skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
English really lacks when it comes to the vernacular of interpersonal relations. We give the same name "friend", to relationships varying from the person we buy beer from to people we help in our community to people we might be very intimate with.

Friendship though can fill many human needs. Casual friends like those in business or work allow us a shortcut for finding reliable service and goods.

Communities are built out of friendships that may not be particularly close but which allow us to do things we couldn't on our own. Moving house, caring for children, help in an emergency, planning a celebration or acquiring a hard to find item.

Perhaps a lot of HNers won't understand how important this is because of their financial situation. But these are services people often cannot pay for and only acquire through community. I grew up in such a community and had never heard of paid movers until I moved to the West Coast. In many a family emergency my siblings and I stayed with such friends.

Intimate friendships can be wonderfully fulfilling in a way you can only know if you've been in one. Though you must be very careful of who you invest them in. Something I really struggled with was finding that a lot of people are not good intimate friends and that's ok. You should just maintain those friendships at a distance.

The main thing I've found though is that if you are anxious and I am very prone to anxiety around unfamiliar people, you will not bond. To make friends, you must find a way to be comfortable around people. I think this is why families are often people's only major friend group. Because they have been forced into contact in situations where eventually their guard is down. Same as to why sports and games are so good for meeting friends. You get focused on the activity and lose some anxiety. Probably also why drugs and alcohol allow people to bond.
The DOJ press release had a link right at the bottom to the 47 page indictment “showing the evidence.” https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1347146/downl...
2007 Forever
Is there a search engine which displays 4-6 thumbnails of top sites? I feel google results are just giant walls of text that you randomly pick one. If you could actually see the relevant text on the website, you'd not even have to click?
Private pilot here. You have it exactly right. The problem is not the ten-second reaction time. There are a lot of emergencies that require that kind of reaction time (engine failure, to cite the obvious example). The problem is ten-second reaction time to a new kind of emergency without special training for that emergency.
They have a huge hospital and medical program.
There is always the single source of truth principle. It is expected that both the search service and cart reference the catalog service.
Ah, my bad, yes being taxed for ten years because you were in a state for two months is nothing like what I said
This is unenforceable. California has no Texas Rangers that can hunt you down in other states. California has no standing in another state's courts for collecting this tax. And that's a good thing too. Consider child-support payments --- they require states to cooperate. But you may never be able to enter California again.
You don't need any specific permissions to collect a near-unique device fingerprint. iOS is even more restrictive when it comes to that and yet fingerprinting devices is very easy if you collect the data over time and correlate with other data (from other apps or websites).
> The ad is just pushing mental buttons and appeals to emotion.

Facebook has monetized manufactured outrage over half-truths. It only makes sense they’d employ the same strategies they’ve seen their best clients develop on their platform.
Interestingly enough, I just went to 'Google' that question [0] and got some very non-relevant info boxes:

https://imgur.com/a/J9U5ZwJ

-----

[0] https://www.google.com/search?q=google+ad+revenue
Jo sadly passed away shortly after this article was published. [1] RIP.

[1] https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/they-came-to-celebrate-j...
We'd be so much better off if shareholder voting power were weighted by the amount of time they enforceably commit to holding the stock, after the vote.
C and the Dangers of Memcpy()
That's actually, theoretically, the plan for a set of tracks adjacent to my house. In practice though, its easier said than done. Besides width concerns, which are easy in some places and much harder in others, do you really want young children riding their bikes a few feet away from a speeding train? Do you put up a fence?
Tons of advertising includes only glowing reviews/testimonials and it has been going on with newspapers, television, etc. forever. I can't imagine similar selectivity being illegal on websites merely because it's presented in a way that implies (but does not explicitly say) that they're faithfully reproducing everything that has been submitted in good faith.
This was a proposal from back in August, and the election of Joe Biden probably means it won't happen. Why does that matter? Because Trump was treating California like an enemy country and trying to destroy it, starving it of resources even though California taxpayers (individuals and companies) pay far more to the federal government than any other state does.

It would be better to do a wealth tax at the federal level. It really isn't conceptually different from a property tax on real estate, it just applies to all wealth.
This is just a proposal in the legislature: it isn’t clear if it has any real support for becoming an actual law yet, or if it will pass muster with the courts if it does.
Except that the definition of monopoly power is that the company is facing a downward sloping demand curve and that it is operating on the elastic portion of it.

In general, that provides an incentive for other firms to produce a close substitute at a slightly lower price and eat away at your profits unless the government is there to stop them. Monopoly power cannot be sustained without government intervention. In addition, monopoly pricing incentivizes consumers to look for substitutes.

