skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
there is no housing or land shortage - simply desirable houses in desirable locations are expensive.

Check out this website: https://www.cheapoldhouses.com/ there are many houses on there for not much money but they are obviously not in desirable locations. Some need some repairs but that is just time & materials not buying expensive land. So there is lots of cheap land and cheap houses.

Increasing density by tearing down some single family homes and replacing with townhomes is probably a workable compromise - now there are three dwellings where before there was 1, and everybody still gets a garage and a yard, but each of those townhomes will still be priced up to what the market will bear because there will not be an infinite supply of them.

In my town of 20,000 about 1000 dwellings are coming online significantly increasing the supply - potentially increasing the populatiog by 2000-4000 people, (up to 20%!) but they were all snapped up for $800-900k and now there is only one available for $1.2M.

People want to live in desirable places, and will pay more to do so. Nice places are always going to be expensive.

If you don't have a house you can hack the system by moving to a place with cheap dwellings and making it desirable, which is a normal pattern: Artists and musicians move to cheap neighborhood, it becomes cool & desirable
Throwing nuclear waste somewhere underground doesn’t sound cool either.
It really is, and the problem is ubiquitous across app categories.

Here's another example: you cannot selectively block JavaScript in an iOS browser.

On Android/MacOS/Windows/Linux, you can use a browser extension like Noscript to only run trusted or necessary JS.

Safari only provides a coarse on/off toggle, and Apple forbids any browser that does not use their proprietary WebKit framework. None of the App Store content blockers allow seamless fine-grained control like every other platform supports.
> Gen Z [...] has a major focus on projecting success, wealth, beauty, and other aspects of vanity

Focus on projecting success, wealth, and beauty is a tale as old as time. It is not unique to Gen Z, nor is it heightened in Gen Z.

Funnily enough, those claims are also as old as time.
The href is wrong for the paragraph:

Visit the site: https://writeydrawey.site

The href is missing the 'e' in drawey.
http://archive.is/23lHw
It's a good point, and also in keeping with the intended spirit of this site - for example "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
There's a CompareAndSwap to do a quick acquire when there isn't contention: https://github.com/golang/go/blob/master/src/sync/mutex.go#L...

If you look at the slow path, there are many interesting paths that a lock can take in there. They are all potentially interesting when you're debugging contention.
Yea, I think a lot of the criticism being posted here on HN is because this would be, at best useless, at worst counter-productive, for hiring software engineers in particular. But there may be other careers where a short video would be helpful. So I'd be willing to give the idea the benefit of the doubt.

Just please don't use it to try to hire me in tech! I have enough disadvantages, I don't need my monstrous looks and obvious signs of old age to put me at a greater disadvantage. Written resume for me, thankyouverymuch. At least a written resume helps you get your foot into the door before the onsite interview happens and looks-based biases start making their way in.
Didn't know that! I always search for links before submitting and many times I've seen a previous submission with little to no traction (and then subsequently not posted it to avoid dupes).
This is exactly what annoys me the most. Every person is entitled to good healthcare, good education and should be paid a good wage to live well. Happy people don't riot. Happy people don't commit crimes. Happy people don't start wars.
"excited by"
> Employers are looking at your education

I don't look at education at all, unless you're an intern or within your second job out of college. It's an unnecessary gate to talent, imo.
Right. Other governments are always going to subsidize though (unless you work that into the trade deals I suppose).

Obviously any barriers to the success of US fabs should be removed, but it's not clear if there's a market for more expensive US chips - if there were, you'd think someone would build it without the need for a subsidy
Why People Distrust ‘The Science’
I wonder if the hitman is the one who notified the BBC. Seems like a better way to make some money than actually, you know, doing the job.

(not implying that the bbc gave him any money)
This is trivial to fix: A lot of regulatory requirements should have a minimum size before they take effect. Such that a small player is approaching large player status before they need to worry about it.
Extremely well stated and reasoned.
So now along with an expensive package they also get an expensive airtag for free
Nope. I live in the US.

I would sleep on a train, if any came within a few hundred miles of me, but I've seen nothing so far that would make me trust a self driving car enough to sleep in it.
Mine's a 2016 Subaru WRX. Cars101 has posted a lot of photos of the interior: http://www.cars101.com/subaru/wrxsti/wrxsti2016photos2.html

I don't know that it was so much a conscious design choice as that Subaru, as a smaller manufacturer, tends to buy/develop a bunch of disparate systems rather than some single integrated monstrosity. Though looking at interior photos of some of the newer vehicles (Impreza, Forester, etc) they all look to have more or less continued the trend and same general design of still having some basic physical buttons and switches.

And yeah, it's great. Along with having all the pertinent information basically in my line of sight without looking away from the road, I can operate most of the important features of the car without having to look away because they're physical buttons and knobs I can feel for.
I don't think cryptocurrencies are the only solution. Before the rise of cryptocoins, you'd just shuttle physical gift cards around.

