skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You were very selective with your reading of my comment, discarding any bit that inconvenienced your uncharitable and wrong interpretation. Not sure if this is bad faith or a reading comprehension issue.

Throughout my comment I made a few things explicitly clear. That I don't blame the gamers, rather the game devs for including the option and the leagues for choosing to play games that have this. And that many games are fine. You chose to ignore that when making your case.

To your point, plenty of games exicitly have such behavior built-in via fatalities, takedowns, executions, or some signature move and slow motion kill-cam to be shown to the victim usually, all with animations that go beyond "I defeated my enemy" into "I humiliated them". There's only one reason to include such mechanism in a game and that's that they want gamers to use them. A league promoting those games regardless of whether it punishes using that feature still endorses them in their entirety. Those are the ones I'm having issues with.

The gaming and e-sports industries don't do enough to call the offenders out on this behavior. At best they turn a blind eye while still playing and promoting such games. I'm sorry but this is like having Harvey Weinstein or Jeffrey Epstein at your birthday party and thinking it's ok because they didn't harass anyone while you were in the room.

The fact that I still have to explain this already speaks volumes.
That’s side-allegation, not what this article is about.

And it’s a debatable one.
> we're 10x as productive now, and I think that's because of the popularity of Open Source and Stack Overflow

So you agree Brooks was right.
Imagine being at a wedding in Pakistan and a bunch of these things show up with American flags, dancing and blasting old music
Unemployed graduates struggle to find jobs in the Covid-19 market
Considering the rise of convict leasing programs across the south after the passing of the 13th amendment, I’d say there was very little difference.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convict_leasing
I think the potential of this tool, like many industry tools, is to streamline the translation process, not completely automate it. I can see this speeding up the process and lightening the load on stuff like typesetters, even if the final translation isn't perfect.
I guess that's move fast and fail fast for you. It's like a weed generating lots of tiny seeds to make sure as many potentially fertile spots as possible get explored.
I think it looks fake because the movements are so smooth and fluid.

On a dancing person you see all the slight adjustments to keep balance that make it feel natural, I believe these robots do it too fast for us to notice and so it seems like CGI where keeping balance isn't a thing.
Unless they invented a creative way to use pop3, it is not 'pull' in any reasonable sense, because you can only pull what has already been pushed. You can't even even select what to pull once more than one request is outstanding, because pop3 does not convey information beyond message size.

Also, you have to poll continuously, destroying the benefit of having something pushed over smtp.
Except that string theory isn't exactly mainstream - there's a small group of people who do string theory, and a large number of physicists whose work has been completely unaffected by string theory.

That's what makes this so strange. Everyone outside string theory seems to think string theory is pseudoscience. Why is it still being funded?
X_a1994
What does any of this have to do with the Chinese Communist Party literally forcing slaves to pick cotton[1][2][3]?

You bring up issues with the US Justice System, and then use that as an excuse to blanket over everything the CCP does? How does that work, exactly?

[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/china-cotton-forced-labour/c...

[2] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china/u-s-bans-...

[3] https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/china-s-forced-labor-cotton-ma...
gasoline cars also use a battery to initiate the engine.
“there is risk to them because you are allowed to defend yourself by fighting back”

This depends a lot on what jurisdiction you live in.
Bitcoin seems completely irresponsible to me because of the amount of electricity it uses:

"Mining companies that run lots of ASIC miners as businesses claim to use only one watt of power for every gigahash per second of computing performed when mining for bitcoins. If this information is correct, the bitcoin network in 2020 consumes 120 gigawatts (GW) per second.

https://www.thebalance.com/how-much-power-does-the-bitcoin-n...
What does NgU stand for?
> Prison labor is compensating for crimes committed against society and other people

But the prisoners didn’t commit crimes against “society” they committed them against particular people. Why not force the inmate into indentured servitude under the injured party rather than an opportunistic third party like Walmart?
That means nothing if the wealth distribution is somehow worse than that of US dollars, which it is, and there’s no mechanism to create new dollars to give to folks to even it out.
I can't think of a Google product that is actually better now than it was a decade ago; in fact they've almost universally become less useful, less powerful, slower, and less ergonomic. Or they've been destroyed and either not replaced, or replaced with one or more increasingly half-baked successors.

It's astounding how difficult it is to use Google Maps these days, and how much less data is available.
I think if you’d eat shrimp or prawns you’d give crickets ago. I’ve had them before as a novelty and they were fine.

