skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Like almost every single major market where people spend a large percentage of their money on?

Are restaurants a monopoly? Obviously not.

Cars? There are lots of options for cars

grocery stores? There are certain some big players, but the 10 corner stores, target, safeway, and whole foods within 5 blocks of where I live show that it is not a monopoly. MAYBE you could argue geographic monopoly for grocery stores, in certain limited exceptions in a few small towns, but that is not the vast majority of people.

Housing? There are 10s (or Hundreds?) of millions of people own their own home, or rent it to others. Clearly That is pretty competitive

Lets now pick some random things that I see within eyesight of me.

What about refrigerators? There are multiple refrigerator companies.

Furniture? Probably a lot of companies make furniture.

What about shoes? Clothing? There are lots of clothing companies.

And before someone says it, yes I am sure that every example that I gave has some big players in the market.

But my main point is that I simply do not consider the existence of some big players in a market, to be anywhere even close to the same thing as a monopoly or similarly non-competitive market. There is a huge gap between those two things.

The only major exception to all of these examples, is some of the new tech companies that have significant network effects in winner take all markets. Sure, maybe there is an argument that Google is getting to the point where it almost has a monopoly on ads.

But, just looking around my room, and looking at the main things that I buy in my life, which is food, shelter, transportion, and clothing, it seems pretty clear that most of these things have lots of competition, even if there are some big players in these markets.

That is unless someone is going to make a silly argument that the only markets that could be considered "competitive" are ones in which there are 10 thousands small businesses of equal size or something.
It's not a hit piece. There was a mistake during the trial with dosage, and instead of coming clean in their main announcement and explaining what happened it was obfuscated by the "half dose" story. This just caused confusion and provided ammunition for critics.

It's great the vaccine is as effective and safe as predicted, but fumbling the most important clinical trial in the companies history reflected very poorly on their competence.
One of the things I learned, not from TypeScript but from other languages with type systems that work similarly, is to minimize the use of type decorations and let type inference do most of the heavy lifting.

It took some getting used to because things end up a bit less obvious, but I found that with the IDE's syntax highlighting capabilities, actually inspecting the inferred types isn't as much of an issue. And then you spend less time typing out type names.
Exactly. Most of the time, recoverable flaws are better than immutable bad design.
Anecdotally, as someone who works in a clinic where we test for COVID-19 much of the day (and have multiple positive patient tests per day), I can tell you that this editorial certainly seems correct. Even with our caution with PPE, I’m certain that we would have had a major outbreak among staff over the past year if this thing was transmitting efficiently via fomite—it’s just too difficult to use perfect form 100% of the time when dawning and doffing PPE or to not absentmindedly touch your face, etc.
The cheap used 10Gb NICs and the switch mentioned use SFP+ ports rather than RJ45. 10GBASE-T SFP+ modules are expensive and power-hungry compared to direct-attach twinax cables or fiber + transceivers.
The Stanford prison experiment has been debunked, it should not be cited as the study was intentionally manipulated.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31380664/
They should make a new version of "How Not to Land an Orbital Rocket Booster" for Starship :)
But it doesn't break your ability to zoom, so you at least have the option to (quickly) fix it.
The Falcon landed on land before it landed on a barge. Obviously landing on a moving/swaying barge is harder, however they had to start with water landings because they hadn't proved they could aim at their target. Once they crashed into the barge a few times, the FAA was convinced they'd only blow up the landing pad and not drop it on something else in the launch complex. So they got clearance for landing on land.

The early starhopper/starship flights proved what they needed to that they'd generally land on target.
The UK government did a lot wrong, but we still don't know what a "competent strategy for social distancing and containment" actually looks like.

