skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I had a long trip which I updated after departing to be a short trip

Bugs notwithstanding, if intentional, then that's a pretty scummy thing to do. Not all drivers are given the full details of the offer they are accepting (it's the norm not to have details), but some offers that drivers receive do include things like "guaranteed $X trip". So even if unintentional, someone would be getting screwed there (e.g. Uber, if they were forced to cover the difference to the driver).
It’s worth noting that most modern cryptocurrencies consumes minimal energy as they are not based on the same technology of Bitcoin (proof of work)
Is "sorcerer" any more simplified than "philosopher"? They just seem to be two different things with perhaps slightly different meaning (or perhaps just stylistically different) between US and UK.
> Number of times I said or implied anything about information being misleading: 0.

Here, I will quote what you said about misleading information: "And if you asked "What the hell is Camry?", and the answer was "a cage of wheels", that answer would still have no usefulness whatsoever. It would even be actively unuseful. Because this is a cage on wheels:"

> Too many words that are as useful or as pertinent to the discussion as the original comment: not at all.

Either you're badly misreading me and/or skipping half of what I said, in which case I give up, or you think it's not even useful to know that phabricator is software, in which case you are ridiculous and I give up.
Their Tommy album was pretty good.
If you charge people for your service, maybe you can pay for cURL.
I would've agreed with you on this until recently. Tried to get an extra piece for something but they no longer make that 'color'. Then had the same issue trying to buy another malm piece to match the rest of the bed room. No dice, no longer making that fake wood facing and replaced it with a slightly different one. Different enough to look out of place.
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcr...

Coronavirus press conference 11 February, 2020

Tedros gives the money quote:

> That was exactly what we were trying to do in DRC so we don't want, as WHO, to go into speculation. Okay, people can have projections. We prefer, what can be done with the equipment or the solutions at hand and do our best to contain it at the source without undermining its gravity, without undermining the serious consequences it may have. That's what we did and that's what we want for this one.

> Of course Ebola and this are not the same. Ebola is lousy. This is airborne, corona is airborne, it's more contagious and you have seen how it went into 24 countries although it's a small number of cases. In terms of potential to wreak havoc the corona is very different from Ebola; corona has more potency, virulence. We take it more seriously but still the position should be instead of speculation really to focus at the source, to do everything at the source, slow the spread, stop the spread, invest more in containment and based on the situation move into other strategies if necessary.

> Meaning we have to be realistic; we have to be calm [?] but we have to take also serious measures.

This was when the WHO was pressured into saying not to ban flights from China, as it would be useless [?!] against fighting the pandemic. Not blaming them too hard, as these were difficult decisions. But somehow this got retconned hard, and we, and the media, let it, not even bringing it up again when debating COVID being airborne or not.
That's an interesting way of framing the issue. By that logic, while active malfeasance may be the scenario that generates more outrage, it's actually the banal/emergent evil that represents more of a reason to avoid a business because between the two it's much harder to fix.
Why should it go up? It is worth whatever buyers are willing to pay at any particular moment. It has no other value. Tomorrow it might be more, might be less, according to the whim of the market.
It wouldn't surprise me if every military intelligence organization on the planet was now secretly allied and colluding against the common enemy, the public interest.
So I haven’t really looked at it too much but I’ve heard about solutions (like incognito.org) to transfer shielded bitcoin (basically adding privacy to bitcoin).
It stinks, but they have a monopoly if you want high speed internet, so they can do whatever they want... because the government gave them a monopoly. I wish the Government would create free ultra high speed Internet for all citizens while the Government is printing all this money.
I don't doubt it's bad but it could be worse, you could be trying to use Oracle software.
Yeah! My brother was an expert in 1990 at 6. Me at 6 in 93-94. Except we most certainly weren’t.

You’re giving a completely wrong impression of how the early web was and the early internet. I wasn’t around for that so I won’t personally give my input but for the time, each iteration every few years was great.

If domain knowledge wasn’t needed by the 90s. When was serious domain knowledge needed? When did that stop?

Some people found the internet hard to use and found it required more domain knowledge than they had every single year since the internet snd web have been around. Including in the 2020s.
This is a useful thought experiment but it ignores the fact that the balls are more like a tangled mass of burrs, all variously interwoven

Try to pull one out and you get a web of affordances and side effects and unforeseen interactions stuck to it

If we were to be wiped out by our technology I see no guarantee some extradimensional coroner would be able to point definitively to just one

Say it's climate heating, rapid-onset Venus mode. Was it the internal combustion engine? The coal plant? The automobile? The wheel? Language? Money? Industrialism? The limited liability corporation? How do you pick one?