If you look in real life, you will see that monopoly power is sustained through restrictions on who can sell stuff and from whom you are allowed to buy.
Can someone explain why I would want Web Assembly versus just writing in another language?

Serious question: I feel like I am missing the use case for something like this - is it primarily useful for multi-tenant scenarios where you want to sandbox the workload or ??
Thoughtful comments appreciated.

(It is accredited, online, and economical even for someone who thinks they otherwise could not afford quality higher ed.)
> Apple doesn't need Facebook

I'm not sure that's true. I suspect the absence of Facebook's apps on the iPhone would be a pretty significant blow to Apple's long-term market share.

WhatsApp has >1.5 billion users, Messenger nearly that many.

(Would it also hurt Facebook? Absolutely.)
That's just going to cause annoying false positives, and it's not that difficult to get around such detection.

I'll bet the only result would be confused developers.
And I'm sure they're right. It's important to remember that Facebook can precisely measure the impact of news articles like this.

It's tempting to think of Facebook as omniscient, but I'm not sure how precisely it can be measured. Economically, yes, maybe. But morally?

Remember, the Timnit controversy ended up with letters from congress to Google's CEO. In bigcos, not everyone forecasts everything.
> Capitalism means capital that earns for you while you sleep.

If it earns for you while you sleep then it is also taxed while you sleep. Income is income: the tax man doesn’t care where it comes from.
Singapore is a weird one to throw in there with the others in that list. Could you elaborate?
Welp, apparently Stanford is shit at algorithmic design
The german Wikipedia has an article on free beer ("Freibier") if you do not mind a foreign language source.

Here is an excerpt with an example:

"Eines der wahrscheinlich größten Freibierfeste ist jedes Jahr das Sommerfest der Braustudenten an der Technischen Universität München am Standort Weihenstephan in Freising. Dort werden jedes Jahr über 150 Hektoliter Freibier von über 300 Brauereien ausgeschenkt."

Translation:
"One of the most likely largest free beer fests in the world is the annual summer fest of brewer students at the Technical University of Munich at the location of Weihenstephan in Freising. Every year, more than 150 hectoliter [i.e. 15000 liters] of free beer from over 300 breweries is served."

Source: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freibier
And for those of us that have seen this type of tax play out historically where "it's just 0.4% and just on the top 1%" and want to avoid being dragged down any farther?
It should be just the opposite: real estate is the limited resource that all people in California need to share, not the revenue of a multi-national company concentrated in 1 state.
It isn't a false equivalence, though.

From the original comment:

> taxing the top ~1% is to simply bring their wealth more in line with their contributions

The comment above yours is just pointing out that Bezos may contribute more, which would be an explanation for Bezos' outsize wealth. Whether it's true or not that Bezos contributes more is subjective, of course.

> It’s not healthy for society to have Bezos level wealth in one person.

That's an entirely different point unrelated to the "contribution" question/attribute.
Hypohesis is a tool to do this https://github.com/HypothesisWorks/hypothesis/tree/master/hy...
The issue is the 'progressive' nature of the tax code. Everyone could be taxed at the same rate and the 'rich' would still pay the most in tax dollars. The only reason ever given for why the 'rich' should pay a higher tax rate is 'because they can afford to.' Which then leads to tax code legislative loopholes to try to offset the excess taxation and then more resentment when those loopholes are used to shelter income.
Yea, it’s funny how a community that started based on tech startups now advocates totally burning down businesses that rely on advertising for revenue or customer growth. I don’t love the optics of this FB ad, but it is a fact that it’s going to:

1. Make targeted advertising significantly more expensive, which affects small businesses

2. Potentially cause those businesses to advertise less, which hurts apps that rely on that ad revenue

3. Give users more privacy control over cross-app tracking

All the coverage of this is 100% focused on #3 while assuming 1 and 2 are free or worth burning to the ground.
That's untrue. They explicitly targeted current-gen consoles, told us the game runs well on them, and even released a themed Xbox One!
If California were well run, sure. Do something about the housing and homeless crisis and we’ll talk.

California doesn’t have a money problem. They have a lack of political will problem and an incompetence (or corruption) problem. The state is held hostage by NIMBYs and is chronically unable to build infrastructure. Look at the high speed train disaster for an example of the latter.

NIMBYs ensure that any money or effort put into the homeless problem is also wasted, as there is no affordable housing for these people to inhabit even if their mental health issues are dealt with.

More money won’t fix these things. It will probably go into the pockets of the people who created these problems.

Note that much of what I wrote applies to the USA broadly. We are taxed not much less than Canadians, but have the infrastructure and social services of a “developing” nation.

Give me either low taxes at e.g. Costa Rica levels OR shiny infrastructure, free college for my kids, and universal healthcare.