Half the time we look at a country as being a good example of this, things fall apart within a few weeks... When a single person can infect hunreds of others, or none, there's a lot of randomness that models cannot easily account for. There are still a large number of infections where we don't know how the person was infected.
The stocks(GME) are still limited/restricted btw.
I think you got downvoted for what may have been interpreted as bragging. Keep the good work and don’t wait for validation from others. While some acknowledgement does blow some wind in one’s sails there’s a trap of getting stuck in that pattern. Anyway, goodluck with your projects and the future looks very bright for someone like you.
nice! I worked at a place in 1999 that had an RTF file on a public share that had the passwords for everything. It was ok because it was encrypted with wingdings...
Thanks for the detailed write-up!

I find this stuff very interesting. I've mostly only dealt with low-level userspace code on Android in the past.
I'll give that a shot, but AFAICT from the forum discussions, Pine isn't to amenable to shipping replacements without paying for them.
This seems like nitpicking.

Especially because "Amazon" being chosen in '94 doesn't mean Cadabra wasn't the name it was chosen to replace. How is Paul "saying something different"?
The UK's has been a gambler's strategy, for mine, seat-of-the-pants I'm-feeling-lucky stuff. This "win" does not compensate the losses nor justify the strategy. The win here is "the decision outcome has not been smashed by a possible downside."

There were rather a lot of people suggesting that doing an unproven vaccine strategy of getting the maximum number of people their first vaccine and a longer period between first and second that had not yet been trialed, at all as a thing that was risky. People said it in advance. Who were the credible experts who recommended it? What support did they give that it wasn't a pretty big risk? If there was some and I missed it I'll put my hand up and say I was wrong. As I recall there was some serious doubt about whether anyone would get benfit from vaccination at all. Again if it was /known/ that it was likely to work that's not a bad decision - but I haven't seen that analysis. Have you? Please do link it if you have. I'm also not clear about what the upside for running that risk was. Are there better results for people contracting covid after only one jab? Do we have data? Or was that a flyer that it might turn out to be? Any links you have with an analysis of that is welcome.

The "herd immunity" strategy was also described as risky by most experts that I saw. I think the word I used when looking at it, in advance of the numbers coming in was "insane," while being well aware there was at least a nonzero chance it could work better than the conservative approach. To say it has not come off is an understatement. If it did come off somehow due to dumb luck it would have been equally terrible decision making. It's too big a risk to take, the downside is immense.

It is reasonable to criticise a risk-loving gambling strategy for a nation's health whether it comes off or not. I criticisised it before and after and I criticisise it when it comes off and when it doesn't. By contrast a considered and careful strategy is to be commended even if it turned out to be incorrect based on subsequently available facts.

This is literally gambling on uncertain outcomes with people's lives and health. You want to do that as sensibly as you can. You want the analysis. You want it public. You're paying the downside. Getting lucky to get results out of bad decisions does NOT make a decision a good one.

But hey, take the thing as a whole. Has it been good, covid management in the UK or not? It's worthwhile analysing what when wrong and why and how that compared with other, differing strategies. Taiwan's looked pretty good initially and continues to. South Korea and Japan looked to have pretty good strategies and continue to. New Zealand and Australia had very different strategies to the UK.

It's entirely reasonable to criticise a gambling addict's decision making when they bet the rent check and the bet wins.

I hope that makes the point clearer for you, please disagree if you like but it should be clear that hindsight has nothing whatever to do with the criticisim.
A single modern mechanical HDD has more sequential throughput than a gigabit ethernet link.

SSDs are an order of magnitude faster than gigabit ethernet.

Google fiber is rolling out 2Gbps internet in many locations

1 Gigabit is definitely good enough for most general use cases, but once you start moving files around regularly it becomes a huge bottleneck.
... and it comes with a built in wealth tax (zakat), which is just about the best economic idea EVER. And it prevents loans with interest. And there are versions which embody economic free trade (the whole debate about political borderds). And...

... it's almost as if Mohammed was an economist who foresaw all the economic problems of the 21st century, and built protections around them.
It's both an interesting biography of the period surrounding his death, and visually stunning.
Or, and hear me out here, he might have lied.

