skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Just read their copy for the App Store: https://www.apple.com/app-store/

> Because we offer nearly two million apps — and we want you to feel good about using every single one of them.

> Apps must adhere to our guidelines.

> You should never have to worry about inappropriate content.

> Every day, moderators review worldwide App Store charts for quality and accuracy.

All of these are far stronger claims than I would be comfortable making about the current state of the store.
The same reasoning should apply when someone says to 'just do' such and such, but more often it's not so simple.
Fully automated cashier kiosks exist and are available at a lot of McDonald's. From my own anecdotal experiences, the problem is people don't like to use them. There have been several times I've gone to a remodeled McDonald's with several automated kiosks available and usually only one backup register at the counter. There would be a line of people waiting for the human at the register to place their order while several kiosks sit unused. I've experienced a few times of ordering at the kiosk and getting my food before the people I would have been behind in the line even placed their order.

This hasn't been for just McDonald's either. I seem to recall seeing a similar setup at a Jack in the Box location before McDonalds started implementing the kiosks. They ended up tearing out the automated kiosks because nobody used them and put back in another manned register because people ignored them.

I really wonder what drives people to prefer placing their order with a human being at the register instead of an automated machine. Personally I prefer the kiosks as a well done one sometimes shows options I didn't even know existed and its far simpler to review my order before sending it off. I've yet to have a bad experience with a kiosk, other than one completely crashing halfway through accepting the credit card making me wonder if the order was placed or not.
Because it's a worse experience 3 ways: you can't search for only comments or only stories, you get one result let page not per comment, it's ordered by Google not HN popularity.
Or perhaps every classroom is filled with unique individuals with differing learning needs?
I think you're imagining the tax advantage here as a lot of work, when it's really not.

These sorts of tax avoidance strategies are only complicated the first time you do them, and then repeating the same thing each year is simple. ...as for selling enough of it to call it a company - again - it's easier than most people realize to register a company.
Junior level developers at companies I've worked at are often taught to run meetings as part of helping them grow. If a couple junior developers work on a project then having them take turns facilitating the meeting was common. My team's meetings at my last company we also had everyone take turns facilitating it. There were some pre-meeting tasks that the facilitator was also responsible for like organizing some documentation related to last week on-call alerts + commenting on any product metrics for the main product we worked on (most of the time it was looks normal).

A lot of growth I've seen is about having people get opportunities to do things more commonly done by people at higher levels. While most design documents are written by seniors or above sometimes mid level/junior engineers get an opportunity to write one and all design documents get a lot of feedback anyway.
Yeah - the term "functional programming" is nowadays as unclear as OOP. But "pure functional programming" is not - there is no equivalent in the OOP world.
People forget that Hacker News is explicitly not a forum for free speech or open discourse. It's a forum for curated speech, sometimes aggressively curated, preferring fewer comments of higher quality over more comments of lower quality, even at the cost of open discourse.

It gets on my nerves too but that's Chinatown, as it were.
It's not a contradiction. Maximum speeds for information transfer in communications and computers is in the .67c zone. Research that could speed that up closer to 1c is possible (and welcome), which doesn't mean information will ever, at least within the current paradigm of physics, travel > 1c.
Ha, I could've used this ~a year ago when I moved into my current rental apartment. Fiber optic internet is included in the rent (in the form of an RJ45 jack in my wall), but there's a captive portal requiring you to enter your contract ID, which resulted in having to scour my memory and bookmarks for a non-HTTPS site.
It is a false assumption that everyone who wants to work needs a wage that will support a family of four with no other income.
> No, the books says never criticize, condemn, nor complain.

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with. I agree with that statement. I am merely highlighting that "the book explicitly called out the case where someone is seeking negative feedback"

> People don’t seek negative feedback so that’s not the issue.

We live in different worlds. It's certainly not common, but it does happen. Seeking out negative feedback is standard advice that is given to people who seek self improvement. On multiple occasions someone has become upset with me because I didn't correct them. Not the norm, but plenty of people out there do want negative feedback sometimes.

> And, how can you trust people who give you “constructive criticism” any more than people who don’t?

This seems a bit of a non-sequitur. You do it based on the person's track record. In some ways, though, it is apt for this conversation. Just flip it around: how can you trust people who give you praise any more than people who don’t? The people I often don't trust are those who tend to find something to praise despite their disliking (praising a story he was greatly bored by, etc). People who always praise are not people you can rely on. They may make good yes-men, though. There's a reason good leaders look for subordinates who disagree with them.

> I would argue people who criticize others usually have selfish motives for doing so eg. making themselves feel better about their own shortcomings or making other people feel and look bad.