Oh wait Costa Rica has universal health care...

We are great at setting money on fire in this country.
There are no capital gains for personal holdings in the NL. So as long as your year over year gains are higher than 4% you're ahead. For example if you double your money with Bitcoin you still pay 1.6%
I very distinctly remember when AltaVista removed support for "quoted words and phrases" in queries. I was studying CS in college at the time. I think that's when we switched en masse to Google.
Wealth is not money.
This is from the verb "to consummate", not the verb "to consume".
> why should the government be allowed to force me to sell my company

If it’s your company, is there any particular reason you don’t pay it (or a loan against your equity) out of cash flow? Just like every other significant expense?

If it’s a painting or a car, it’s already getting taxed as an inheritance, so this is just a .4% increase in a 40% tax, no?

I happen to agree that wealth taxes are unwise, but it’s not because implementation is weird. We already have property taxes; we’ll figure it out.

The main reason it’s bad is because wealth taxes compound, even when you take losses on investments. Retirement accounts will simply be ~20% smaller than without the tax.
The original target for Java (Oak) was set top boxes. Arguably Sun was trying to commoditize the set top box industry so that they could sell expensive servers to cable operators. Then someone decided to open source the result (engineers aren’t always great economists / financial analysts).

Amusingly in the 25 years since, set top box manufacturers have commoditized themselves very effectively.
This, exactly. Perhaps counterintuitively, having less time enables me to do more.

Also, I stopped doing optimizations & just try to deliver the basics. I realized a lot of time was eaten by optimizations, while other, more important things, were not even done.
> not really sure what you mean by 2D/3D.

Turn off the computer and "write" a program by assembling legos. One token is one lego block. So an open quotation mark—"—is one lego block. If you can align all the lego blocks in a single line, and the meaning of the program does not change, you have a 1-D programming language. This is the case for all the languages you mentioned—"JSON/YAML/XML/s-exprs".

This is not the case for Tree Notation/2-D and 3-D languages. Changing the 2-D positioning of the tokens changes the meaning.

Now you might say that this is not the case because you could just have a lego block that equals "\n", and so the parsing would be the same. But the mistake their is to miss the general idea of 2-D languages. While Tree Notation first parses a program linearly from start to end, that's just because it's a limitation based on how our current computers are designed to work, and having multiple read/execute heads starting and moving in different directions across a memory cube is not technology we currently have.

I gave a talk on this putting it another way a few years ago: "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldVtDlbOUMA".

To put it another way: you don't need syntax characters, all you need is space.

> but failing that, people will dismiss your claims of being revolutionary as crankery, which will hurt your project's image.

I figured it would take ~10 years of hard work and dedication to chisel out the core of this idea and make it "just work" for people. I'm about 4 years in, so the bulk of the work and resources to put in are still ahead. I do not want to put so much effort and resources into a novel idea that wouldn't have much of an impact if it turns out to be correct. I give this idea a low probability of being groundbreaking (<10%), but if it is it will fundamentally change our languages and probably make a significant impact across society in many unpredictable ways (probably many orders small than binary notation, but many magnitudes bigger than most things). So I'm happy to sacrifice my "image" for this idea. I want people to be critical, especially now, still in the early days, to figure out the flaws here. I'm still not seeing one. From all the data I've seen so far, these types of languages will be a 10x+ leap in technology. It's a really big idea.
Local governance running well, public services like cleaning, helping homeless etc, all require tax dollars. Saying "I'd pay tax if they had enough money they get from tax to fix the problems that cause me not to want to pay tax" seems like it's a bit of a chicken-egg problem.
That's my way to do things now. I still have my 500 lines bash script file to backup multiple databases, with dynamic filter, on multiple remote servers... to remind me that I can do that much easier in Python.
Neither company has pure motives here. Apple just so happens to take a 30% cut of in-app purchases, so they stand to benefit immensely from a change to that model. They also have their own ad platform that will benefit from this.

Both sides are concealing their selfish motivations under the guise of altruism.
Show HN: Noscript.it – browse and share links with JavaScript disabled
I would assume it's because a drug is standardized but a surgery may reasonably be suspected to depend on the skill of the surgeon, so people lean more heavily on priors, on what seems reasonable, and less on statistical evidence.
An algorithm is clearly a virtual scapegoat. They’ll need to interview those who were involved in coding it. Dig deeper to find out why.
Honestly both sides suck at using them and they have little impact on the national elections as is. But both sides want them to continue existing. They make it possible for challenger politicians in small races to get their names known.
The taxes from the "1930's-1970's" were not particularly high, that is a misunderstanding of how the structure of the tax code has changed. Net of deductions, taxation hasn't changed that much. You can't look at the nominal tax rates in isolation while ignoring the scope of deduction against those rates.

