably confident you get good security, though possibly at a higher cost than desired. In the latter, although the cost may be less, the security is a complete unknown since you are using a new process invented by people who have never used, let alone made, a high security process before and it is a class of strategy that has literally never succeeded over multiple decades of attempts. Not to say it could not happen, it took hundreds or possibly even thousands of years of failed attempts before heaver-than-air flight was cracked, but they would probably be better served just using the existing techniques that are known to solve the problem.
I have 2 bachelors degrees, a minor, and a masters degree; none of them in anything related to STEM or CS. I’ve been a professional wed developer (full stack from server installation to DBA to server side programming to front end development) for nearly 23 years. My company will pay my tuition for me to go back to school. I’ve considered getting a software engineering degree, but I need to do it while still working full time.

I’m not sure if it would be worth my time or what kind of program I should be looking for. I mainly want to get a better background on software engineering that I missed out on by not studying STEM in college. I should mention that I don’t know any math beyond high school algebra and geometry. I’ve never taken calculus or any higher math.

Is there anyone out there who was in a situation similar to mine who went back to school? How did it go?
Just like David Rockerfeller's Rolodex!

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15867741

I've always wanted to create something like this myself. Glad to see someone do it.
You speak as if being a grunt doing webdev isn't a good gig. I have a degree in chemical engineering and do webdev stuff, but I know I'm not doing computer science nor do I care to, I'm content making good money doing easy work.
"We value Front at $1.3B"

[closes tab]

I mean, seriously.
I'm not saying it's not useful, but I doubt the typical user is going to save all that much money.

Unless a fitbit convinces my insurance company to drop their rates in half, I'm not saving thousands. If I google insurance savings I see... they'll get me a moderate discount on the fitbit itself.
You nailed it, Google product managers, specially in Cloud lack the Enterprise expertise. They need to get that a company with IT staff already went through updating NT to Windows 2000 and then 2008 and deploying Linux and Active Directory and Exchange 5.5, 2k..etc...many MS products which were de facto for any large Company, if you can't integrate with it you will never have a solid footstep into the Enterprise world, yeah they may use BigQuery and that's it.
What is wrong with markets that companies like this can spawn and grow to be so size-able? Is it just human-error.
Auction of Apple-1 Computer with Original Box Signed by Steve Wozniak
> very small business services

Which accounts for almost all hosting and startups. Most startups will never see more than a handful of users and yet microservices, lamdba, nosql etc must be deployed because ‘scaling and failover’, wasting their own and investers’ money for nothing. Only a small % will ever need any scaling and failover.

If aws were truly cheaper, we would be using it for everything; currently we mix which is far cheaper. Anything not fail critical that benefits from fixed price cpu/gpu, bandwidth and storage we host traditionally. We and our clients saved fortunes over the years. And for clients or projects that do not need such heavy lifting as aws, we simply host traditionally completely.
"Harmony", perhaps?
Joe Rogan Interviews Moxie Marlinspike
What about CAP theorem?
> If they had purchased Dropbox and Slack they could've gotten a foothold rather quickly and slowed down one of Microsoft's major selling points (you already use Office, why not Azure?).

Are you suggesting an enterprise is going to leave Office for Dropbox and Slack? Cause that's not happening.
If the person in question is mark zuckerberg
I've had this conversation multiple times with my colleagues. One of them always argue that WhateverIsTheNewThingThatsGoingToReplaceEmail will replace email, this time for real; I argue that 10 years from now, email will still be a thing, and all these services will likely be not.

It's been at least 4-5 years of the first time we had it. I never update the "10" part.
Quip isn't an Office competitor. Just because it offers similar functionality doesn't make it a competitor.
Based on the tone of when it was introduced in the article, I would say that the author means that Windows has a lot of stuff running on a normal install that is unnecessary and entirely fragmented both in location of files and in location of configurations.

One thing that keeps me somewhat sane in windows are those heroes who spend hundreds of hours figuring out what each system service does, whether it’s needed, and how to disable it if it’s not.
Yeah. Email makes me sad.

I've brought a tiny bit of sanity to my Outlook inbox [0] by using many, many rules. The goal is to move an email out of my Inbox and to a folder of my choosing on receipt. I hit about 80%. (And every week or so I update the rules to try to capture more of the 20%. But the goalposts constantly move.)