No technological form exists in a vacuum, likewise Technology is neither a monolith nor a ball pit of functionally independent atoms
> Its not like a drone can randomly fly around high profile people or infrastructure without raising suspicion.

This may not remain true for long, if food and package delivery via drone become commonplace.
> Every day Bitcoin fails to go to 0, it gains legitimacy as a store of value and means of payment.

Bitcoin is a horrible store of value. It might not go to zero, but it’s fluctuates wildly.

I think for people who predicted from a decade ago that this was all nonsense, the case is there that it is.

Realistically, what are we looking at? What runs on smart contracts? What is being bought and sold with Bitcoin.

This answer is not nothing, but…I mean really? This is the revolution?

As far as legal uses, the only one that has any amount of traffic is speculation. That’s it. Are there other people using it occasionally for other things? Sure! But then we’re looking at, checks ledger NFTs?

All of this while burning through tremendous amounts of electricity. We’re talking over half a percent of the total energy consumption of human civilization.

What have we gotten in return? This isn’t like people pushing back against airplanes or paper or rice. There’s no denying that a lot of money is thrown around, but you can only talk about people being “left in the dust” if you can point to something worth, again, >0.5% of electricity consumption of the PLANET.
If you're interested in the history of ketamine (and its subsequent use by the intelligence apparatuses of several nation-states), I cannot recommend this podcast highly enough https://soundcloud.com/inpatientradio/psychotropic-golgotha-...

I think the most intriguing thing I took away from it was that the Esalen Institute was one of the first ketamine clinics - while at the same time hosting backchannel talks between KGB and CIA agents.
Well, there are a bunch of sections detailing various player offences, followed by some sections that define terms used in the preceding sections. e.g.:

> N. ABUSE OF BALLS:

> Violation of this Section shall subject a player to fine up to $20,000 for each violation. In addition, if such violation occurs during a match (including the warm-up), the player shall be penalised in accordance with the Point Penalty Schedule hereinafter set forth.

The last offence is R. UNSPORTSMANLIKE CONDUCT, followed by S, which defines the point penalty schedule, and T, which defines what a default is.

The point penalty schedule mandates consideration for default on fourth (third?) and subsequent offences.

The offence sections all specify their own penalties. Many involve a $20,000 fine. Many, generally those that occur during play, specify that they invoke the Point Penalty Schedule. And several specify that they may trigger a default:

> D. LEAVING THE COURT

> Violation of this Section shall subject a player to a fine up to $20,000 for each violation.

> In addition the player may be defaulted...

So it's not clear that section T gives the tournament any authority that isn't granted in the subsection of the particular offense. It's a definitional section, and the text "may declare a default for either a single violation of this Code or pursuant to the Point Penalty Schedule set out above" faithfully reflects that (i) certain offenses specify that a single violation may trigger a default, and (ii) the Point Penalty Schedule also specifies that it may trigger a default.

I'm not saying this is clear in either direction. It isn't. This contract doesn't specify how much discretion the tournament has. Maybe they have a lot, but that's not explicit in the contract.
I've been at the same company for 9 years straight out of college. The company doesn't allow employees to give any references for people who are leaving.
I think apple's in-app ads have the worst dark patterns. I tried to find a game for my elderly mom that didn't try to get you to install some other app every few minutes via a full-screen popup. No dice.
There is a fixed wing version too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0om03oXX_8

Awesome launching system.
Yeah fair enough. I just have the white one which seems to have carried on.
The blockchain has nothing to say about trust outside of its ledger, which is to say in the physical world. Even if you try and hook it up to physical sensors, the sensors themselves can be compromised just like anything else. Any people who are currently distrusted by other people could just as easily put lies into the blockchain, so it has nothing to say about that kind of trust either. The only thing the blockchain allows you to trust is “X was entered into the blockchain previously”.
It wasn’t even really IE. Everyone forgets the bigger issue at play in that case: forcing OEMs to pay for a Windows license even on non-Windows devices. That’s something that anti trust laws are for. The IE thing was just another thing they could tack on as an “abuse”.
They can be notoriously bad at their job however - an example can be found in toilet testing, as they do weird substitutes that don’t match actually plugging the thing with toilet paper. Who cares how many golf balls it flushes?
...and in Chinese restraunts in India they usually have 2 chop sueys on menu. American Chop Suey (red sauce) and a Chinese Chop Suey (white sauce).
If you chip your knife you just put it to the stones to repair.

And hobarts are industry standard mixers for the food industry that vary in size from 5L to volcanic caldera. But they are built like a tank and easy to repair with plenty of easy to find spare parts. A lot of bakeries that make really high end stuff probably have the exact same hobart inside. Probably not that ancient as the one on the pic, but those things barely changed from their inception.

