skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As a regular Pony user, and coding seriously in it for a few months, this is what I think;

I rather fight the Reference Capabilities (easily the hardest aspect of Pony and probably the number one reason people give up) than to spend endless amount of time CHASING concurrency problems, or even worse, HOPING that I didn't forget some lock/mutex/whatever and ending up having data corruption.

Pony is forcing me to do the right thing, and doesn't allow me to "I guess I could get away with X", and this reassurance is a huge boon.

It is hard to learn, and if you are not in the concurrency space, don't know what a thread is and don't care much for data integrity, then Pony is not for you. The effort you need to put in will not be appreciated by you.

If you have a strong opinion on how things must be done, Pony is not for you, because it won't allow you to follow your opinion all the time, because the opinion is not safe.

Pony is not for everyone, but for those that can think in the Pony model, then it is an incredible tool to ensure your code is correct, safe and performant.
This is not outsider vs. establishment expert.

This is effort to learn vs. making hasty judgements issue.

I have studied several subjects over 100 - 1000 hours as an outsider, but that does not mean that I can criticize experts. I can ask pointed questions maybe. Being intellectually humble is good.

In this issue outsiders should at least read everything Matt Levine writes on the subject as a starting point.
Presumably it's no longer accelerating though, so it doesn't really matter how fast it's going. I guess the thing is still going to be in our solar system for another 15 years or so, so a solar sail or any number of other options exist to launch something towards it.

https://i4is.org/what-we-do/technical/project-lyra/

https://www.wired.com/story/should-earthlings-chase-oumuamua...
If you broaden your understanding of WSB's definition of winning beyond "making a profit" or "maintaining value" to "taking a loss but having an entertaining ride along the way" then they're winning and have no way to "lose."
Now the SEC or Professional Capitalists making easy money may not want WSB to turn corners of the market into a volatile form of entertainment but it's completely legal AFAIK and illustrates the disparity between what is claimed about the stock market by the wealthy and powerful and what the stock market actually is. If a Wall Street clique-member replaced WSB and behaved the same way it would be fine, at least from a hyperventilating "we have to think of the children/retail investors" standpoint.
Sorry, edited after you wrote this. I took out the reference to the Trump administration because it wasn't helpful to the main point of many doctors not being experts on epidemics.
Show HN: get matched with developers and projects
Hey, so I just recently finished YC SUS with this idea, talked to a lot of potential users as well, thought this was something that just needed to be out there.

In brief, ConnectDome helps you match with developers, projects, and ideas.

In detail, ConnectDome provides you with tailored project recommendations, 1:1 AI matches with developers we think you'd love to work with, our aim is to simply enable a lot of developers out there who aren't able to work on their ideas just because they don't have the time to or lack support from other developers.

Our tailored project recommendations help you work on other projects with one huge benefit, you get to be directly in touch with the creator of that project which can be a big advantage for some.

Either way, this is the alpha version that we just launched, and it's free to use right now! :)
Some years ago I learned about ProDBG[0] and was pretty excited. It is going through a rewrite, I hope it gets usable soon.

[0] https://github.com/emoon/ProDBG
Good case study in why it is often not productive to legitimize "both-sides".

What started the California wildfires:
1) We're not sure: could be power lines, fireworks, a cigarette...
2) Jewish space lasers
This is a pandora's box. My recollection of the events is this: around March 2020, there were some links to somewhat shoddy studies of effectiveness of masks in case of other diseases, but the official statement was that masks were not proven to be effective - but that's because there was no randomized control trial performed to check mask effectiveness against SARS variants, and how could there be?

This spins off into a whole discussion of how evidence-based medicine can lead you off the cliff when you follow its letter, and not spirit, because despite something being bloody obvious, there is no RCT proving that.
> why should they be considered civilians?

Because they are. Robert Peel was insistent on exactly that point when he set up the police force in the UK. See, for instance, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_principles

Edit: corrected URL
Imagine an alternative universe. WSB decides that shorting some company they hate is a good idea. But wait, it has already been shorted up to 99% by hedge funds! No more shorting allowed. SEC rules.

Same backlash about a "rigged" system.
> They screwed it up big time.

because people are mad at them? you think they shouldve gone public during a high-volume, high-volatility feeding frenzy with tens of billions flying around and said "we're insolvent, but its ok we're taking action to recover our position"?

it looks to me like their actions were totally rational and at least a good-case scenario, if not best-case. platforms have been deleted in the past due to circumstances like these, and i think the CEO going on TV and saying theyre on the verge of massive legal and financial problems is suicide. keeping their business alive is supporting their customers. no if, ands, or buts.

calling this a PR problem is a bit obnoxious. its like saying theres no technical problem, but people think there is, so the company has to not only continue providing their free services but also make their users feel good while doing so. RH had to navigate dangerous waters, with bankruptcy to the left, bankruptcy AND lawsuits on the right, and only lawsuits ahead. im not sure how they couldve done better.
My Facebook feed is filled with people talking about this. These are friends I have know for years who have never mentioned stocks before but now are talking about "holding the line".

