skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have a possibly stupid question...

Parts of america have really really high housing costs... like really high... and a bunch of people want to live there, and a lot of people there are poor (atleast compared to housing prices).

Why the hell do you still build single family houses, or one/two floor buildings in areas where you need to fit a bunch of people (eg. both photos in the article)? I'm from a former socialist country, and housing for working families back then looked (still does) like this:

https://i.imgur.com/pmpcaOL.png
https://i.imgur.com/YowiKVe.png

Modern buildings look a bit better, with ground floors for commercial use, and underground parking, but still:

https://i.imgur.com/AFpUiuX.jpg

I understand single or two floor buildings if you're building something in rural alabama... there's a lot of space there, and the land is cheap.... But places like san francisco? That, I don't get.
France is investing heavily: "By 2028, the European Union’s second-largest economy wants to double installed renewable electricity capacity to up to 113 GW, compared to 2017." https://ieefa.org/france-boosts-renewable-energy-spending-to... which btw also says "Meanwhile, 14 nuclear reactors in the country will be closed by 2035, two of which have already been shuttered at Electricité de France SA’s Fessenheim plant in eastern France this year."

100% solar is a strawman you constructed. Nobody is suggesting anything close to that. And don't pretend that uranium mining is a clean business.

Power to gas technology is still in its infancy, efficiency rates will improve as it is scaled up. Every technology starts out small.

Any nuclear project we start now won't be producing power for at least a decade, more likely two. We don't have that time. You might have had an argument twenty years ago, but arguing that we can defer renewable investment if we just build enough nuclear now doesn't make sense to me. By the time your proposed plants start to come online, the transition needs to be complete.

And if you're truly interested in debate, maybe you shouldn't compare your opponents to a murderous regime?
I use 2x27" 4K LG's (good panels for the money, ~£350 each) on a cheap (but honestly awesome for the money) dual vesa arm that is incredibly comfortable, having them up off the desk gives me more space on what isn't a huge desk (WFH) I couldn't go back to use regular stands, having the monitors essentially float in mid-air is ideal for me.
dnscrypt-proxy already blocks this, as well as variants of it using SVCB and HTTPS records.
I don't think this is true, and why would it be? Unless you're in an area where the housing market is cliffed for some legislative or regulatory reason.

I have a friend who works in real estate and he tells me people in difficult circumstances pay a premium because of the risk of default and damage. The landlord needs more margin to cover those extra risks.

He also told me you could never make money at the bottom end of the market if you have middle class sensibilities. It's pretty ruthless at the bottom.
Maybe you've become a better coder and now the "average code" has dropped in your estimation. There are a multitude of potential explanations, and anecdotes from people will not reveal the answer to your question.

My small amount of experience has shown that people are astoundingly bad at intuiting generational change in crime, capability, and morality.
I don't even have that as an option. I only have:

- Collect Analytics

- Allow Content Personalization

- Allow Interest-based Ads

- Allow Accurate Location-Based Services

- Request your data

- Delete your data
> What's the real solution here?

I haven't spotted this in this entire thread: managing energy consumption and more efficient distribution.
There's a massive demand for energy. Why? What's causing this? And is that demand really justified?

Vox did a really great piece about how managing consumption and distribution is a major part of the equation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfAXbGInwno

The controversial part is this: how do you do this? There are two totally naive approaches: either rely completely on free market dynamics, or heavily regulate how energy is consumed and conserved. Reality sits somewhere in between.

Then there's also a hard reality: optimization of consumption has a hard lower bound before the consequences become too painful. As a thought experiment, you could imagine a world with no electrical power plants whatsoever: but then you'd turn back the clock to how things were before the late 19th century. That's when you realize how electricity has shaped modern society over the past 150 years, but also how dependent modern society is on its availability.

Electricity is also a tradable commodity. It's a political and economical strategic asset. Part of why a radical shift isn't possible is because of existing interests who oppose anything that might cause a shift in power balances. I think it's important to recognize this as well. Especially in a discussion that promotes particular types of energy production over one another.

One potential scenario might be this:

Electricity has become superfluous. Nobody ever questions the intricacies of energy production and transport when they plug their smartphone charger in a socket. The vast majority of consumers are conditioned with the idea that a socket will always provide an infinite flow of power. It's only when power is cut off for whatever reason - brown outs, black outs, power is too expensive,... - that one starts to understand that this isn't always true. Having access to electricity isn't a human right after all.

The future might be painful in a sense that more and more people will be confronted with this painful truth. If not pro-actively and softly pushed through public debate; the circumstances - raising energy prices, availability,... - will force people to confront their own power consumption, the lifestyle they have build based on the assumption that power will always be available. It will also confront them with the inequities caused by all of this.