And with interest of cooking increasing a lot of restaurant gear is finding its way into home kitchens. Nothing sears a steak indoors better 3500W induction hob with big cast iron skillet on top.

And if cooking on a wok - having 120k BTU burner makes it much more pleasant and smooth experience.

Interestingly with gas burner efficiency - 120k BTU in gas are just a tad more powerful than the 3.5kw induction.

There is good reason why Alton Brown always says to obtain things from hardware and restaurant supply store.

And let's say in consumer ovens that are not built to gastronorm or hotel pan specs finding additional trays, sheets, grills etc that fit is PITA.
That’s awful. M
Wine can probably run most windows 7 software, you're probably better off with Linux (use pop-os if you want something easy with good IME/desktop features. My Thai girlfriend jumped pretty much strait to that from windows after she got tired of all the MS/vendor crap eating up all the I/O.)
I wanted to add some background so HN commenters can appreciate what Osaka is trying to say, instead of sputtering "but she signed a contract. QED!"

I know a few high-level female musicians.

Most of them have nearly crippling anxiety they face daily if they look at social comments, which spikes near a performance. (Think "ball up in the corner in a fetal position.")

Youtube and Instagram have enabled them to have studio careers, but often they don't/won't tour.

The idea of continual interviews, especially after losses, is beyond comprehension for many people. I was alarmed when I saw that Osaka had 134 losses - even a fraction of interviews covering those losses would destroy many egos.
> Design is also an engineering constraint. All of these constraints are interconnected. None are wholly independent.

Did I say they weren't interdependent? My response to you LITERALLY stated an interdependency.

Also when does "design" being an engineering constraint have to do with anything? Are you talking about aesthetic design choices made by an artist/product designer that an engineer has to take into account? You should be more specific because engineers "design" solutions around constraints as well, and the statement makes no sense when viewed from the engineering perspective.

>The “fashion” argument is particularly silly. Fashion and style are concepts that have existed as a part of human nature longer than manufacturing, corporations, or even money itself have even existed.

What fashion argument? You say the "fashion" argument is "silly" but I'm over here thinking, what "fashion" argument? I NEVER made such an argument. What's silly here is that you're talking about some weird imaginary tangent that I never even touched upon.

If you actually did watch that video or even read my posts I'm thinking you read it really quickly and you skimmed that video. I think you skipped some words and sentences and made a huge assumptions about what I'm talking about.

>

The part of my response that you didn't even address is that I'm saying FAILURE is engineered into the design DELIBERATELY. It's not a side effect of creating a cheaper product. It's a actual design choice making the consumer more likely to buy a new product.

You realize that the filament for those bulbs weren't picked because the filament was cheaper. A deliberate R&D effort was created to pick filaments that were roughly the same cost but failed quicker. That's counter to your entire argument. R&D costs money so costs are actually INCREASED to make the product fail quicker.
At some point... yes. Otherwise, what's your idea for dealing with people who know they're sick but still go into crowded places? We've had examples of people who knew they were infected trying to board planes for example. If not coercion, then what?
This law seems enough easy to comply with? I don't really buy that.
> SME didn't create documentation because they are "too busy".

Because they keep getting shoulder tapped to put out fires. Because they’re the only one who knows the system. Because there is no documentation…
You can't have your cake and eat it too.

I think it's okay to skip interviews if she decides to forego any of the winnings. But the entire point of the tournament is to create excitement over it, via media coverage, etc. If she doesn't want to participate in it, then that's fine but she should give up the money instead and just play for the prestige.
I have a local nas running zfs and owncloud. I backup my photos to owncloud and while not the same ui/ux, it’s pretty good to share with things with the family.
Ah okay cool about Fork then.

I haven’t checked the differences but the class of apps like Fork, GitFox, Tower all feel like they are in the same category. SourceTree def is not in that category :p.

I’ll prob switch to using Fork as my main GUI
I mean, I wouldn’t miss it. I was a huge Bond fan my whole childhood and and young adult life. I think it gave me some really messed up ideas about the world. It took me a long time to unlearn what I had learned from the series, and I suffered in my life and relationships as a result of my beliefs.

I know it’s too valuable a franchise and Hollywood would rather reinvent it. But we can also just say goodbye to our problematic past and create new heroes or even find new figures from the past to celebrate. It is okay to let go of our attachment to these things.
The marquesas are part of the Florida keys system, which was under Spanish rule at the time, so why wouldn't they use the locals instead of pulling labor from another possession?
On Pro, I have no auto-reboot, OneDrive is disabled, no ads, and the Store is useful at times and can easily be ignored when I'm not using it. I'm not sure how LTSC would be an improvement.
This argument, that the existing financial markers and institutions are broken for the average person, is somewhat addressed in the linked twitter thread.

