skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"The Commission will closely review actions taken by regulated entities that may disadvantage investors or otherwise unduly inhibit their ability to trade certain securities. In addition, we will act to protect retail investors when the facts demonstrate abusive or manipulative trading activity that is prohibited by the federal securities laws. Market participants should be careful to avoid such activity."

This should scare the crap out of Robinhood from what happened yesterday.
Survivorship bias is also relevant -- what we can find in the market from hobbists got to be the good ones or happened to find niche markets that the professionals overlooked/passed.
I hate this sentiment so much. As if it's a bad thing that Wall Street gangster hedge funds are finally feeling the squeeze that they put on everyday working people, just because some of the money they control is pension money or university endowments. It's literally the same rationale people use to justify staying in abusive relationships. Controlling some crumbs of the great unwashed's money gives these billionaires zero moral authority to do the crap they get away with every single day. Fuck them, then fuck them again. They deserve every ounce of this and then some.
> We can estimate how many comets are out there with orbital mechanics models, but what about objects originating from outside the solar system?

We can estimate the frequency and size of impacts, regardless of the origin of the impacting body, from observing craters on the Earth, moon and other planets. Those show that the "end of life" impacts are pretty rare - the conclusion that also follows from the fact that we're having this discussion here.
That thought that continued growth is eventually unsustainable has been there since at least the 1840's. The core of Marxism is the idea that capitalism is the most effective method of increasing productive capacity, and that this is fantastic (the first chapter of the Communist Manifesto is fanboy-level praise for capitalism), until it runs out of room to grow into.

Whether or not you agree with the analysis, the core problem it posits - that capitalism will grow out of markets to expand into, and that once it does, it will fundamentally change the game - matters.

We can necessarily not have growth forever - if not before, eventually we run out of exploitable energy within our light-cone. In practice we'll hit limits far sooner that will cause competition to drive down production cost will be far harsher than it needs to be in an environment where you can compensate by expansion.

Marx thought that would happen "soon" - when capitalism has spread to the entire world. But it's a question when, not if, we hit a ceiling where further demand growth can't physically happen, and quite likely we'll reach a ceiling long before there where it's not happening fast enough to counter competitive pressure. The world population is expected to stabilise and start dropping - at least for a while - possibly as soon as towards the end of this century. What happens to growth then?

Whenever we reach a point where capitalism is no longer getting growth by growing into expanding markets, the question becomes whether capitalist competition will drive us to a level of automation that threatens to kill capitalism. Marx believed that would happen by causing crises of "overproduction", where improved efficiency would cause mass unemployment and by extension kneecap demand by taking away peoples incomes. Alternatively, whether we'll be able to as a society reign things in and ensure people share in enough of the improvements in efficiency for capitalism to survive - be it with UBI, or shortening working hours, or other means.

Because it's easy to forget that one of the "promises" of capitalist competitive pressure is to drive margins towards zero, because a company that can survive with lower margins can out-compete one that can't. And ultimately that means driving every cost that can be reduced down, and that means ultimately driving labour costs down as far as they can go...
It reminds me of the one and only time I've replied-all to an email with a joke. At the time it seemed perfect, the best possible setup, something everyone would get and enjoy. But the dozen or so joke replies immediately after mine ruined it and convinced me never to do it again.
Definitely recommend checking out Novo -- also free, no minimums, no txn limits, and integrates with QBO, Stripe, Shopify, etc. Comes with invoicing, envelopes, and debit card. Not owned by a big bank. Most comparable business banking to Azlo vs some of the other players. https://banknovo.com/azlo

Disclosure: I do work at Novo
The people shorting are screwed, but the profits will go to the people who bought the options, who will essentially be selling the contract back and trying not to own the stock. The stock should go into free fall, and the people who bought the stock are also going to be victims unless they sell to an alternate victim before the call date.

It should all be convoluted by policy, settle dates, brokers selling and later replacing stock in margin accounts, etc. But basically anyone involved in buying GameStop stock itself is playing in the options market with insufficient evidence of understanding, and brokers are supposed to interfere with that.
>Think of it more like a first date and you each pay for your own meal.

Reasonable point, but many companies expect you do to a reasonably substantial technical test (minimum half a days work, often more) after a quick chat with their HR people. I usually refuse unless they have managed to convince me that I really want the job and I am not competing with ten others for the job.
Hiya. That's me.