Or, you know, it could be simply that they were asked how they could improve.
Yes.

12.0 -> 12.2 was smooth (my cloud provider had 12.0 from a dropdown menu).

I see from your post I was supposed to reboot twice to upgrade major versions. I'm sure it was in one of the docs I was reading and I lazily skim passed it. So it's on me.
Relevant:

> ACLU Again Cowardly Abstains From an Online Censorship Controversy: The once-principled group issues P.R.-scripted excuses or engages in obfuscation to avoid taking stances that would offend its liberal donor base.

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/aclu-again-cowardly-abstain...

Edit: HN always seems to downvote anything which doesn't go with the censorship of controversial view points.
I feel there is an enormous difference between DARPA and CSIRO primary the "D". How many incredible innovations has DARPA made that will never reach the public because they give a strategic advantage?
Why ‘free speech’ needs a new definition in the age of the internet
People are great at giving advice to others, while failing to do the same for themselves.

> things ESR is right on

Except he's not. The entire existence of "kafkatrap" is to paint an enemy and argument that doesn't exist, taking some random train of thought to it's logical extreme. Considering his bigoted comments on women, Islam, and African American's, I have very little confidence that he's coming from a good place.
That's exactly, what this is. In particular, they manage to create a set up demonstrating strong anomalous dispersion, so that in the medium, longer wavelengths become slower (you'd usually expect longer wavelengths to have higher phase velocity), whereas shorter wavelengths become faster. The reshapes your pulse in such a way that the group velocity ends up appearing negative.
If you’re looking for information on quantitative trading, and are considering relying on a YouTube channel, please just park your money in an index fund and go read about LTCM, Black Tuesday/Friday, Knight Capital, Orange County, and the Global Financial Crisis. Just remember, finance is not like betting on the ponies. It’s worse, because the odds aren’t posted.
I don't see a single item as ass-kissing. Do you want to call out a few that you think are particularly bad, and we can discuss?
We've been doing this for year and deduct tons of personal expenses from our business. We're small enough that the IRS doesn't care.

I laughed when she asked if she should put her breast implants on the company card. Even I knew that was going too far :)
Note how you have just did exactly what you criticized ( “silence legitimate criticism of others” by dismissing those that called out cancel culture)
This guys YouTube channel is cool af. Highly recommended.
The line between insincere/sarcastic trolling and genuine sincerity has been blurred by people like Elon Musk and Donald Trump, who seem to freely dabble in both and sometimes use the former to excuse the later. I think understandably, some people have grown fed up with this and have decided to treat all tweets from these men as sincere tweets, to deny these men the use of 'I was just joking' to walk-back sincere remarks.
> That all the comments in the first six pages are from 7+ years ago?

Why not simply switch to the "past year" view or sort by time to see the more recent ones ;)
2% is pretty low compared to random websites (it’s your birthday! Enter your info in this link so we can send you a gift!)
Thanks for your willingness to engage and instruct on this. I've learned a lot. Cheers!
"Fact" in science needs to be based as much as possible on reproducibility by anyone and as little as possible on the support of those with institutional authority.

Alternatives to peer review are seen everywhere these days: open review and discussion and even the open source software model.

A scientist does some work, writes it up in rough form, puts data files online, and tells some friends/colleagues about it. After some feedback and corrections, the scientist puts the writeup online and notifies discussion forums. Then, anyone interested can look it over and provide feedback of all sorts: good, bad, and ugly.

The scientist then incrementally upgrades the paper, including edits and rewording and donated graphics, etc., along the lines of open source software and pull requests. I'm not claiming that many eyes make all bugs shallow, but if someone points out that your algorithm omits the first line of each data table, or your evidence of warming only measured temperature during the day while comparing to temperatures measured day and night, it's true or not regardless of the credentials of the person making the claim.

The paper doesn't have to be fossilized but can be versioned, because "paper" doesn't mean paper anymore, and your institutional worth (as opposed to scientific worth) can be based on citations of all versions rather than the prestige of the journal.

You might fear that authors will be overwhelmed by mostly low-quality feedback, but most papers are read by so few people that this isn't much of a risk, in my opinion. The biggest risk is deliberate lies, but we already have a reproducibility crisis, and only reproducibility--not the filters of authority--can ultimately solve it.
I have to agree here. The pain point for the classic examples here are dealing with customers.
The kiosks have a terrible UX, for one thing. Ordering a Big Mac value meal with a drink should take one or two actions, but for some reason it takes about 10.