It is FOMO for sure, but the real emotions I get from talking with people are outrage and revenge. Everyone feels like the system (economic and political) is rigged against the public. The dopamine hit from sticking it to the man is palpable.
...that goes without saying
Because while what you wrote is true, it is not really relevant to how Wall Street earns money. They are not earning money from beating the market.
Everything on WSB states this is a bad investment plan and is more to bankrupt Melvin because they tried to bankrupt Gamestop. Short sellers have been using the down turned economy to collapse struggling companies that hire everyday people.

What's funny is how the HN community tries to defend the firms they've whined about for years. Is what's going on irrational? Yup. But it pulls back the curtain of what the financial firms do to the economy and their own manipulation tactics.
I'm missing your point here.

You seem to be suggesting that just because some data leaks which is outside Apple's control that it's ok for all data to leak? But that makes no sense.
imo 66% effectiveness is pretty good, not on a personal level, but at the population policy level. I'm glad to get another vaccine on the market soon.
It might be helpful to consider the paradox of choice; although I'm not completely sure that it is correct or what its real implications are.

Also, this topic made me think a bit of this letter: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Moral_letters_to_Lucilius/Let...
> I'm not a domain expert, but it would seem that whether or not something was sold naked is ultimately determined in the instant that you are obligated to deliver

No, this is not true. When you sell short (with some exceptions for market makers), you are obligated to "find" shares to borrow (called "locates"). Usually your broker arranges this; any shares that you borrow cannot be lent to someone else. If you do not have any borrowed shares (as recorded by the broker), that is considered a "naked short sell".
Is there a spoiler tag on HN ? These ones still hurt:

There is a lot of thing one could have done "for the LULz" but decided to browse HN, Imgur or Reddit instead.

- Bitcoin. I heard about it when it was still possible to mint it on CPU, but chose to run SETI@Home instead.

- Bitcoin when it was at merely $9000.

- Ethereum when it was going under $1.

- Dogecoin like anytime before yesterday (up 6x or something today).

- #GME when options where pennies on the dollar, or even the stock at $20 in early January.

- $Tesla in January, February, March of 2020 or anytime before the split.

- $Tesla instead of putting down $1000 to reserve a slot to buy a model 3 at its announcement, put it in the stock, or even better, in long dated calls.

- $Amazon or $Apple last march or anytime before that.

- $SPCE after it crashed in March (a WSB hyped stock)
it's got bipartisan appeal because the one thing politicians have in common is how self-aggrandizing they are
It’s pretty well documented that intelligence agencies new about the novel coronavirus very early on, and we know the vaccines were completed very rapidly after the genomic information was published — so this argument is sort of off. The US appears to have had reasons for not rushing to vaccinate its military. China, by contrast, made the decision to vaccinate their troops a lot earlier.

In other words the military clearly does have early eyes on all sorts of situations - and their action or inaction on that info is a separate consideration.
So maybe I can help a little with the above:

- prior the 1980s, when you bought a stock a physical stock certificate was passed back and forth between your broker and the broker selling the stock

- as you can imagine, as trading volumes increased this became unmanageable. In fact, at one point, the exchanges would close every Wednesday just to give people time to catch up on all of the exchange of certificates

- everyone, rightly, agreed that there needed to be a better way and the idea of a clearing house emerged. In this model, all of the physical certificates lived in one place. Ownership was tracked via a central "database" (originally not electronic). This made it MUCH easier to transfer ownership aka "settle". This is very similar to how gold is traded e.g. the NY Fed holds it for other countries etc

- An added benefit of a clearing house: it's easy to see how much everyone owns of everything. e.g. if one party is over leveraged or has gone extremely short, in theory, the clearing house can choose to not deal with that party or, more flexibly, request additional capital etc.

Here is also a specific example about settlement risk:

- let's say you report all of your trades to your clearing broker (think of them as a mini-clearinghouse)

- a data file gets lost or corrupted and the clearing broker says "Wait! Something is wrong! We are not letting you trade until we get this figured out!"

- EVEN IF YOU ARE CORRECT and they are wrong, you now have market risk because you may be holding a position that is losing you money. So much money in fact that it might drive you out of business.

The above is an actual answer to a settlement expert when asked "What is your nightmare scenario?". This in turn, could have ripple effects to other clearing brokers and trading firms and is generally all part of "settlement" or "clearing' risk.