I then use a search folder to show "all unread messages", group the view by "in folder", and treat that as my inbox. (It still shows messages in the actual Inbox.)

I find this very useful in removing some of the cognitive load of email.

Before:

- 10 emails arrive in Inbox.

- Email 1 is about project x. You figure that out, switch mental context to project x, action it perhaps, move on.

- Email 2 is about project y. You figure that out, switch mental context to project y, file it, move on.

- etc.

After:

- All (most) of the email regarding project x is filtered to the project x folder.

- When I choose to, I go there and do things.

- I never have to cognitively switch out of 'project x mode' until I choose to.

Setting up and maintaining the rules is a pain in the ass, and Outlook fights you at every turn. But for me it's 100% worth the effort.

[0]: Corporate environment, so it's not like I can use any of these funky cloud services. It's what I got.
Really? What's the logic behind that?
I think you do not understand "selfish mining": it's a technical term for a miner trying to take the lead over the existing blockchain, but only in some very specific cases outside normal mining. It's predicted by game theory - google for it, it's interesting!

The rest of your analysis is correct: as rewards decrease, TX fees may increase. You can also see that due to competition for the limited tps, as seen in 2017.

But this is also exactly why the scenario discussed in the paper is implausible: miners get to pick the transactions with the highest fees for inclusion in the next block. If your transaction is not urgent, you pay the minimum and wait. Eventually, it will be processed - if the expected delay (given the mempool) is not to your liking, you can update the fee with RBF.

But again, it means there will be little variance - just a smooth adjustment, meaning the required condition this whole paper is based on is dead wrong.

About the economic model breaking down, you make 2 mistakes: 1) you fail to account for difficulty adjustments made just for this situation, but even people who do often forgot 2) when revenue no longer covers costs (as say for a factory), the company doesn't immediately give up and fire everybody.

It's industrial organization 101, and due to the difference between short term and long term.

Of course, there is less friction and fewer rigidities with software, and mining equipment could be deployed differently if it was still CPUs or GPUs.

But the genius of ASICs having no alternative use means it can't happen (except maybe switching to another coin with the same algorithm)

Overall, regardless of the situation and what you throw at it, there's no situation I can see where the economic model break - except maybe if miners are tracked and executed on sight by the army? But even then, all it would do is move the mining to another country - or lead to bribes!
I can sort of resonate with this. I also realized that once I make it my default assumption that whatever it is I plan to do is most likely going to result in some sort of dumpster fire, and if I'm still ok with it, than the fear, concerns over other people's judgment, everything goes away. But of course it has to be important enough that you are genuinely on with it failing
It's a grim wish for Zuckerberg, but fortunately for him it is unlikely to happen.
I recently discovered the `-brief` flag to ip(1). It shows a summary table for the address and link commands that can be easier to read than the default output.
at what point would you consider an egg "cooked"? how would you define this as a measurable physical quantity?
> $200 smart watch, and 1/10th of those people avoid obesity, we can avoid $20,000 a year

Oh, I completely agree that that is a realistic and worthwhile scenario.

I just think that lifetime health costs in dollars do not decrease.

Let’s say we get 1/10th less diabetes due to subsidised watches. The total number of people with chronic diseases remains constant because we just get a different chronic disease on average (because we all die of something!). So the $2000 saved is just spent elsewhere. Ignoring potential savings we could make by increasing the number of sudden deaths and decreasing chronic conditions.

Or from another angle, at an individual level many spend all they have on their final healthcare costs so our individual spending remains the same, and at a government level total healthcare spending mostly remains constant regardless of health improvements or lack thereof (e.g. we spend close to 0% on polio these days – however healthcare costs didn’t decline and instead other health costs substituted instead).

Now, quality and length of life may improve, but total spending has not changed. I suspect I lack the economic language for talking about situations where we need to optimise for cost substitutions and quality of life. I do believe that optimisation of healthcare for an economy just using dollars as inputs to the objective function would fail us miserably.

I find it really hard to think about healthcare costs, because it just doesn’t work like my intuitions might expect about saving money.