Also last time I was at McDonalds the kiosks were displaying a Windows BSOD.
Ah, fair enough, I misread the editorial claim, and stand corrected. Thanks for pointing that out!
A group of us are working on a solution. Here's a reference to a prior comment thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27297013

The solution is to make peer-review better, rather than remove it entirely. Imagine that you can choose a set of people who you trust on any particular topic, and rank them with how much you trust them. Then you, and those people, can all rank any paper (or in general any URL) you read, and each of you will have a feed of incoming papers (or URLs) on any topic computed by a function that you control, in your personal reader app, which crawls your network of trusted people, and the people they trust, and so on, and aggregates all rankings and reviews. After about 7 degrees of hops across that network, you'll cover most of the world.

The key new idea here is that peer review will no longer try to be a single, objective, determination of truth. Each person can have their own slightly different feed, computed by slightly different criteria, using slightly different sets of trust metrics of people over the community, all competing for other people's trust, by writing good reviews, and good papers, in order to gain reputation and influence within the distributed network.

This won't be a single app. Rather, it'll be a distributed use of the WWW. Anyone can host their ratings at any web URL, on any website, and subscribe to the ratings from anyone else, at any other URL, at any other website. We can make this all realtime using the web extensions defined by https://braid.org, so that you can have a continuously-updating feed.

In effect, we'll be building a distributed, subjective hacker news (or equivalently, a distributed subjective reddit). We don't need to fight over objectivity anymore. Instead, we'll all be entitled to our own view of the web, and be able to share our views with others. And we'll find that we are best off ourselves when we import the best views from the best people we know, and that way we will see the world through each other's eyes, and even be able to — with the flip of a dial — see the world through our enemies' eyes.

Please reach out if you are interested in building anything similar! I am toomim@gmail.com, and am coordinating a group to make this happen.
Identity and Access Observability – Securing 400m consumers and 30m merchants
Maybe this helps. From the Nature article abstract:

"in practice, this means that a light pulse propagating through the atomic vapour cell appears at the exit side so much earlier than if it had propagated the same distance in a vacuum that the peak of the pulse appears to leave the cell before entering it. "
An article like this, comes up every few months. They tend to give an intro to the technical how-to but miss the step of convincing the readers that supporting screen readers is desirable.

Ok sure, it'd be _nice_ if blind people could navigate my website. But... how nice? How many screenreaders can I reasonably expect as a % of traffic? What difference will it make to their quality of life? What decision process should I use to decide if _my_ website needs to support this? Does my personal blog to support a screen reader? What about this bank login page? This motivating information is a cruicual step in actually getting people to care enough to do something different.

A contrasting example is the discourse on "bloated" webpages being slow and hard to use on shitty old phones. The upshot is that if your website needs to download and run 1MB of JavaScript then someone viewing it on a 5 year old low cost smartphone on a crappy 3G is going to have a bad time. The statistics around how many people have bad internet motivated me to try and reduce download sizes.

It would also be nice to have a guide on convincing your boss to give you time to support accessibility.

The technical details are good (and this article is quite readable) but probably aren't the key bottleneck in more people writing accessible markup.

<edited for less unnecessary snark>
I always wondered why they were so strong. The connector on my Surface Go seems so weak and yet I never have a problem with it.
This reads like something from Robert A. Heinlein's Lazarus Long character.

"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
Google's is http://connectivitycheck.gstatic.com/, and Microsoft's is http://www.msftncsi.com/ncsi.txt
How about: "A ton of these low-end businesses use illegal immigrants to depress wages and Covid shut down that pipeline."
> What does the term "woke" mean in this comment?

Roughly speaking, it generally refers to a combination of progressive political goals with a you're-either-with-us-or-against-us intolerance of anyone who is neutral (or insufficiently supportive) toward those goals. I assume this is more or less what asabjorn meant.
>It says a lot about the quality of our media/reporting when everything becomes politicized.

This is easy to explain,

https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/vaccines/emerge...

If HCQ and Ivermectin were found to be the safe and effective treatments that they are, then no EUA could be made to fast track the experimental mRNA gene therapy "vaccines" from Pfiezer, Moderna, etc. The question I keep wondering is, "Why?" For what reason did they want to fast track these experimental treatments so badly?
> aren't paying enough money

Renumeration expectations are entirely malleable and subjective. When you've been riding the gravy train, even $15/h looks a pittance.

> Executives and shareholders have had decades of amazing wealth accumulation, but that has to end. The unwinding is happening and the gains from productivity, automation, and innovation belong to everyone and this moment in history may force government to adopt policies to make it happen.

What does America have to offer in 2021 that would prevent said executives (at the potential behest of shareholders) from jumping ship?
You can use SSI, and echo the remote IP: https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/howto/ssi.html

```
<!--#echo var="REMOTE_ADDR" -->
```
That seems uncharitable; it was not that trivial of a cheat. They inserted a realistic type of vulnerability that was not specific to their test.