Source: have worked in fintech trading for many years.
I think this is a bit of a disingenuous approach. There's a slippery slope here.

Just because "humanity, including giant healthcare conglomerates who stood to profit came together to fast track vaccines against a deadly global pandemic" it doesn't mean "regulation of the vaccine and drug industry is pointless."

If the FDA were to relax its standards across the board due to this one success in the face of an anomaly, you'd better believe drug manufacturers would be fast tracking dangerous drugs.

Heck even in the current regulatory environment dangerous products make it through. As evidenced by all the ads I see for litigation based on harm caused by various already-approved (in a non-fast track manner) drugs that have made it to the market in the last decade.
Walmart to begin drone delivery pilot this summer
Absolutely not. On what theory? And on what grounds? There's no such thing as "a fairly easy case for piercing the corporate veil".
I don't think it allows its users to make more queries. When is the last time you've done a google search and have seen "too many queries, try again later"?

The efficiency gains of improving the algorithm ARE free-flowing streams of capital.
That’s not at all the attitude I read in gp.

Being cognizant of our (humans’) fantastic, ego-bolstering tendencies is a good thing.
> The problem is that when hedge funds get in trouble they do not go to jail

Criminal prosecution is held to a much higher evidentiary standard than civil fines. Almost all market related crimes, including manipulation and insider trading, require mens rea. Proving state of mind beyond a shadow of a doubt is really difficult to do. Especially when the defendant is sophisticated enough to know the law and have access to high-quality legal advice.

Any US Attorney would absolutely love to have the feather in his cap of sending a billionaire hedge fund manager or investment banker to prison. Hell, the reason Rudy Giuliani is a household name is because he managed to do that. But no prosecutor is going to bring a case that he has no chance of winning.

Given that it makes much more sense to target enforcement with civil fines rather than criminal prosecution. You can tie up your resources to fight expensive, hard to prosecute criminal cases. Or you can quickly settle for reasonable fines, and cover many more cases with the same set of limited resources.
Being prevented from being able to buy a stock if the brokerage can not afford to legally sell it to you is the expected outcome. If you want to argue that Robinhood should have been bigger, and thus had more flexibility and been able to handle this, sure. Why not. But then you're complaining that the company you're dealing with isn't big enough to float your risky position.

Would you have preferred the alternative where Robinhood risks exploding, has no liquidity, triggers a rush where everyone tries to get their stock out of Robinhood at the same time, fails, and every Robinhood customer is stuck waiting on SPIC for some undetermined amount of time?

Or would you have preferred the alternative where Robinhood didn't allow you to sell either? And then it the stock went down during that time, you can't try to get out?

Robinhood is a shitty company for a lot of reasons, but preventing themselves from being over-extended into bankruptcy isn't really one of those reasons.
Interesting that you assign expensive Mac products to WSB members. The most that can be said is that they likely have a mobile phone of some time.
I've just checked my own savings and pensions, which are in a portfolio of a few different investment funds, primarily in socially responsible areas that I expect to hold for the long term and investing in real stocks and not funny money financial instruments. I'm not in the US, and none of the funds I'm invested in has any declared connection to any of the affected stocks as far as I can see.

And yet, despite steady, healthy growth in recent months, I appear to be down close to 10% over the past week. Now, that could just be bad luck, with sharp falls striking a variety of different funds at almost exactly the same time. Perhaps there has been some profit-tasking after that period of growth. But there has been generally positive sentiment in other respects this week, from Biden to vaccines, and no obvious cause for sudden alarm or to expect the growth to stop.

Alternatively, something else is happening, and there is only one story making the front pages today that could explain it.

Now, as I mentioned, I'm generally a buy-and-hold, long term investor. Short term blips don't greatly concern me, and probably won't until I'm getting close to retirement. But if I were about to retire, I'd be concerned about the short term consequences for rationality in the markets.
There's definitely a conversion cost. For strings, Python apparently caches the UTF-8 encoded string, so if you _repeatedly_ transfer it to Rust I suspect (but haven't checked) that the cost is much lower.

In general I suspect it's the usual "NumPy arrays are fast, everything else you better be getting a sufficiently large boost from the low-level code to justify conversion".

For the thing I prototyped in Rust, it was wrapping the `ahocorasick` crate which was in fact faster than `pyahocorasick` which is written in C or Cython or something. Both have similar conversion costs, probably, so it came down to "for lots of data the Rust version was faster".
>Can journalist check Gamasutra nad gdc vault before writing blog post on genre

No because if they take time to do research they'll miss the views they could have gotten if they just slam out a piece and (basically) nobody is going to pay extra for a journalist who's also an expert on board game design.