But cryptocoins are definitely more efficient than traditional forms of money laundering.
A Google Image search for "triceratops Grand River National Grassland" turned up a bunch of images.
The idea that the "real" problem with criminal activity is that victims aren't properly prepared to defend themselves is odious.
This is a great point, Apple has plenty of capital to fund it's own dedicated fabs (even if operated by TSMC)
I thought we had free public housing already. Why didn’t it work the last time we gave away free houses? I thought we could just give them all free houses and the problem would be solved. Why do we have even more people now that need free houses?
^ The sympathizer poster always makes me laugh.

You understand China culled the herd and killed millions and disenfranchised any who disagreed with their revolution?

disgusting.
Show HN: I create an app to tweak various secret settings on Mac
Hi everyone let me tell you a story: Back 2 years ago I made Almighty https://www.producthunt.com/posts/almighty as a way to tweak some secrets settings like Showing Finder file extension or simply clear system clipboard quickly. Although the app had poor icon and no landing page, many have found it useful. Since then I've been working on an improvements for it, and when SwiftUI came out I decided to rewrite it from scratch to better leverage SwiftUI

The result is Almighty 2 https://onmyway133.com/almighty/ with a nicer looking, both in main window and the menu bar. There are many tweaks categorized by apps. You can also organize into workflows to run all tweaks. There's also possible to set up a keyboard shortcut for each tweak. And voice command is in the work

The plan is to provide more tweaks, like hiding status menu items, detect camera usage, obscure keyboard, ...

The app is free to download and use, hope you find it useful. And suggestions for more tweaks are welcome
Bitcoin's usefulness comes from being able to transact value without a centralized authority. There are no gatekeepers to determine who can transact with whom, to assign value to a medium, or to take that value away. It is democratization of financial power.
Which is not, really. At least not as clearly as other things.
I figured. Google it, find the first random web page, and type it in.

This article is a summary of one random historian, Frier.

Probably better summary of evidence:

https://archive.org/details/demographyromans0000park/page/20...

"We have a single papyrus record of 122 individuals listed in a register of taxes. Of these 122, 85 have ages extant. ... only 8 are over the age of 49 years, and only 2 of those are over 54"

"average life expectance at age 15 range from 8.3 to 15.4 years."

Etc. There's a broad set of estimates, but the estimate of 50 years is simply not plausible, unless you're talking about the wealthy elite. Being poor in Rome sucked.

And with Rome, I guess that's usually the case.

I'll mention: For all the talk of infant mortality, most infant deaths in history weren't recorded. The figure everyone tosses around -- 28 years -- sort of already takes that into account.

I've given up on editing bad Wikipedia pages a long time ago.
> You want a strong software engineer in charge of Babel, right?

I want Babel to continue to exist, even if it steered by an engineer who is not "the best in the world", if we take your assertion at face value (higher salary = better engineer).

Since we're taking Silicon Valley metrics seriously, I will posit that there is a least 1 Eastern European engineer who's better (based on HackerRank/leetcode/CodeJam stats), and is willing to accept a lower salary. So Babel might be better served recruiting there.
Yes, in some weird lab setting with 12% screen brightness and no user activity.
"Imagine a world in which every other month you’re forced to bid for your personal data back from hackers who continuously rob you. And a world where all of this is is so commonplace there are automated darknet marketplaces where others can bid on your data, and every detail of your personal life is up for sale to the highest bidder. Every private text, photo, email, and password is just a digital commodity to be traded on the market. Because that’s what the market demands and that’s what capitalism left unchecked will provide."

Maybe I'm in a minority, but I think I'd air-gap my personal data if this world ever came to pass...I'm considering it already to be perfectly honest.

Would the general population just give up if things got that bad? As per TFA, I imagine state level actors will step in if things get much worse, lest people start unhooking en masse due to the risk/reward ratio flipping.
Ummm if the government does the investing they get all the returns. If google does the investing they get the returns. If they are lobbying rather than investing, this suggests they think the ROI would be negative.
> Rust does not consume C headers.

Yet, at least. I hope one day it can, transparently.
>The SAAS mentality really, really, really needs to die.

It won't. This is evolution. People are voting with their wallets, and subscription providers are making the money while "pay once and forget" people are going out of business one by one.

Or let me put it another way: Looking at the world, habits of people around you, and the software pricing strategy landscape, which method do you see "surviving"? (not asking which one you want, but rationally, which one has the demonstrated advantage?)
The problem with this governmental intervention is that you can't have it both ways. These companies want the governmetn to step in to hlp them with their problems, but let's take a look - are they going to contribute back once the government has intervened? What are they really proposing, a 20% revenue tax on consumer products that are sold with these new US sourced chips? No. Of course not. God forbid they actually pay taxes to fund the government services they're asking for.
> Good DS understands the basics of web technology

I'm not a data scientist but a portion of my job is creating pipelines, data analytics and such. I also only have a bare minimum knowledge of web technology. Why is knowledge of web technology part of being a good Data Scientist? Or is this point oriented specifically for data scientists working in web based companies?