That's why I think it's a fallacy to perceive both nuclear and renewables as "silver bullet" solutions to avert such scenario's. Reality is far more complex.
I did mean to reply to you (72 days ago plus in another thread) I just can't make a Twitter, like I've tried and doesn't like my IP or email addresses or something, not sure
This piece deserve front page just for its potential noise reduction effect.
By the way, maybe there are too many « curators », but at least they provide a filtering function.
It make me thinking about the alternatives and opportunities to create a filter as a product.
The supplier was great! I think I received it within a week of ordering (which considering I'm in the UK and it was coming from mainland China is pretty impressive). Here's a link to the exact part and supplier I used: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4001192011831.html?spm=a2g0s...
Yea, sorry about that. I forgot I had configured a local resolver for .dev domains. in /etc/resolver/dev

The site works fine.
and tie your face/info to credit card
DataOps: How to develop, maintain and scale data intensive projects
Not very surprising. Twitter doesn't work properly on my desktop, google freezes when showing the cookiewall, github freezes my phone. These are all important projects of billion dollar companies.
I've seen this effect a few times with housing. When viewing either apartments or shared rooms, not being discerning enough at the advert stage has resulted in viewing some absolutely terrible places - damp, poorly heated, unmaintained, and the sense from interacting with the landlord that their MO is firmly "slumlord". The really surprising thing is that the rent demanded for these places is often not much less than the rent for a much nicer space in the same area of the city - maybe £50-£100/month.

I think when supply and demand meets minimum wage you get an incredibly non-linear effect in bang for buck. I'm sure there are exceptions (the property market definitely has a negative survivorship bias where the nice cheap properties are never on the market for very long while the terrible ones are).
I've caught myself in recent weeks nearly going into this so called "Bullshit Industrial Complex". I've got a few projects I'd like to build in the year, but wasn't planning on starting immediately due to other obligations. Hence I thought to myself sure, let me build a following in the meantime!

After following a few people on twitter and participating in a few threads, I quickly saw this as just not for me. I don't want to be selling the image of myself, because:

1) It's a lot of effort not actually related to the product (as the article mentions)

2) Honestly, it makes me feel narcissistic.

3) I've been trying to get _away_ from attention grabbing social media to get work done and have some more quiet in my life. Is having a following the only way to get the work visible? Surely not!

So definitely, I'm out to build usable things and not an audience.
It was just a placeholder button I'm afraid :/ I've removed the buttons now to avoid confusion.

I'm planning to have a little SQL client on the homepage you can use to query against demo data (maybe the public holidays calendars from Google?) but I didn't get around to it yet.

It's a bit of a fun challenge locking it down: purposely putting unauthenticated SQLi on your homepage isn't usually recommended!
> - I don't get lisp's (lisp-2) dynamic scoping (a big reason I haven't switched from vim to emacs). I'm much more comfortable with the lexical scoping of scheme (lisp-1).

"Dynamic vs lexical scope" doesn't have anything to do with "Lisp-1 vs Lisp-2". "Lisp-1 vs Lisp-2" is about whether function values are distinguishable from "defun"-defined functions. "Dynamic vs lexical scope" is about whether variable name-resolution is done based on the lexical scope stack, or the call stack.

You can enable lexical scoping in Elisp files by starting them with:

;; -*- mode: Emacs-Lisp; lexical-binding: t; -*-

That's how my ~/.emacs.d/init.el starts.
TurboVax
I suspect the author hasn't suffered overly and recognises how lucky she is, but it's a bit of a broad brush to paint an entire generation with.

And it's somewhat ludicrous to claim suffering is inherently good for you. It can be, I guess, but it's often not. I don't feel suffering made me a better person, in fact it's left me with some psychological scars, helped end a marriage etc.

Of course, I don't know who I'd be without those experiences, so I can't really make any valid comparisons.
Healthcare is kind of a special case though, in that it's not really a free market (whether you think it should be or not).
So the value of what medical professionals do isn't really signalled through. The lawyer has high value to the company that pays them, so they probably meet the first part exactly: rare skills in high demand.
This is correct! Though there is a newer driver board which supports USB-C (and thus one cable), but it's a lot more expensive. And since I was connecting to an 2015 iMac, wasn't needed in my case.
Isn't it true that a lot of 2nd hand cars migrate from Western Europe to Eastern Europe. I wonder if you will always lag behind because of this.
I wish the WebAssembly page sizes wouldn't be fixed at 64kb, so even microcontrollers with very limited memory could use it
Miners consider the resale value of GPUs since it is an inherently risky business venture. So you're right. They won't buy the mining cards.
I grew up poor (first gen immigrant family, the poor kind), so I empathize with the points raised. At the same time I don't really understand how some / a family can be (outside of some circumstances like health issues, disabilities etc) repeatedly behind on water bills or other necessities.