If there is anything you ever want to chat about from that podcast or anything pony related, feel free to find me on the Pony Zulip and DM me.
Yup, doubling in on what you said. If they were banned ages ago for that reason, okay. Understood. Especially if every group that uses slurs gets insta banned as well. Roger that. Thats a fair system. But doing so only when the financial overlords are getting hurt by that group? Come on, because regex was invented this week? Now they can easily find the slurs? This is a classic pissing in our pockets and telling us it's raining.
If you're interested in publishing Rust libraries as Python packages (or integrating Rust code into an existing Python package), check out https://github.com/PyO3/maturin and https://github.com/PyO3/setuptools-rust.
We're hearing about lag from our friends in Europe. Also mobile browsers don't respond very well right now. We'll need to address the lag-in-Europe problem, and mobile browsers will become more relevant post pandemic. Thanks for responding! :)
Good point - something to test, once I get to the filesystem benchmarks!
I vaguely remember that some settings / control-panel-thingy was written in Scheme on Windows. That was at least 20 years ago, though, so it’s probably gone by now.
> They're allowed to lie to suspects, not the courts where parallel construction happens.

That's only true in theory. In practice, police lies are one of the pillars of the US "justice" system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_perjury

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/18/nyregion/testilying-polic...

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/08/police-testilyin...
And her social media presence in the years in between has demonstrated maturity and good judgment?
Unfortunately, you have situations where cases are started using inadmissible investigation tactics, but presented to a jury without them.

In those situations, the prosecution may succeed, which actually adds incentive to conduct the illegal investigations.
Factorio is a lot like Dwarf Fortress - the graphics are a very small part of the gameplay.

Interacting with the simulation is the majority of the gameplay - and the majority of the simulation is spent on that.

The thing that is interesting about Factorio is it is entirely deterministic (similar to old games that could "record demos" such as Doom or the original Starcraft) - this simplifies some things and complicates others.
That sounds even worse than the nonsense we have to put up with in this industry.
Actvid.com – Watch HD Movies Online, Free HD Movies Streaming
Exactly. Short seller buys 100 shares, return shares to lender, lender sells back to short seller, repeat as many times as needed to close
The "retards" of WSB pride themselves in using these slurs spuriously.
I think some of the vitriol comes around the discussion of whether or not we should develop a mission to go visit it.
I'd love to see noisy two stroke dirt bikes a thing of the past. Maybe the future isn't so bad after all. :)
At zero interest I can borrow money to meet my debt obligations.
Ever since Clinton repealed Glass Steagal, banks have been able to offer both commercial banking and investment banking. And they aren't really scared of defaults when they are too big to fail.
Factorio is sensitive to memory latency, not memory throughout. This matches expectation of a single threaded application with many data dependencies. Ripe for multithreading where data independencies can be made.
> There are no environmental restrictions here you could grow for as long as user needs grow.

Computers need matter, energy, and space.
Indie dev studios also have the ADVANTAGE that they can do this - if Bob wants to post a blog he just needs to run it past Jim and Barbara - no need to run it through Legal, etc.
Great article, I learned! Can you tell me if you looked into aspects of the NVMe device itself, such as whether it supports 4K logical blocks instead of 512B? Use `nvme id-ns` to read out the supported logical block formats.
Police in the US don't enforce the laws against other police or other powerful figures in governments, for the most part. This results in two different sets of laws, one that applies to police and government officials, and a much broader set that applies to you and I.

The idea that the law is applied equally is a total fiction.
> Trying to have some debugger program like gdb and then talking to it from emacs or a terminal or something will be a big pain.

If you're already familiar with Emacs commands, then the M-x gdb interface is as good as any debugger interface in an IDE.

If you're not already an Emacs user, then the TUI[1] (gdb -tui) is surprisingly good - much better than the "old school" approach I was taught in college of just interacting via the gdb prompt.

> Debuggers work well for what, windows and websites?

I spend most of my time on a large C++ project that does neither of these things, and I still use gdb a lot. In my experience, it's most useful for unit tests - you identify a bug, write a unit test that triggers the bug, and run the unit test under gdb to poke around and understand what's going on.

gdb and lldb don't work great when run on the whole program, mainly because it's hard to specify the actual behavior you want when debugging a system where multiple threads are executing concurrently. Almost all of our unit tests are single-threaded, so this isn't a problem when debugging unit tests.

If you're working on a C or C++ program and using a supported processor, I also highly recommend trying out rr[2], the record and replay debugger, which you mentioned in your comment. Unlike gdb, it's reasonably easy to use and understand even if your program has lots of concurrency, and it pretty much eliminates the need to do "printf" debugging, since you can print variables from any line in your program without recompiling and re-running. You can still use the Emacs or TUI gdb interfaces when using "rr replay".

[1] https://sourceware.org/gdb/current/onlinedocs/gdb/TUI.html#T...

[2] https://rr-project.org/
I enjoyed the article and mostly agree with the authors opinions, but I think it glances over some important shifts in modern economies.