Genuinely curious. I could imagine myself working as a DS in the future and that's why I found this article interesting.
An interesting description of obsession I've come across is that it's what happens when the will is frustrated. So maybe temporary obsession can be a good thing, if it's a sign someone's chosen a task so difficult that they need to expand effort to overcome a significant hurdle.
You can't compare Apple to the government. Apple does not have any ability to compel you to do anything, and in fact you have many other options besides using their products. With the government... not so much.
If you even have a main doctor (many Canadians can't find one) sure - then you wait 6 months to see the specialist who may/may not know what to do. My wife was recently in a car accident and waited 3 months to see a podiatrist who said "maybe your foot's broken, go get another x-ray".
Stalking people who don't use iOS is fine though. It's a good thing they're not as important.
The value propositions creators bring to their markets are changing drastically. An artist whose content I follow across YouTube and Instagram is a vlogger and does a ton of design work outside of the scope of her more traditional "here is a painting, would you like to buy it or a print of it" offerings. She also engages socially with her fans. The whole thing works out to selling an experience/brand of a kind that didn't really exist in the past. I think it's fair to say that it's probably not possible to follow this path "as a writer" in the sense that "a writer" has meant in the past -- but that doesn't mean that this is a situation where "Short answer: no." is an accurate (or indeed respectful) answer to a question that she is asking by attempting the thing.
For what it's worth, I worked at Disneyland Innoventions back in 2002 when we got early previews of consumer products that weren't on market yet, one of which was the first plasma screen TV with a built-in screensaver. When it became available to retail, it was over $7,000. The very first plasma screen at all from 1997 was originally $23,000. The color television in 1954 was about $12,000. For 15 inches.

I don't think they've gotten 1000% more entertaining, but one effect is people can have a television per room and no viewing conflicts. Back in the day we only had one television per household and you were stuck watching whatever your dad dictated most of the time.

Also, if you look at fcc historical charts (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-14-672A1.pdf), check Table 3 on page 10 of that pdf, it shows expanded basic cable, or basic cable plus live regional sports, was $22.35 in 1995 and $64.41 as of 2013, but also Netflix existed by then for $7.99 a month.

I'm honestly not that sure how to feel about this. Things like assisted braking, crash zones, seatbelts, and airbags are pretty unambiguous improvements. But I'm not sure the plethora of cheap entertainment options is any kind of a net benefit, hedonic or otherwise. As a kid in the 80s, most of the time my sisters and I entertained ourselves by reading books, playing board games, building things out of legos. Maybe less immediate hedonic reward, but explicitly interactive activities made for better family bonding and active consumption rather than passive was a lot more intellectually stimulating. I can barely even pay attention to a book these days, but I still remember being 12 and the level of thought and imagination they would provoke and it was a heck of a lot more than I've ever gotten out of film or television.
Same reason Foxconn is a proponent for manufacturing in America. If the shift is happening and you can't control it, may as well hedge by being part of it.
As seen in the glitter bomb experiment [0], many package thieves simply drive a few blocks, open the package and then toss whatever isn't valuable. Not that likely it will give you much useful to go on.

[0] https://youtu.be/xoxhDk-hwuo
Banning cryptocurrency only fixes one side of the global-internet-being-security-broken problem. If you're a nation-state actor and you can still break into computer systems throughout the world, you can still:

- Manipulate and profit in foreign stock markets by short/long selling based on insider information

- Choose who gets elected by making dirty laundry public

- See military planning by the enemy, live, as it happens

- Trick critical foreign infrastructure into self-destruction

- Discover and cultivate corporate espionage assets based on what you know about their personality from emails/SMS/metadata/etc

- Plant incriminating evidence against political or corporate adversaries, for example by using their home internet connection for something nefarious

The future hell described in the article is not a future hell. It is the present hell. Ransomware is just one small part of it.
I agree. But to add to what you say, in fact, when presented with a binary choice in matters as complex as society / organizations / culture etc. the "pontificator" is almost always wrong / inexperienced / has a hidden agenda / love to hear their own voice. In retort to this article, "an execution guy" with no ideas is just as vacant as "an ideas guy" with no ability to execute anything. And, in fact, there never are such simplistic personalities to start with, so please ... Casey (the articles author) ... what I think you're doing here is just self promotion, no?
If the project is a pure C project using a build system that can't integrate Rust very easily, or it would come at a great cost, then I can see this being a totally valid concern.

However, AOSP is massive. It is HUGE. And complicated to build. I really, really doubt this addition will make a huge deal.