I say novelty as they’re not generally available as food where I live.
It's not about "winning capitalism". Money is simply an abstraction layer over something like direct bartering which has liquidity problems that increase with the complexity and number of goods & services on offer. I might agree that capitalism is about "winning" and money is used to keep score, but not that money is intrinsically tied to that game. And there might be a better abstraction layer you could place over people's time & effort than either money or direct bartering. Command economies are one option, but economies seem quite a bit too complex for that to be a feasible alternative at the moment. There's probably other options, but I'm certainly not smart enough to think of something new on that topic.
And gold was awful money which is literally why we stopped using it as money. Trying to bring back a digital gold based money is just making new crap digital money.
I would call it well-plowed, yeah. Our streets in town don’t look nearly that nice for a few days after each storm, and we all drive around in normal passenger cars with snow tires.

The parking lot he starts in has like three inches of slush, after that there’s a quarter or half inch of packed snow on the road.
With fiat currencies, money is basically an IOU from the central bank. So it is easy for them to give loans by "printing money", since a loan from the central bank is just as good as cash.

You could still layer a system like that on top of Bitcoin. However, you might have trouble getting people to accept your bitcoin IOUs as equivalent to real coins.

That said, why would you want that? Why not just use fiat currencies where they are appropriate, and leave Bitcoin for the use cases in which it's appropriate? It doesn't need to replace the whole economy to be useful as a technology.
any idea of what that means?
> I love that BTC is supposed to be correlated with inflation

Is it really? BTC is renowned for being systematically and thoroughly manipulated. It makes no sense to expect any correlation that is based on the assumptions of a free market.
mostly because it would take more than an hour and involves a translator interested. I sure can't speak Japanese (yet), but I have enough technical chops to spend a few hours getting something workable out with this alone.

Then from there maybe I can trigger Cunningham's law and get the attention of someone who knows what they are doing. Sounds like a win-win for me.
"Research in string theory field led to developing new mathematics which eventually helped to calculate particle paths in LHS,"

I think this is koolaid.

String Theory is Probably Wrong.

Thousands of PhDs have been minted, a zillion talks and publications, conferences, think tanks, books, 'Science PR' - all for wish-wash.

That 'String Theory helped some thing over in the corner' does not validate all the investment.

With the clearly lacking 'Self Awareness', it's possible that Science could have gone in a variety of directions, producing or necessitating all sorts of other, likely more useful things, out of which some 'useful math' may have also been developed.

But instead we put a lot of effort into vaporware.

Why? Because it's human nature - people don't want to accept they are riding a meme, and lack objectivity.

...

"This is made by popular media, movies. Most scientists live normal life, create families, try separate work from life, therefore research does not come from worldview. "

Again, I don't think you're maybe grasping what I am saying.

It's normative for people, especially serious people, to be wrapped up in a 'world view'.

Businessmen talk about 'free markets' all day long, often completely ignoring real externalities.

Socialist politicians, clouded by their goodwill, are often dangerously unaware of basic economics, the realities of Supply and Demand.

Military Generals may sometimes see a possible 'military solution to every geopolitical problem'.

It's even 'more normal' for someone working on something arcane and abstract to be tied up in their passion and ambition.

Case and Point: String Theory.

It seems as though String Theory is probably mostly hogwash.

How many String Theorists would admit that? Or even the very real possibility of it?

And how many will take their 'belief' to the grave?

It's obviously not 'entirely a waste' - but if Science wants to really maintain credibility, it needs a giant dose of self awareness there - and also with the 'reproducibility' problem.

Edit: for some nice examples of cultish, self re-affirming behaviour [1].

[1] https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=9375
> Once you see it as a religious war it's by far the best analogy to understand the dynamics, at least to me

If "religious war" means a sectarian war, in which both sides are believers, just believers in different sects (often different only in details so minor that outsiders can't even see what the fuss is about), then I agree. I'm not aware, historically, of anything called a "religious war" that wasn't a sectarian war in that sense.

This might just be a difference in terminology. However, it might not. If you think one of the sides in the "religious war" we are talking about is "unbelievers", then we disagree on something of substance. "Unbelievers" in this context would mean people who just think we should have free speech, period; that nobody should be suppressed simply because of what they are saying. But, as I said in my previous comment, I don't think either side in the current "religious war" meets this criterion; both sides agree that some speech should be suppressed, they just disagree on exactly which speech.

Note that this applies not just to the particular "dustup" referenced in the open letter, but to the larger "cold war" you describe. Nobody is fighting for free speech, period. The different sides are just fighting for different rules about what can be suppressed. One side's rules currently seem a lot more draconian than the other's, but both sides want some such rules.
While I would very much like to agree with you, I still haven't read a convincing debunking of the "tether is used to manipulate Bitcoin's price" argument.

The facts, AFAIK are:

- Bitfinex (or rather some entity controlled by the same folks who own Bitfinex) can emit as much Tether (USDT) as they like.

- They claim to have, in a reserve bank account somewhere, one dollar for each USDT ever emitted (which - in itself - is problematic because of counterparty risk).

- They have never - so far - provided a proper third party audit of said reserve bank accounts.