It's funny how many people on this page are having trouble acknowledging that this is a prevaricating puff piece. He wants to tell a story of his success, and leave in a way that doesn't tank the stock. So he lies a bit about the origin of the company, lies a bit more about their accomplishments, and so on.
It's truly astounding for a company this large, and this old, to be able to continue growing revenue at this rate.

Even more astounding is that they're growing earnings even faster.

Simply unheard of for margins to expand at this point in a company's lifecycle.
> I’m surprised that the nature of the implementation of a public specification is patentable.

Prepare to be very surprised, I guess? It’s pretty routinely done, eg) look at any of the MPEG standards.

I don’t know what patents, if any, cover 10GigE, but in general IEEE, which governs that standard, will accept Essential Patent Claims in a standard provided the Patent Holder will provide a Letter of Assurance indicating that they will license said patents under FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory) terms – which does not mean free.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=2580&v=vYA0f6R5KAI&feature=y...

Yeah, they were doing high fidelity high performance computational fluid dynamics simulations and aerodynamic simulations by 2015.

So I think they've done the sims, and now they're doing it in real life.
Yes but in real life they are not necessarily landing in the same spot the same day to be reused again. They could have multiple replacement boosters.

Regardless, I have no problem with the booster return design unless it induces reckless danger to human life. The explosion is not a positive data.
Never attempted what? Relight an engine? Engines are routinely re-lit, especially on upper stages, yet Space-X gets it wrong with regularity. The Russians and Arianespace do it just fine.
> that google is by far the most superior search engine.

Is it? I find the amount of censorship and manipulation in Google's results since last yeast has really affected its performance on my end.

It's just alarming when you can search for something in Google and not find it, then type the same query in Bing or DDG, and you get the desired result immediately. And I do mean absolutely benign searches like news articles and published research.
I was actually doing computer repair when the IBM PC came out. It had a backplane, but most of the system was on the motherboard. Repair people were horrified that many if not most of the logic chips were soldered in, not in sockets like the Apple II. At the time, I had repaired Apple II's, and dumb terminals that had soldered IC's. Half of my time was spent painstakingly de-soldering chips from boards so a replacement chip could (hopefully) solve the problem.

On the other hand, most Apple II repairs consisted of what we jokingly called "the laying on of hands," which meant reaching in and pushing all of the chips back into the sockets with the palms of your hands. That was always accompanied by rubbing the gold fingers on the disk controller card with a pencil eraser because the gold plating was inferior. Many Apple II repairs were 5 minutes. Third on the list was power supplies, which we never figured out how to repair at a component level, and were justifiably afraid of.

At the time, IBM published some data based on their own years of computer service. They serviced a lot of their own boards, and made their own memory chips. Their data showed that chips were actually more reliable than sockets, so they limited sockets to those which had potential for fallout in production (the 8088), and the memory chips which were an optional add-on. And the ROMs, which could potentially be upgraded.
Another fun modular bus: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PC/104
The writer makes some huge leaps. Why is ad tracking a privacy nightmare? Personally, I like getting ads for things I'm interested in, rather than the spammy viagra/singles near you/etc. ads that were so commonplace on the web before ad tracking.

And how is Facebook telling you exactly what they use the tracking for "gaslighting"?
They didn't say anything about current technology, they simply asked if here was current evidence.
No, some vaccines wear off relatively quickly: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/04/how-long-do-vaccines...

So it's very important to follow the protocol here as much as possible until we know otherwise.
SpaceX Starship SN9 flies high, explodes on landing just like SN8
It all has to do with refactoring. And new people coming into the project. True fact: One day (or another), it happens.
> You're dancing around the problem

Please be a little bit more charitable: I'm very candid about the usability problems on the Linux desktop, I'm just telling people where they need to send their time, money and concerns to fix it.

> "but that's not our problem!" when something breaks.