This is the same for many of the huge projects adopting Rust. The worst one so far is the Linux kernel IMO, because at least that is mostly C and GNU Make. And yet even there, that still isn't that bad.

Also, as far as bugs at the interface, I'm pretty sure it's a wash. C and Rust are ABI compatible to the extent that matters. The "subtle bugs" are most likely going to be ones that could've existed without the additional complexity of a new language and an interface between them. It's no worse than say, JNI, which doesn't seem to be a serious issue.

I'm pretty sure the benefits of Rust can outweigh this cost. As long as you can build the project, you don't really need to understand 2 toolchains to contribute unless your contribution lands across a boundary between 2 toolchains. On a lot of really large projects this may already be the case anyways.
It's extra funny since YC asks applicants to also submit a short video pitch, which is basically a TikTok.
Sounds like you need to find a different line of work.
I agree. I think the $500 tax savings home owners get makes not a lot of difference in their lives and simultaneously, they'll believe they earned it, while scoffing at the idea of giving free money to someone who has none.

We're not very ... self-aware as a society.
That's not what's happening here (Android already has low level C and high level Java). What's happening here is two low level languages side by side.
Actually, it assumes only that evolution of new features slows down. Once things are _slow enough_ the value of an extra dependency is dramatically reduced.
> you outdanged me

I can only take that as a badge of honour!

You've got a point on one end of that—I agree I think he should be more engaging in response to some of the critiques and questions he faced. I read through the comments. Some of the same critiques came later (they appear to have closed the comments after a week elapsed), but others were posted the same day as the article.

I know some of their writers, editors, and moderators take part in online discussion in the comments; but most publishers maintain their discussions offline.

Usually they'll respond in a later article or shorter columns to an aggregate of the comments or direct letters. At least, traditionally that's how those kinds of publishers have operated.

So while I would also prefer he be more engaged, especially to a reasonable and seemingly obvious question like the one we're all posing, I can't give him marks for not engaging in another manner than is usual for the paper.

Credibility? Well I can't argue there—people will form their opinions no matter what. It's certainly best to try and get ahead of the obvious which he failed to do.

But then, credibility how? As a thoughtful person remarking quite fairly and accurately about a problem? Not at all, what he said is valid regardless. But as a self-reflecting finger wagger? Surely.

Personally, the article seems to be net-good to me. I'm just glad people are writing about the subject in the mainstream, so I have to give him kudos there, even if it made him look bad (not to make him sound like some kind of credibility martyr, not even close—just a step up from soapboxing).

All of what I really take issue with, is the seemingly growing consensus that it's somehow a moral failing of the newspaper itself. I have no real attachment to any outlet in particular, but I believe what they do and represent is important; that as a society it's good to have panels of people who work to keep up with the current, and work to understand the goings-on enough to remark and report on them intelligently. The last several years we've seen first-hand what happens when even good information is grossly misunderstood. It helps to have institutions working to form coherent discussions. I find it frustrating when I see so many very smart people swept up in disparaging one of the pillars of cooperative society; usually growing from one small gripe into sweeping condemnations of an "other" they don't seem to fully understand, but think they do.
Dolores – local development dynamic TLS proxy
> On one hand, cartoon frogs

Is this an honest, good faith explanation of everything that was discussed on the Daily Stormer and 8chan?
No. It needs more permits for mid tier buildings. And stopping the 80/20 tax exemption(20% of affordable housing)

Because it's very clear that the middle class in NYC ends up paying for the lower middle class... while the richest people get away with laughable taxes.

Take the Hudson Yards redistricting example...
+ funding received from OpenCollective (annually $123K USD): https://opencollective.com/vuejs (goes to "a fund with transparent expense models supporting community efforts and events" https://vuejs.org/support-vuejs/#Recurring-Pledges)
This article is pretty vague. What does it even mean to ban Facebook "from using data from WhatsApp users"?

Facebook "uses data from WhatsApp users" to support basic features like authentication, is that banned now? What about sending a WhatsApp message to a contact, doesn't that "use data from WhatsApp users"? Facebook has to look up some internal user ID (user data), then route the message to their devices, probably by device ID (also user data). How do you do that if using data banned?

I suspect there's more to it but this particular article isn't telling the story in a particularly clear or helpful manner. Hopefully the actual injunction is not as vague.
That's the wrong way to look at it.
He has a lot more contributions, including code reviews of pull requests.
https://github.com/hzoo?tab=overview
Not to mention other behind the scene tasks such as fund-raising, etc.
> Google attempts to use some non standard APIs on their pages

Google pushes their APIs and calls them standard. And then employs "developer advocates" to bash iOS and Safari.

Here's a non-exhaustive list of APIs that are "standard" even though both Safari and Firefox are against them: https://webapicontroversy.com/