- Even if they do *actually* have one USD stashed for each USDT in circulation, it's highly unlikely they're just letting it sit there, it's likely invested, therefore risk, therefore the equation 1USD==1USDT is iffy at best.

- emitted USDT can easily be used to buy BTC and pump the price up

I'd be very happy to be proven wrong on any of the points above.
That's potentially true, and also fine. Success for a programming language doesn't mean it has to be a good language for a corporation's interests.

Haskell is first and foremost a gigantic personal productivity booster. It allows me to do bigger and more complex projects on my own or with one or two others. These projects are not for corporate interests although that can be for personal profit. I am pretty confident I will be able to stop giving my labor to any corporation within the 10 year mark of my career, and Haskell will be a big reason why.

But I still try to convince corporations to use Haskell since then we offload the cost of learning onto a corporation instead of an individual. That feels like a worthwhile re-allocation of capital to me! Corporate Haskellers get paid to gain expertise and keep it forever, leaving corporation with nothing besides their direct labor. Luckily it's easy to convince a corporation of anything with what amounts to propaganda & politics.
> is that "pure Python" enough?

Not at all! The PyBuffer library is all about interfacing to C data. As far as I know, creating a (mutable) contiguous array of floats is impossible in the Python language. This seems to be a deliberate language design decision.
I'm pleasantly surprised I'm able to hear the sweep all the way up to 8000 Hz! It's just slightly quieter at the top...
>Zuckerberg clearly can control it. There are dials on the algorithms that control what users see in their feeds. What can’t be controlled is what happens as Facebook pursues engagement.

I disagree with this and agree more with the original article. Zuckerberg, or no other individual, even with the magic of 'algorithms', has the ability to centrally plan the information flow for billions of people in a way that does not produce misinformation.

Even if Zuckerberg has the best intentions in the world, there is no one discourse that will ever work for a billion plus people, Facebook is totalitarian in nature and it is its size that creates structural problems.

Social interaction needs to be brought back to human scale, with publishers who are stakeholders in their community they operate in, and human moderation that is oriented towards social ends. Not one network for the entire world.
It is very difficult to build anything in SF. The city doesn't have any available land, therefore you need to demolish existing structures and build higher. There is a loud and vocal community of activists that refuse to allow new construction because of gentrification. Additionally, many won't allow retail businesses that are not local. SF prevents retail chains of a certain size in some neighborhoods. Also, the city has a law that allows any resident to challenge a change of use permit or new construction, no matter where they live in the city. These cases ultimately come up before the Board of Supervisors which tend to attach requirements and restrictions for construction leading to expensive delays.
I've gathered some more alternatives for static site comments on my blog [1] (ironically, I didn't include comments on my own blog)

[1] https://darekkay.com/blog/static-site-comments/
What? Paying someone (a pittance, mind) doesn't make forced labor not slavery. Read the 13th amendment.
Generally agree, except for this doozy at the end:

“...Google could reduce its cost basis moving forward and free up resources for competing at what they’re really great at: building great software.”

Oh NO, they are definitely NOT great at software. All of my problems with Google Maps, Google Search, admin panels, etc. boil down to mind-numbingly bad software design decisions, that have become worse every year. Google essentially sabotages its own products at this point, regardless of what competitors may do. (They’re not alone, of course...)
I tend to agree with you but you might find this more common than you realize. I’ve noticed in my lifetime products I like change their recipes. I’ve also seen products once labeled as ice cream now labeled as frozen dairy dessert. I’ve seen this type of thing in lots of different products. Not just ice cream. And I’m not convinced anything changed legally in many cases. Usually I suspect it was to reduce costs.

It’s now something I actively look for on packaging when a product gets a new look.
You're doing a fair bit of disingenuous spinning yourself there, chief.
This is what I wrote about Prop 19 back in October. It was both an expansion and partial repeal of Prop 13. It was supposed to work in tandem with Prop 15 (the other partial repeal of Prop 13):

Prop 19 (Allow people 55+ to take their Prop 13 tax breaks to new homes): Yes. You may ask why someone like me, who is strongly against Prop 13, would support a bill that seemingly expands Prop 13. This bill will encourage older people to vacate their large (and mostly empty) single family homes by allowing them to keep their low taxes and move to smaller single family homes or even fancy downtown condos. That alone would be a good thing, as it would free up needed housing for younger families that are growing and have kids. As long as Prop 13 exists, this will actually make things better by making it financially smart to leave your large unused home (which right now it is not).