Which is the entire point of getting rid of X11. Wayland is a display protocol and does not intend to solve all of the problems that X11 ended up solving, same as the display stack in any OS designed after 1990 (like Windows, Mac OS X, BeOS, Android and ChromeOS) do not solve these problems either.
>>Recruiters and employers are very much aligned on getting as many people as they can, and that's the problem.

I don't think this is true. I think that recruiters are looking for this (cause it's how they get paid). I do _not_ think that employers are looking for quantity.
Do you plan on documenting and contributing an actual critique or just making an unverifiable internet jab? Because if you're serious then the project would probably welcome knowing the specific so they can evaluate their system design.
It’s possible with blockchain.
Imagine if each stock had its own blockchain, made up of transactions of shares transferred from one to another, in exchange for a selected stablecoin. Every trade ever done is recorded and available to the public.
I highly doubt that nobody who used to work on Xorg would be offended by you calling it a broken pile of shit.

And then there's this, from you, today:

> GNOME is a dumpster fire [1]

Can you say the same about Gnome maintainers? Do you think they're not offended by you calling their project a dumpster fire? You're being hypocritical and going to great lengths to spin a narrative to justify your abusive language.

I feel you on entitled and abusive users, but stooping to their level reflects poorly on you and to a lesser extent on the projects associated with you, including Wayland. You can choose to be better than that.

Honestly, your attitude in TFA and here is doing more harm than good. Have you considered taking a hiatus for a while to re-center yourself? Maybe find another outlet for your frustrations? Or maybe consider @titzer's suggestion [2]: delete the post and start over.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26004413

[2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26002869
He Wants to Save Classics from Whiteness. Can the Field Survive?
Meme Stocks Lose $167B as Reddit Crowd Preaches Defiance
I think the challenge is when it comes down to resource allocation between different business units in radically different industries. Like how does someone who is not Jeff Bezos go about deciding whether Amazon should use its free cashflow to make big bold bets such as acquiring LionsGate for Prime Video content, expanding Amazon fulfillment centers globally, acquiring Humana for a push into Amazon health insurance or buying a chip fab to make Graviton chips. Perhaps the fact that Andy Jassy actually comes more from a business background means he'll do well.
> This isn't how a stable society should be set up

and why not? antifragile systems gain stability as they endure shocks. why not cyclically generate then destroy business? makes it easier to funnel resources to the top, because only the biggest - i.e., the most moneyed, hence the most liquid, hence best reactive to risk, hence most stable - firms can survive.

you may not like it morally, but two centuries of corporate history leave little to gainsay empirically about this notion.
Rapidly reusable means the goal is to have Starship (or at the very least the Super Heavy booster) fly multiple times a day. The Space Shuttle needed a new external fuel tank each flight, and the SRBs required significant refurbishment, to say nothing of the orbiter's own refurbishment.

Also important to note that Starship is going to be an interplanetary vehicle. And that means it needs to be able to land in places with little to no atmosphere on a surface with no runway.

The Space Shuttle was an impressive engineering marvel, especially for the time, but even if it could leave low earth orbit, there was no way it could land anywhere other than Earth.
Power takes differing and subtle forms: political, electoral, military, obligation, legal, sexual and official (as in the power practiced by an office holder). Monetary power is precisely one type of power, it is powerful, but is not power’s only form. Everyone has a price, except when they don’t. Is a billion dollars enough to make up for the loss of your son? What about a trillion? Only if the value you placed in him could only be measured in money.

> You then talk about the market cap of Amazon. Why? The market cap, while also representing a sum of money, is not really relevant to the discussion. You even seem to realize this yourself, but you do not really explain the reason for bringing it up.

You’ve lost the thread. Let me help:

============

>>> I still remember when Amazon was only selling Books. People laughed, Media Laughed, and I guess most of us laughed.

>>>Amazon is now a ~$1.6 Trillion Dollar Company.
What an era.