But that doesn't necessarily mean that the present alternatives (bitcoin, altcoin of your choice) are THE answer either. It's not a binary thing. Something may emerge that is valuable and useful and decentralised but I haven't seen anything that fits the bill yet.

For the vast majority of people Bitcoin is an investment because the price is going up. The price is going up because lots of people think it's a good investment. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy until it's not. Then it's every person for themselves and someone will be left holding the bag.

Yes, some people can use Bitcoin to buy goods and services. But if all the speculators were to decide they wanted to exit the market at approximately the same time do you really think the price is going to hold anywhere near where it presently sits? And are those people using Bitcoin for purchases going to hold, or are they going to exit their positions too?

Phrased more simplistically - can we all agree that the vast majority of xCoin holdings are speculative?
I think someone like Derek Sivers (maybe not actually him) talked about doing this. From what I remember, it was quite painful finding one who would agree to it, and was probably only possible because it was a stand out property.

This would likely be more difficult for an average person to pull off, but can be a great mutual win if you pull it off.
Really surprised you brought up Proof of Stake for decentralization and not the environmental aspect. It could actually solve the environment issue!

But decentralization? How will the ease of entry not allow allow rich people to dump money into it and be the main players/money makers in that system. Perhaps they wont all be in one country but they'll certainly (by stake owned) be one predominantly one demographic.
Why would it be absurd for the game to require that? It could just require that the person landing on it bid $1 as penalty for landing there. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Besides, you can always immediately mortgage a property so it's always worth buying it for less than the mortgage price. The only situation I could imagine where everyone would pass is if everyone has exactly zero dollars, no houses and no unmortgaged properties, so nobody can afford to buy it for a dollar. In that extremely rare event, triggering bankruptcy of whoever landed on the property seems more reasonable to me than "nothing happens" because at least it advances the game.
Previously, Visa(?) had tried to prevent merchants from having separate cash and debit/credit prices (gas stations for example), and they got in trouble with “monopoly laws”. So I wouldn’t hold my breath on them retaliating on merchants who ban customers.
> I am making a claim that there has been insufficient progress in e-ink space.

Insufficient progress? How does one know what is sufficient progress? To provide an analogy to software, you're saying the equivalent of there has been insufficient progress in Linux desktop.

Perhaps E Ink set too high an expectation? I never thought they'd even reach their current level of achievement. In my opinion, they're achieving about as much as what they can achieve with the physics of their material and the level of demand the market provides to them. For example, the most common request I've heard is when are they going to have bistable color. The response I would have is they had that at SID2019 but then nobody wanted to pay $2000 for a 16 color display that peaked at 16" diagonal. That's not 16-bit color, that's 16 colors! So they pivoted to adjust to what the market was willing to accept which was about $100 for a 7 color 6" display. That's what the market was willing to buy. Last I heard even that's thin pickings with no high volume products. In the display industry, if you're not able to sell at least a million displays a month, you're a niche player who won't be able to support having a factory with a fully tuned production line. Backplane vendors will treat you like a red haired stepchild and you'll be perpetually on the bottom of their manufacturing queue.

> E-ink is stagnating, this has been the constant lament on mobileread forums for 10 years.

Physics is a bitch ain't it? Perhaps you can invent a way for a fast moving pigment particle to achieve bistable and consistent positioning. You have access to E Ink displays after all, you could invent your own drive scheme if you believe they aren't doing the best that physics allows.

> People want high quality color, people want lower prices, and we are not getting it.

Yes, I want a $100 iPhone 12 and a $1000 ferrari and I'm not getting it. Why is that?

> Only recently we've had some larger devices. Why is only Dasung able to offer a very limited sized monitors and at a very high price to the consumer?

Volume. How many people are buying? Not a million a month? Then who wants to make it? Price correlates with volume. If you want prices to go down, go find a million buyers and put down the order so that manufacturers can afford to build up a production line for that device.

> When/if ever will we have $200 e-ink monitors?

When a million people a month are buying it.
Or you could look at this the other way around. Considering the relative power of e.g. remote tech workers combined with the allure of CO, with a little organizational muscle this could be an easy win to compel the smaller offenders to change their behavior.
The merchant is the one who has more capital and more information about the product he's selling. I think it's fair that the merchant bears most of the risk.
The phrase "outsource getting into conflict" caught my eye. To me, that is an interesting take/observation. I've been trying to sort out when a disagreement or argument becomes harassment and the closest I can come to is when there is a power imbalance between the parties. I'm inclined to agree that taking your grievance to the mob doesn't solve the real issue.