Edit: the original post “U.S. per capita healthcare spending is $11,172. If the U.S. gave everyone a $200 a year tax credit to spend on a smart health watch, we'd probably save $2,000 a year per capita and get a 10x ROI.”. I believe U.S. per capita p.a. healthcare spending would now be $11,372 (the extra $200 couldn’t be found in the budget, and the amount spent on diabetes did not decrease, the total budget was not decreased.) However people have a better QOL, and are living longer so they are better off, but the economy is worse off because we’ve added years of extra cost to support the longer-living elderly!
How about Pendo? I have not used it personally, but it might suit your purposes.

https://www.pendo.io/
> The actual most that objectively happens is such routine banal minor infraction enforcement and intrusive stops that affect a minority of the population

No, this still isn't "most" of what the legal system deals with. It's a large fraction of what the criminal legal system deals with, but most legal cases are civil, not criminal. That's why I took the trouble to draw the key distinction between those two types of cases.

As far as criminal law is concerned, the way to minimize police harassment of citizens for no good reason is to minimize the things that are crimes. For example, the war on drugs is insane: there is no reason to criminalize mere possession of a drug. Just that one single change would drastically reduce the number of people the police can harass (and just freeing all of the people who are currently in jail for non-violent drug possession would drastically reduce the number of people in jail--and a disproportionate fraction of those would be poor and minorities, exactly the people we want to give more protection from police harassment). But there are many, many other laws on the books that could be eliminated on similar grounds: they criminalize behavior that shouldn't be criminalized and the laws can't possibly be enforced as written, so the end result is to give the police a much larger selection of excuses to harass people when they feel like it.

But this "fix" for criminal law doesn't work by fixing how the system deals with cases that are before it (things like reducing the variation in sentencing); it works by eliminating a huge set of cases altogether--the system no longer even sees them because the system is no longer criminalizing acts that shouldn't be crimes.

The problem is that a similar fix doesn't work for civil cases, precisely because there is no simple way to draw bright lines to separate disputes that should be dealt with by the legal system and disputes that shouldn't.
I'd totally pay for something like this, but not $90/year. I'd pay $90 per year for an all-in-one-service to replace Google, but with open source and privacy.

It seems like a tough business model, to try to sell a one-off utility like this. Over a 50 year lifetime, that's $4,500.

It feels like in the eighties, I'd pay $20 (which is $40 in today's dollars) for a shareware tool, and it'd do this for the rest of my life (or until my 80286 running DOS became obsolete, whichever came first).
Jackie Gleason arranged and produced a number of easy listening albums. Yes, the How Sweet It Is guy! This one is my favorite:

https://www.amazon.com/Music-Lovers-Jackie-Gleason-2012-07-3...

but really, all of his work is good. You're in for a treat if you've never heard his music before.

P.S. The CD sounds wrong, I suspect some monkey business went on in the remastering studio. Get the vinyl version. Besides, these tunes just sound better with the needle drop, rumble and crackle of the old vinyl.
I was going to say, this is a sampling goldmine.
All drivers are FOSS and native.
So what can you do and can't using iOS and it's contacts, reminders, calendars, etc?

It's like - I don't want a TODO app when I can create simple Note with checkboxes.
Also don't miss the other auction for "Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak Signed 'Battleship' Keyboard" [1]. It has such a nice piece of computer folklore:

Jurvetson relates the story of Jobs signing: "Back when I was a b-school student, I had Steve Jobs over for a fireside chat to the 'High-Tech Club' that I ran at the time. When I asked my childhood hero if he would sign my Apple Extended keyboard, he looked a little surprised to see Woz’s signature already there, and then he exclaimed, 'This keyboard represents everything about Apple that I hate. It’s a battleship. Why does it have all these keys? Do you use this F1 key? No.' And with his car keys he pried it right off. He did this for each of the keys. Alan Deutschman reported the moment in his book, The Second Coming of Steve Jobs, culminating in Jobs' comment: 'I’m changing the world, one keyboard at a time.' He signed the keyboard. I found the function keys the next day on the fireplace mantle (he had left them quietly behind), and I put them back on the keyboard."