It's the biggest problem with journalism today.
They were testing a vaccine to prevent hookworm infection. [0] After giving the experimental vaccine, they intentionally inoculated the research subjects with hookworms to measure whether the vaccine prevented hookworm infection.

[0] https://twitter.com/JimmyBernot/status/1354443850153144321
I look forward to Michael Lewis's next book on the subject.
Why Europe’s Vaccine Politics Are Worse Than America’s
tbh I thought I'd have to go to n-gate to get this take on recent discussions...
Thanks so much! Hearing we saved you time is our favorite type of feedback!
Lies lies.. Robin Hood bye bye
trees 300-500 years old are not unusual. organisms can grow without blowing themselves or their ecosystems up.
How does that change any of what the comment you are responding to says?
His undergrad degree was in economics from UCLA. He never practiced medicine and started his own hedge fund soon after medical school.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Burry
It definitely is. The next sentence specifies market participants which would include both WSB and hedge funds.
IIRC this is a new thing in order to limit exposure to the positions above.
Facial recognition software fails legal tests if used with large datasets. It does so b/c software does not discriminate in the same way the human mind does.

For example, some facial recognition software identifies this picture of a man wearing glasses as actress Milla Jovovitch:

https://images.newscientist.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/0...

[The New Scientist article from which the above picture is taken is "Glasses make face recognition tech think you're Milla Jovovich":

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2111041-glasses-make-fa... ]

The (PDF) original paper:

https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~sbhagava/papers/face-rec-ccs16.pdf

Steven Talley was identified by the FBI as the primary suspect in two bank robberies using a facial recognition algorithm. He had an iron-clad alibi, but the police and FBI weren't convinced. In court one of the bank tellers said Talley definitely wasn't the robber. Nonetheless Talley lost his job, his wife and his family and was held in prison for months. For more details read:

"LOSING FACE: How a Facial Recognition Mismatch Can Ruin Your Life"

https://theintercept.com/2016/10/13/how-a-facial-recognition...

I found out about the facial recognition failures from he outstanding book "Hello World" by Hannah Fry. Fry tells the story of Steven Talley as part of a chapter on crime, AI and facial recognition.

https://www.amazon.com/Hello-World-Being-Human-Algorithms/dp...

Fry's book shows how/why facial recognition software simply does not work well enough to use in police work. She provides the studies and footnotes them. As Fry says:

"If you're searching for a particular criminal in digital line-up of millions...the best-case scenario is that you won't find the right person one in six times...". That is not nearly good enough for law enforcement and the courts.

-from "Hello World" by Hannah Fry
One could argue that the whole situation came about because outsiders (Reddit users) caught the "experts" (hedge funds) with their pants down.
Yes, as you rightly point out, and although I applaud this from Apple, it is carefully worded.

But we knew that. It's for Joe Public.
linkdd is saying that complexity comes from emergent behavior based on simple foundational building blocks, like a programming language
Just that at least the first statement is technically incorrect. And that the second is a bit misleading IMHO.

Edit: And adding that some of the data in question is in Apple's control (the IMEI for instance that could also be randomized/changed).
A lot of the comments in this discussion should be tagged with the country to which they apply.
Thanks!

Turns out an easy google search answered my question as well... this post https://medium.com/distributed-computing-with-ray/ray-for-th... does say that ray uses the actor model, and ray is listed on The Actor Model wikipedia page as an Actor Model library.
Also, how much of that has been realised vs just being paper gains/losses? I'm not convinced the original hedge fund shorters have really closed out all their positions at a loss. Or maybe they've closed out some of their shorts at a loss, then entered the short again at a higher point and are now poised to make even more money on the (inevitable) way down.

Conversely, a few investors that bought cheap might have made huge returns - if they sold at inflated prices (passing the hot potato to the next greater fool). If they didn't sell, then the paper gains will vanish.
I've been thinking about this. Would traditional co-location (e.g. 2x 2U from DELL) in a local data center be cheaper if e.g. you're serving local (country-wise) market?
Surely weird flexes don't get much weirder than this.
I would certainly believe that this is different outside of the US.

The US is very litigious and as a result the rule book is often long and complicated enough that nobody really understands it because it's written by lawyers to avoid liability rather than as a set of practical measures designed to improve real outcomes.

Also, whenever Something Bad happens they generally add new rules to address it, even if the existing rules would have prevented it had people been following them. So the complexity grows over time and makes it less likely that anybody even reads the rules, much less implements them.

This also differs by industry or even by which rule book it is. If you have reasonable policies for handling hazardous materials, people follow them because if they don't then they get hurt. But even in the same company, the company policy on other things only gets followed if it gets enforced, and only gets enforced if not doing so caused trouble in practice.
An option is to use a throwaway account for comments that would leak personal information if linked to a main account or personalized username.