For the first few years my family had an income of ~$1000 / month (back in the 90s). My mother wasn't legally allowed to work and my father was on a stipend. The whole family lived in a studio apartment, that 900 sq ft place in the article would've been huge for us. Our car was a $1200 tiny little rust bucket, but it ran.

Sometimes I see documentaries about people living in poverty and going pay check to pay check, yet the kids are wearing Nikes and playing on iphones. Being poor was definitely stressful though, and I'm definitely grateful that stress isn't part of my life anymore.
Is there a non-underground FightClub? :)

Also, fighting back against ... what exactly? Ads? The Big FAANG?

This is not the way. It's either beat them at their game (not likely), or building/supporting/using alternatives (eg. Signal, Mastodon, maybe substack? nebula? Librem/microG/LineageOS?), but ultimately it's politics. If "HN thinks" they are too powerful, then "HN has to" influence and persuade people in order to get laws, policies, regulations enacted that control/diminish this power. (Of course if such a grassroots movement gets powerful enough to influence legislation/policy probably at that point the market would respond too, eg. maybe Google would offer a no-track version of their services for cash, or serious competitors would emerge.)

The cynical take is of course a simple good luck, after all "HN" doesn't even have to fortitude to ditch Chrome.

(I hate ads with a passion, and use uBlock, but I don't care about tracking. Sites can and will implement it in their own backend anyway. GDPR/CCPA is the correct level to address the real problem which is handling of personal data [not IP address]. Now it's up to the market and consumer/user behavior to adjust. All these obnoxious consent forms are ripe for "disruption", yet it seems the economic/market value of not being tracked is so low, that it's hard to build a business on it. Though NextDNS is trying, but it's such a small niche, and basically solves nothing ... still, I wish them luck.

If the policy changes regarding "news" in UK/Germany/Australia were not due to bullheaded Murdoch/NewsCorp and regular old media/publishers lobbying, then that issue could be a starting point on which to build something better. But ultimately if every simple view has to be compensated, it has to be tracked.)
Yeah I think that's the kind of odd behaviour that those KPI's end up causing; they 'cheat' the benchmark by avoiding certain behaviour, like loading extensions later.

I mean I can understand it, a lot of extensions don't need to be on the critical path.

But at the same time, I feel like Chrome could do things a lot better with extensions, such as better review policy and compiling them to wasm from the extensions store.
Is he against regulations that he benefits from? Probably not.

Would he be against a regulation that counted his factories as non essential in case the grid needs to be relieved? Yes.
> quadratic is a fancy way of saying "this code is super fast with no data, super slow once you have a decent amount"

Well, that is an abuse of the term, by people that sometimes don't actually know what that really means. Up to a point, quadratic IS faster than linear after all for example. Too many developer love too abuse the word blindly.

If it is badly tested with no data, it is badly tested with no data. Period. Not "quadratic".

> The problem is that when you double the amount of stuff in the JSON document, you quadruple (or more) the scanning penalty in both the string and the list.

My point was precisely it depends on the data and initial assumption are to be routinely revised. I was making a general point.

Maybe the guy was pinky-sworn that the JSON would hardly change and that the items were supposed to be ordered, sequential and no more than 101. For all you know it is even documented and nobody cared/remembered/checked when updating the JSON. But we don't know, obfuscated code don't comes with comments and context ...

Or, it is actually a real rookie mistake. It probably was, but we don't have all the facts.
That came to my mind as well. If I don't expect the deposit back and cannot afford to claim it, let's just turn the tables and make them claim something from me.
> Maybe because I don’t understand what it’s trying to say.

When a business venture is doing well, it pays generous salaries to executives and avoids taxes. When the business venture fails or creates grotesque havoc through incompetence or bad principles, a government of cronies will use tax-payers' money to pay for the consequences.

The business venture continues its "mission" and its perpetrators continue their careers.

Think of the extraordinary sums of money given to corporations "too big to fail".
I run a small 3D printed jewelry business (https://lulimjewelry.com) where I sell on my own website and also on Etsy.com. The Etsy team handled Christmas great this year (although it was my first Christmas in the platform so I don’t really have much to compare it to). Specifically they handled the communication around the mail delays very well, both with me and with my customers. It’s really interesting to see the tech decisions that had to be made to make those communications!
Accuracy of what? For 12:00 to be at noon on average? That's what timezones are for and they also already change. Just add leap seconds to the timezone offset instead.