Not sure if this is still owned by Steve Jurvetson or not. If yes, I'm surprised he'd part ways with such a nice piece of history, particularly something he was personally involved and got both Steves to sign.

[1] https://rrauction.com/preview_itemdetail.cfm?IN=6003
Call me old-school, but I still don't buy into these "revenue multiple" nonsense. Traditional valuation metrics like PER, EV/EBITDA, DCF etc. all tie back in one way or another to the cashflow-generating potential of a company.

Revenue multiples have, at best, only tenuous relationship to cashflow. If you sell $10 notes for $1, in theory you can have infinite revenue.

I wish investors would just stop pretending tech valuation these days have anything to do with financials, which is actually fine.

Maybe it is time we shift what we think the equity market is about. Nowadays its less a place to go looking for returns and more one-giant-PATREON where you buy a stake just because you are a fan.
Can someone summarize the expoit?
I am surprised by how much time CS undergrads are required to waste on irrelevant subjects such as Physics.

Here's an example CS curriculum at University of California at Los Angeles:
https://www.seasoasa.ucla.edu/curric-19-20/80-comscicur19.ht...

English Composition 3

Differential and Integral calculus

Integration and Infinite Series

Physics 1A — Mechanics

Calculus of Several Variables

Oscillations, Waves, Electric and Magnetic Fields

Calculus of Several Variables

UCLA Samueli Ethics Course

Linear Algebra and Applications

Introduction to Discrete Structures

Electrodynamics, Optics, and Special Relativity

Differential Equations

Probability Elective

That's a whole bunch of useless courses. These courses are intended to make sure you're well-rounded in your education. But spending more than 50% of the time making sure you're well-rounded in Physics is useless for a software engineer. 99.9% of software engineers don't use physics in their career (except maybe some game or graphics programming). 99% of software engineers don't need Calculus (except maybe for innovating some ML core algorithms).

A better way to be a well-rounded software engineer is to make sure graduates know more than just algorithms and a couple of programming languages. They should know Networking, Databases, Operating Systems, Machine Learning, Big Data, Distributed Systems, etc. Because of the time spent on general education (that will be forgotten as soon as they graduate), CS graduates are missing out on valuable topics such as those I listed.
Programming. Serious.

https://karma-engineering.com/lab/wiki/OnlineCourses
Can people still passive-aggressively cc my boss on emails to me when they want me to drop everything to work on their special issue?
Here's a POSIX kernel in Go, written explicitly to prove your point wrong:

https://github.com/mit-pdos/biscuit

https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/projects/biscuit.html
I really appreciate it! The Hemingway app was no good...will now invest in Grammarly
Here's another twist on this advice. If you make a wish list, try to optimize the list for the gift giver. My brother loves to find the best whatever-it-is for you, so just giving a category optimizes for his gift giving experience. One thing on my list last year was "dice storage", and he got me a really fun dice bag. He got to surprise me, and I got something wanted and actually still use.

My sister is a pleaser, and just wants you to get what you want, so I include links to specific things for her. If she is ever unsure what to get, she can just go straight to one of the linked Amazon pages and just click buy. My list is long enough that even if it's exactly what I asked for, I'm still surprised by what she decided to get for me.
Related their store is still open and even had a Cyber Monday sale

https://shop.areciboobservatory.org/
Show HN: Storylocks – Write serial fiction with friends
At least the ones you listed are all supported by cockroach db. There are still some missing bits but the gap is rapidly closing
If you bundle Exchange + CALs + Office Professional Plus, over a three-year version upgrade cycle, versus three years of Office 365, Office 365 costs about twice as much, last I checked.

And, since Microsoft supports it's software for ten years, you can skip one or two versions of Exchange/Office and still get security updates, and pay a quarter or a sixth of what it costs to go with Office 365.
Please leave email alone, it didn't hurt anyone.
>Sam echoes some of the things Paul said

I was really hoping you were gonna have a quote from the religiously important Paul.

People have been saying proverbial (in the most literal sense of that word) crap for all of human history. Sure you can wrap extra words around simple concepts like "be determined", "communicate effectively" and "pick your battles" but most of this stuff is just the same few hundred takes on the same handful of attributes that make one successful in life being written time and time again but in the languages and with contemporary examples of whoever is doing the writing.