> we first copied fqzcomp from https://sourceforge.net/projects/fqzcomp/and inserted a vulnerability into version 4.6 of its source code; a function that processes and compresses DNA reads individually, using a fixed-size buffer to store the compressed data. This modification lets us perform a buffer overflow with a longer than expected DNA read in order to hijack control flow. While the use of such a fixed-size buffer is an obvious vulnerability, we note that fqzcomp already contains over two dozen static buffers.

> The modified fqzcomp program contained a buffer too small for the 177 base pair read length, so it would overflow after processing the first read.

https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/usenixsecurit...
Is this actually true? I remember my grad level engineering classes in which I was the only American. And these weren't tiny grad classes either, at least 10-20 students.

Now I'm starting to think all of this is simply the endgame of our education system.
Why are you so quickly assuming that you know better what I mean than I do?

Could you point out a specific point in my answer that is not compatible / or contradcits with the common definition of referential transparency?
Cicero wasn't murdered for any connection with the assassination of Caesar. He was murdered because Marc Anthony personally hated him for having denounced Anthony in a series of speeches known as the Philippics. When Octavian and Anthony were setting up the Second Triumvirate, Cicero's life was one of Anthony's demands.
There's gonna be a strong demand for skilled software engineers.

WFH is something that could be a win/win for both parties.

Market forces will make companies benefit by offering remote jobs.
Maybe it just means "hey Nobel prize committee, look over here."
How is keeping the USA online (which by the way actively destabilizes other countries and seeks out war outside its own soil) any different?
You're missing the issue.

They aren't ignoring Free Speech cases. They are actively fighting against them.
Building Deno, One Year and Two Hundred Patches Later
Regarding fixing Date, Temporal hit stage 3 recently: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal
Or perhaps they come from a place where speech can get you jailed, and unlike you know what it is like to have no constitutional right to free speech? Perhaps they know the value of what you seem so eager to give up, because unlike you they've lived without it?

There are literally places in the world right now where wearing the wrong t-shirt color outside (Thailand, Belarus) Can get you jailed, tortured, or possibly killed.
It really isn't. If you're assuming that the only reason one might do a bad thing is because they are a bad person, then sort of maybe, but even then, bigotry is pretty specific and one can silence marginalized people for all kinds of reasons that aren't bigotry (naivete, for example)
Clojure: Seqing an Answer (2020)
People on Twitter know him as @unix_guru, in case the name sounds familiar but you just can't place it.
The US trade deficit & endless money printing is funding many of these countries' advanced projects. China in particular. 100 years from now whomever is left in this world with some semblance of free will and expression will look back on US self-hating/self-destructive political rhetoric and the policy it engendered, laughing and crying at the folly of it all.
Probably my favorite comment of that genre, on a video which contained a pathing bug causing an NPC to walk in a circle endlessly,

"Seriously, how hard is it to just check if a path is infinite and stop the NPC from moving if it is?"
Yes, that was the implication. I suspect your manager saw things the same way too.
And McDonalds would have to pay for the cost of taking care of the robot
The rules of engagement are such that killing usually isn't required. They would announce who they are and tell the boats to turn around and exit territorial waters. Those who do not comply, or repeat or suspicious offenders, might get stopped, boarded, and their cargo confiscated, perhaps even their boats sold at auction. Any sailors aboard could request amnesty if they are truly in an effective-slave situation.

The only way it turns to shoot-and-sink is if the boats flagrantly disregard orders through multiple points of escalation. Even then the attempt would be to disable the ship, not destroy it (by shooting out the engine or rudder, for example).
English teacher here, working in Japan teaching English as a Foreign Language.

I would LOVE to use free textbooks and older books. I try to do so as much as possible. But the real problem (for me at least), is how can I get a copy for all of my students? I can't afford to print them all a copy of old stuff, and after about 5-10 years, the publishers stop printing the older books!

I came across this problem big time this school year -- planned on using a book I love and have been using for 10 years old to be told last minute it's now OUT OF PRINT. (It was in print just 6 months ago). sigh

Old is OK in many places, but only if you can get 50-100 copies of it each semester / year...
You have to admit though, it would be very impressive if it made it through the tube in -61.8 nanoseconds.
> It does strike me as weird that there is seemingly no POSIX-compliant way to get your public Internet address, from my readings.

It is not possible to know your public IP address, except by fetching the information from a known entity on the public network.

And in some scenarios, your public IP will change frequently. There is no guarantee that it will be consistent across multiple requests.
> icanhazptr.com

Cool, I didn't know about that one.