Meanwhile leap seconds decrease accuracy when measuring long time periods unless you explicityly remove them again.
The lack of production makes it difficult to purchase a GPU. Since there aren't enough GPUs for everyone you will have to live with that and accept it or you engage in some game theoretic shenanigans and make someone else feel that way.
It would be nice if all all-in-ones / laptops had target display mode. The versatility would be great.

The number of times I've wanted to use, say a console when the TVs taken, or use my mini-itx desktop away from home. Being able to plug into a laptop that im carrying anyway would be great.
The thing that I find surprising about the US government is that everything is a bill/law. Like instead of the transportation agency deciding to build a bridge, Congress has to pass a law to build a bridge. Does anyone know exactly why it’s set up this way?
I can mostly second this advice from the perspective of someone creating a physical product. Effort that doesn't directly go to toward delivering to customers something they're willing to pay money for is active procrastination.

It's much more effective to just get on with creating the thing and let the audience build up as you start delivering. This has the advantage of making sure that your audience is only people that are really in to that thing.

Just as an example, one dumb thing I did was to build up an Instagram following that is > 90% Americans, while my intention is to only ship to Europe and the UK. Time well spent...
it makes some evolutionary sense tho - because objective wellbeing is only part of the competition. Relative wellbeing is what "counts" for real, esp. when competing for scarce resources.
You could get a BBC Model B (6502 2MHz), add the 3MHz 6502 board, add the 6MHz Z80B board, and do a "bake off" between all three (obvs. scaling for clock speed.)

Then add the 8MHz ARM1 board and watch it smoke the rest into dust, I suppose.
I was wrong about Google and FB: there’s nothing wrong with them (so say we all)
I get what you're saying, but limited liability has been a thing for quite a while now. It would be hard to find a few billion dollars to make a new car plant if you could lose more than you put in. But also there are already "piercing the veil" laws where you actually are liable for your business if you commit fraud.

Perhaps it's worth a rethink, as it's been a while since the 1800s when capital was scarce.
They have. There are even different variants of human/version sort. They are of course not as straight forward as a simple lexicographical sort so not everything is going to implement one.
Can you not chattr +i?
Sometimes Linux updates need to be told no and that works for me.
This article should have been titled "On being Poor-ish in Phoenix" ... I don't think many of these issues apply to being poor in, say, a small town/a smaller city/a city with transit or in a country with a better social net.
Introducing AI into work relations is how you turn every org into Uber or Amazon delivery: platforms where the worker has no real agency on his work, the apotheosis of alienation. I have no doubt that someone will try it (already we see it creeping in for hiring), I just think it will be Fundamentally Bad.
Sorry we missed you does a superb job of showing the cycle of poverty and how it affects families. The accuracy of the film stems from interviews while director Ken Loach was filming I, Daniel Blake in Newcastle.
am i the only one expecting the article to be about Service oriented Architecture ? :-)
I was poor for some time after deciding to quit my computer science phd for a career in art. I guess I still am compared to others, but it does not feel that way any more. When I was really poor, worrying about money and how to pay the next rent was a regular source of stress for me, which took quite a lot of emotional energy.

Now I still have much lower income than people, who have regular well-paying jobs, but I do not feel poor. I have no savings and there are some things, which feel totally out of reach like owning a car or house, but I do not have to worry about money and I can afford a lot of luxuries like visiting theatres very often and eating out.

Regarding housing: I remember living in a tiny room in a shared flat in the worst part of town, above a brothel, a shady car dealer and a Hookah lounge (which was often very loud, very late into the night). Sometimes I had problems paying rent, but there just was no cheaper less-quality alternative.

Regarding transportation: I am so glad, that I live in a place, where you can live very comfortably without a car.

Similarly with health care. I think the US is just an especially bad place to be poor in compared to Europe.

Financially switching from computer science to art has been a very bad decision, but overall it was the best decision in my life. It really helped me deal with my tendencies for depressions, because it allows me to feel more meaning in my life and suits me better. I do not think that I would have dared this switch in the US. I don’t know what would have happened if I had lived in the states, if I would have found other ways to cope with depression or if I would have slipped into deeper and deeper depressive episodes without a way out, but I am glad that I did not have to find out.
I'm not sure I would prefer the second version in a code review. I find the first version is conceptually nicer because it's easy to see that you will always get the correct count. In the second version you have to enforce that invariant yourself and future code changes could break it.
If this is premature optimization or not depends on the size of the array, number of loop iterations and how often that procedure is called. If that's an optimization you decide to do, I think it would be nice to extract this into an "ArrayWithLength" data structure that encapsulates the invariant.