But is also does more than that! There is also a partial repeal of Prop 13 hidden in this bill. It would force a tax reassessment when you inherit a property if you don’t move into it. This would mean a huge boost to local tax funding which goes towards schools, police, fire, etc. and closes a loophole that wealthy people use to help their kids stay rich by giving them rental properties that are only profitable because of their tax breaks. Also this prop is opposed by the Howard Jarvis association, which is usually an automatic yes for me, because Howard Jarvis is always wrong.
More than half way through watching this. Why doesn't this guy just fit cameras around his home?
Url changed from https://link.medium.com/w87LxHtzCcb, which points to this. (Link shorteners are banned on HN so please post the canonical URL.)
https://github.com/socketry/async-pool
You're right, vetting would be necessary. Dorms work because the population is (generally speaking) in the same age cohort and stage of their lives, there for a common purpose, and they have skin in the game i.e. they risk their tuition and completion of their degree if they don't abide by the rules. That's the other thing, students sign on to a code of conduct and are held to account by staff and volunteers. An adult dorm would work but it would need to follow a similar setup.
A house is a pretty good hedge against inflation. You can sleep in it during the night and grow veggies outside it during the day.

The only downside is you can sell a small portion of your house.
It's not so much that it's not aligned with their interests. It's more that voters wish to live free of consequences. But most of public policy is about trade-offs. Republicanism is supposed to help this. For example, the longer terms for senators and having them originally chosen by the legislature was supposed to insulate them from the public a bit so they could make people take their medicine.

Unfortunately, Republicanism broke down fairly quickly in America due to special interests and the separation of powers making it very easy to jam up a bill you didn't like. Basically anyone with a lobbyist has a veto power.

My prescription, we need Republicanism. We probably need to do away with referendums or subject them to a lot more parliamentary rules and rigor. To keep thisall from becoming 18th century guilded age corruption we need to do some other things too. We need to effectively kill the power of lobbying. We need to give state and federal representatives massive budgets so they can afford their own researchers. We probably need much larger legislatures, (hundreds or thousands of seats). And we need a new way to choose some of our representatives. Something that incorporates randomness to ensure regular people who live regular lives are actually participating.
Ah you misspelled “muh reality” - I know it’s hard to reason through but let me put it to you this way. Give me one single solitary shred of evidence that they have the money they claim to have. The burden of proof is on them and I’m sure as confident as you are you’ve seen some?

For instance if I told you I had a trillion dollars in an offshore bank account, and that if you gave me $1 I’d give you a funbuck and throw it on the pile with no obligation to redeem it, would you up and believe me right away? If so I may just get into this crypto business after all.
> Odroid C2 has no mainline support for HDMI output yet.

Yes, it does: http://www.linux-meson.com/doku.php
Have you tried Mapkit JS?
Non-sequitur olympics, here I come.
bitcoin in its finite, pre-determined supply and halvings every ~4yrs (formed through consensus) while going through s-curve adoption brings forth its unique number go up technology that has economist around the globe stumped
You were clearly against the people defending themselves in your original reply (saying it won't fix anything) and want school policies to fix things.

The policies you are listing are already in use! Why hasn't the issue been solved?
> I'm not sure how important Streetview is for street level data.

Streetview imagery is mined for address information from signs/plaques on buildings. Operating hours and names of businesses can be determined via OCR
Gigawatts per second????

[EDIT]: I see this needs elaboration ... watts are already "per second". Watts per second implies some sort of acceleration of energy consumption. Just wondering if I'm missing the point.
Parent comment is saying that the deterrent could be how difficult you make it to hack you.

A case where the best, and possibly only, offense is a good defence.
Bitcoin is interesting, but a maximum of 7 transactions-per-second gives it very narrow use-case. Also the transaction fee is up to almost $8.

Personally I’d rather own diversified stock portfolio to hedge inflation.
It is a bit strange. For example, if you're playing Dungeons and Dragons with a group of friends, the choice to murder a child is likely to be met by at worst some groans. Try to have your character rape an imaginary woman, however, and you're likely to not only be kicked out of the game but lose those people as friends as well. I know I wouldn't talk to that person again.

We have a double standard when it comes to imaginary evil that is simply violent and imaginary evil that is repugnant. Make a game about shooting a thousand people and it may win game of the year. Make a game about avoiding prosecution while abusing your virtual pet dog and you'll probably lose your job.
> The practice peaked around 1880, was formally outlawed by the last state (Alabama) in 1928, and persisted in various forms until it was abolished by President Franklin D. Roosevelt via Francis Biddle's "Circular 3591" of December 12, 1941.

You use something that was ended (because people thought it was wrong!) nearly a century ago as supporting evidence for what exactly?
Can we agree it's impractical, even if technically possible?
So many contradictions on Glassdoor: https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Employee-Review-Coinbase-R...
Why are we still using half-baked "doesn't it seem like" type arguments in the comments of a ten year study showing everything you just said is bullshit?
I have tried to compare typical fight movies to ballet. Some family disagreed heavily, until I convinced them to sit closer at a production. The physicality of a ballet show is incredible.