1) It is becoming increasingly hard to stay small if you have a competitor taking advantage of economies of scale and network effects. 2) It is becoming increasingly common for new sectors to discover economies of scale and network effects as digital transforms products and services.

So from a game theoretical point of view, it is kind of inevitable that "being the best" will start to be shadowed by "being big" if size becomes relevant for survival.

If you don't want to be part of something big, the alternative is to build something incredibly differentiated (like sake with 800 years of history).

Basecamp is cited in the article and their approach is exactly this. They build something incredibly differentiated like Hey (a 100 USD/year email service). But "email services" is not a market with significant economies of scale nor network effects, Google and Microsoft would not offer such service for free if it was.

But if you're interested in, say building a job board, where there are strong network effects. You'll never be able to be at peace regarding size. As soon as a direct competitor becomes bigger, you're in danger. There is room for a few medium size contenders, not infinitely many artisans with their slow-going shops.

The thing is: if you open a sake brewery today, can you survive long enough to make it highly differentiated and earn your place in the market? Not an easy task. So I don't blame founders if most companies today are born with growth in mind. Some if it might be tunnel vision and articles like these are good to remind everyone that "big" is not the only option, but it's not like the other options are always feasible either.
I don't really think that a comparison to Rust is all that useful. Rust and Pony are really intended for different purposes. Rust is systems programming language. Pony is an application programming language that provides an actor model for concurrent programming and a runtime to support the actors and perform garbage collection.

A valid comparison would be to compare a Pony program to specific type of Rust program that involves considerable concurrent processing of data.

Pony's killer feature is a type system that allows programs to be written that are guaranteed to be safe from concurrency bugs. Like Rust, the Pony compiler is based on LLVM, and Pony programs compile to native code. Due to the Pony type system, the Pony GC is very efficient. Pony performance is pretty good, but as a language Pony is about much more than performance.
You can have unending growth even with finite resources.

It's Zeno's Paradox - if you have use half of the resources, and then half of the remaining, and then half of that remaining, you could continue forever.
For me this is the language mentioned by Joe Armstrong as "interesting". However, it looks like poorly designed, with cluttered, messy syntax and a kitchen sing syndrome.

Over-"engineering" is the second root of all evil, after unnecessary, redundant abstractions.
Reading this makes me want to stop being an employee and go and start my own business again.
There's a big difference between "provide a decent living for the founders of the company" and "provide ever-increasing profits to the already-wealthy shareholders", and I believe that difference is at the heart of the article's point.
Wow, this blows my mind. I have been working on manufacturing test software which is essentially this.

And it is made by Ball! The company that makes the glass canning jars! Who knew they had an aerospace division...
My attention was caught by this paragraph:

> In addition, we will act to protect retail investors when the facts demonstrate abusive or manipulative trading activity that is prohibited by the federal securities laws. Market participants should be careful to avoid such activity. Likewise, issuers must ensure compliance with the federal securities laws for any contemplated offers or sales of their own securities.

I'm no stock player, so I may not be reading the implied meaning correctly. But on the face of it, it seems at least as recognizing WSB-driven buyers as valid players in this match.

(However, it's an open question whether they consider WSB's attempt at short squeeze as an organic thing, or a coordinated stock manipulation. The latter, as I understand it, is strictly illegal.)
That the object could have outgassed 10% of its mass while exiting the solar system and produced a steady acceleration with no detectable change to its orbital period stretches all believability. However, I've seen similar bullshit pass as explaining such cases consistently in this field, and if anyone doubts it or makes an issue about it for too long, they get the old peer pressure applied to get them in line, or end their career. I think that is part of where the vitrol comes from. People don't like being silenced or losing their respectability because someone waved their hands a lot and said they explained something.
>This is the moment free speech advocates have been warning about for generations.

Yes, and the fact that people have screamed censorship at every moment for the last 20 years makes it much more difficult to take seriously.

"First they came for the terrorists, then they came for the people organizing a violent overthrow of the government" isn't "First they came for the socialists". And it certainly didn't include "Then they stuck little notices below videos of anti-vaxxers with links to medical experts".

Not everything is a matter of degree.

>Yesterday, however, a line was crossed.

Which is why we need to actually address specifically what happened yesterday, and not lump them in with violent terrorists.

I oppose (although am unsurprised) by Facebook's actions in this case, but I think this is a really weak argument against it.
https://www.somalilandcurrent.com/2020/09/13/trafiguras-scan...
Each one of those bans can be explained as WSB being a victim of their own success. None of these companies have a compromising financial connection to Melvin Capital in the same way that Robinhood did.