>> For comparison, using national total wealth, that makes Amazon worth more than Saudia Arabia, Denmark, Portugal, or New Zealand.

>> It's $280.5 billion in revenue in 2019 put it above the GDP of Romania, Peru, Ukraine, etc.

>> Corporations should never be allowed to get this large.

> Make your case instead of dropping your groupthink everywhere. Why? And: What is the maximum size a corporation should be allowed to grow? Who gives that permission now?

===================

> Amazon exhibits all these forms of power and more. Some of the other companies you mentioned exhibit these as well. It would be in the interest of society to break up monopolies and other concentrations of power that are actively impeding competition in the way that Amazon is.

Sure, they exhibit power, they use their power, but is it actually too much power? We can use any measure you like that isn’t market cap, now that we’ve re-established the thread and where that came in. Pick your measurements, and demonstrate how they show that Amazon is too powerful, not merely powerful.

> These ideas aren't new, developed nations typically create institutions to maintain healthy competition.

As a general rule, although not a hard rule, I don’t have nice things to say about the laws of other nations. Your task is much easier leaving them out of it.
Duolingo
#nzhellhole looks pretty competent to me. Does it not to you? The UK dreams about having a day as good as their biggest disaster. They were very, very conservative in their approach.
Not being able to cover your obligations with current cash flow (the situation where they would be defaulting on their obligations for existing trades they submitted) is pretty much the definition of bankruptcy, isn’t it?
a codebase that uses static typing _in the first place_ is a less flexible codebase.

"Less flexible" != "Less correct" or even "less good".

It's true that these are subtly different concepts. It's arguable whether they are helpful distinctions for the long-term health of a codebase.
Put the kids under a tent (not fully enclosed) with some propane heaters in the parking lot of the school.
Do they still have to deposit, mask and etch each of the layers?
It's not like what Google did with "java" on Android was good for developers OR for Java. It's amazing that they don't also look like bad guys here. I get why Oracle gets ill will, I don't understand why Google gets good will.
A single modern HDD can push out (sequential) 100-200 MBytes/s per spindle. Commodity SSDs can saturate a SATA port.

So yes, it's trivial to saturate a 10 Gbit/s link, assuming that the kernel and userland can keep up with the hardware.
I'd like to say it's similar to old day's Java. PHP introduced random features early days but Java and Go doesn't.
This title should be fixed.
I think their point is simply that type guards aren't a panacea.
I guess it's similar to arguing against a benevolent dictatorship. And I don't mean that to be snide, I think if I met someone living under a truly benevolent dictator I would have a very hard time explaining to them why I think it's a bad and dangerous form of government.
Some, including Michael Burry (who‘s hedge fund profited almost 500% during the 2008 crisis) even go as far as calling index ETFs, like that one you mentioned, to be a bubble!
Given two options

1. People doing analysis and hoping to check everything through engineering rigor and (hopefully) good assumptions

2. Test early and often, learning along the way until many positive tests have proven the system

I'd prefer 2. Look at systems like SLS to see the schedule results of (1).

No people were put on Falcon launches until almost 100 successful launches. I imagine a similar situation for StarShip. For example NASA is funding in orbit refuelling experiments (unmanned) and also a StarShip moon landing (unmanned) which will help prove the system prior to human flight.

Don't worry, plenty of people will carefully do analysis (1) later on. But the data they will review will include telemetry from real flights rather than just hopeful simulation / analysis results.
A group of renown epidemiologists from Stanford, Oxford and Harvard demand: "Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal."

http://gbdeclaration.org/
That's fair, although I'm not quite sure how they could monetize the channel as a non-profit without selling or compromising on privacy
Google Fiber can do 2Gbps.
2Gbit internet service is becoming semi-common.

Wifi 6E can do almost wigig/uwb speeds, near 7Gbit hypothetical.

A single modern NVMe drive does 56Gbit.

USB4 can do 40Gbit. It can connect direct computer to computer.