Eliminating deductions for high-income earners while reducing tax rates on that income is revenue neutral, and generally preferable as a policy.
Begs the question why haven't they left already. Is there some sweet spot of taxation before the majority the people being taxed resort to capital flight?
TBH if I stood to lose as much as many California billionaires, I'd leave, ignore the warrant for my arrest, and just not go back to California.
What I heard was that Sony does not want to both sell a game and allow it to be refunded on their platform. That combination invites people to play the game for free by just buying it and returning it later. So when CD Projekt Red announced that dissatisfied people could return the game for a refund, Sony stopped allowing further sales of the game.
What a great question. Part of the answer comes from the question itself, which defines the problem as a well-funded long-term project with almost no hard specifications beyond “open-world sci-if that will be hailed as one of the greatest games ever made.”

So on one hand, you have enough time and resources to hang yourself in a thousand different ways. And on the other hand, you have a genie-wish specification that thinks money and time can solve any problem.

Already, we can see that we have two problems - software engineering and product management - and among these two, product management is the hardest due to the formulation of the problem itself.

The first thing that should have been done is reduce the budget, timeline, and scope — focusing on innovative gameplay rather than innovative technology. The most obvious first result of this smaller scope is not making your own game engine. That should have been the first huge red-flag for the project. If you give talented engineers unlimited time and resources, and tell them to build any sort of “best ever” product, they will happily go down premature-generalization rabbit holes and never come out, creating spectacular architectures that shine in technical art museums (if such things existed) but fail in production. Premature generalization kills projects more often than premature optimization, as it is the leakiest of all abstractions due to solving problems that only exist in our imagination of the future.

So the answer is 1) reduced budget, scope, and technical innovation, and 2) gameplay innovation of existing open-world RPG technology set in a new genre (sci-if).

The hard part here is that gameplay innovation may require technological innovation: so the most important software choice is finding an existing open-world technology that is 1) available for license/purchase at a decent cost, and 2) is extensible and performant enough to handle gameplay innovation.

The problem as I see it isn’t that these technical considerations of buy vs. make weren’t asked. It is that they were asked in the context of having seemingly unlimited time, budget, and ambition.

Reduce your timeline. Focus your ambition. Choose proven technology. At least then you’ve got a shot at making what people want!
I'm just going to say one thing that has helped me a great deal in making and keeping friends. Be the person that makes the effort. You're going to feel in relationships that for every tit there should be a tat. There won't. Those who build communities around them and make friends are the ones to initiate, to reach out. People want to interact, they're excited to interact, but there's a lot of inertia in modern life. Pick up the phone and call people. During this lockdown, I've had people almost cry to be given a phone call, and people who have wanted to stay on the horn for hours, but would not have made that call themselves. Be the embarrassing one, who keeps making offers to hang out that get rejected 3-4 times, who calls three weeks in a row. I started out years ago as a total introvert, and, I have to say, these practices snowball. You build social skills, social capital, and an interest in and need for your fellow humanity by being the person.
You can still buy the physical version of the game no?
because of 0.4%

It's not because of a .4. As you said, barely anyone will pay it. And still people are leaving.

It's because it's now a fact:

That California politicians are unable to spend wisely.

That California politicians have great appetite for raising taxes, and inventing new ones.

So it's not a .4 that drives people out. It's because they know what's next.
To anyone else whom this article resonated, I recommend the journal of Henri-Frederic Amiel^1 and the Rhinoceros Sutta^2 for further explorations of a similar problem space and ethos.

---

1 - https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Henri-Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric_Amiel

2- https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/KN/StNp/StNp1_3.html
My Resident daughter-in-law was scheduled to be vaccinated. Was sick on the day. Turns out, she had the virus! So no vaccination needed any more. One way to resolve it.
The whole mess has demonstrated why ethical AI research is important. It's so easy for people to disregard why and how biases exist in their systems when it doesn't affect them personally.
It seems logical that the entire front line workers cadre should be vaccinated on a priority basis. It also makes sense that the residual staff who will also be second and third level contactees should be tiered for vaccination - so the entire staff as well as admin are then vaccinated, as we have seen how these people are not far from the front line and we have seen how the Covid can migrate widely in a structure. I see it as sad that lower tiered people get these, for now, scarce vaccinations, those safe in home isolation need to be on a lower tier. Wiser minds now seem to have weighed in. One hopes that a flood of vaccine will soon render this all moot.
I imagine this is because the punctuation isn’t in their index at all, so it makes no difference how you format the query.