For example, the WSB Discord was basically such a trainwreck that the WSB mod team themselves admitted they had significant problems keeping it under control. We can extrapolate that to Facebook as well. Hell, the WSB mod team even locked /r/WSB for a few hours to try and figure out a moderation plan. Most online platforms either rely heavily on community moderation (Discord, Reddit) or a small army of employee moderators that have to be rotated out frequently for the sake of their own mental health. Neither of these models work well for an already-rowdy community suddenly 10xing themselves in both scale and frequency of rules violations. It's basically uncontrollable and the only option is to shut it all down until you have a chance to cool off. (Again, that's why /r/WSB was locked yesterday.)

As for Google, they took a third approach: heavy automation. They have shittons of antispam systems specifically targeted to prevent review spamming. A sudden burst of 100k negative reviews from legitimate users angry that they can no longer participate in a financial flash mob is technically indistinguishable from someone who bought and compromised 100k accounts and decided to threaten Robinhood with negative reviews. Your antispam system isn't going to understand context (e.g. Robinhood fixing the books in a particular direction) but it is going to understand timing.

There isn't really a good way to handle this. The null option of "do nothing and let the problem fester" isn't a good option. This is because people will figure out that WSB is the server/subreddit/group you go on in order to break the rules and get away with it. Anyone with a chip on their shoulder about platforms having any sort of moderation rules will deliberately spam these corners of it, and normal people will assume that such behavior is now OK because there's no enforcement. This will spill over into other corners of the platform until everything is as bad as the lowest common denominator. (See also: what happens to subreddits as they grow, the entirety of 4chan, etc)
Do individuals care about wasted taxpayer’s resources? They’re getting paid to do their job, regardless of dropped case or not. The defendant spends their time and money and has to live a stressful life.
That looks incredible and such a cool origin story about a father nurturing his son's idea into fruition.
Collections: The Universal Warrior, Part I: Soldiers, Warriors, and
Of course we need to keep watching.

But at the same time why shouldn't we continue trying to understand what oumuamua is based on everything we know?
u/DeepFuckingValue and the GameStop Reddit mania
No, even though everyone is talking about this, I didn't find anything with real value. Except for this link, this might interest you.

https://isthesqueezesquoze.com/
At some point governments will have to address the elephant in the room.

Across much of the globe, modern police forces have been empowered and emboldened to such a degree that many departments, and their members, feel institutionally above the law.

In no other occupation, that I can think of, can so many rules and directives be flouted without losing ones job, as is the case with modern police.

Its frankly insulting to see, again and again, that people we (civilians) fund the salaries of, see us as beneath them - as evidenced by how we are held to the letter of ordinances and laws by them, while they break ordinances and laws with seemingly wanton abandon.

This is unlikely to change until police are held to the exact same legal and prosecutorial rigors as those they police.
3DOrganizer - End Tangled 3D Printer Filament
It specifies trading activity. I read this as a warning to WSB, not their brokerages.
this is a warning to FINRA, too
I think I generally agree with the majority of the comments here that burn in can serve a useful purpose (especially if you can't find a high probability density point to start from), but I also wonder: if burn-in vs no burn-in makes a large difference in your outcome, aren't you likely just not running your chain long enough? Sure, if you choose a bad starting point, your initial samples might not be representative of the overall distribution, but if a handful of non-representative points can massively impact your result, then I'm not sure how stable your result was to begin with (how do you know there isn't some other set of low-probability high-impact points that your sampler just missed through luck?). People tend to have a cognitive bais towards distributions looking pretty (eg not having random chains off to the side as in the article), but I'm not sure it makes a real difference.

That said, I do think burn in is a pretty reasonable way to find a good starting point if you don't have existing knowledge about the distribution. From a practical standpoint, has anyone actually seen a massive difference between runs with/without burn in? kinda curious how often it really matters
I think this part is pretty clear:

"In addition, we will act to protect retail investors when the facts demonstrate abusive or manipulative trading activity that is prohibited by the federal securities laws. Market participants should be careful to avoid such activity."
I agree with this article personally, but don’t economies (which comprise of businesses) have to grow to either compete or reduce inequality?

Seeing how China is continuously growing at a higher rate, eventually that growth will outpace other economies proving the country a higher standard of living, technological advancement, and power.

Vietnam just reported 3% growth which is good in 2020 when countries had negative growth, however, but it was growing at 7% the last few years. If it can’t sustain growth, the labour market won’t be healthy. In turn, inequality will rise, and social mobility will be depressed.

In the article it mentions Japan a lot. I love Japan, but the stagnating economy (and aging population) is a very visible reason why 0 growth is a big issue.
Hopefully it's more than posturing and that there will be action taken to back up this statement.