skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's the monopoly aspect.

Amazon is a quasi-monopoly for sellers in the sense that many sellers can only be profitable selling on Amazon, they have no choice.

If Amazon has data on their entire customer base, clones their product and puts them out of business, you can view that as monopoly abuse of power.

On the other hand, Ruffles sells their potato chips to hundreds if not thousands of national grocery store chains.

If some stores sell their own potato chips as well, those are just blips. Stores don't have insight into Ruffles' sales nationwide across all chains.
Getting off topic here, but not sure why you feel obligated to reply to the recruiters. You're just an input into their automation system 99% of the time. I find it amusing when they send an email at like 8pm on a Saturday.
What I was wondering is how do they verify that the person is the one requesting themselves be removed? Can you technically have all results of someone that you don't like be removed? I could see that harming businesses if your name is often associated with your websites around your business.
When OP talks about "inflation" they're talking about the amount of money entering the money supply. Bitcoin didnt "inflate" even though it got more expensive. The price did, not the supply. The supply of BTC is algorithmically programmed and there will only ever be 21 million produced. You can't print more Bitcoin at will but a government can print their fiat currency, for better or worse.
> Hiring is the first thing I think of when reading about dating apps

I agree for a different reason. The circus show about hiring is mostly bullshit. You could probably randomly select qualified candidates and turn out just fine.

Likewise with dating, ordering up another human like a sandwich creates a weird dynamic designed to keep you shopping — you stop paying when you meet someone.

If you paired 10 pairs of average people at random and had them doing some task that took them a couple of weeks, half would be “together” at some level by the end.
It’s true but men profiles aren’t better. Most people are averagely boring.
For the time they prefer to do that. It is recommended by doctors because for such vulnerable people it is the best and easiest to execute strategy to keep them from life-threatening infections.
You would think so, and sometimes it does. Sometimes you get looked at as being too negative and people decide well let's give the easy option a shot. If it's wrong we'll adjust." That actually isn't a bad way to go either, as long as there's nothing time/resource critical at stake and an incorrect "easy" solution doesn't make things worse.

I've managed to head off some of those. Had a CEO who favored simple solutions, but would listen to options. And I had a good manager who brought me along to important meetings. The CEO would hear me out. Sometimes they agreed.l, and things worked out. Sometimes the opposite. Once though I did see them cut a Gordian Knot in a very simply way-- though for some rather painful. I still think it was a drastic oversimplified solution to a problem where there were better options, but others had had a chance at those better options and dropped the ball (basically ignored it), and the problem did have to get solved...
As someone who's been exposed to the stats more than most of us (I assume, pre-web dating service), do you have any particular insights? Have you thought about what one could do to address this mismatch since? I was fortunate to find my s.o. on a language exchange site, but if I felt my best options were something from the Match Group... it looks grim
How to password protect a PDF with any device
Something about the savings math doesn't check out, especially given the NEET aspect. 200k savings in 4 years out of school is a lot.
Let’s not derail the thread. Social security is underfunded, but will continue to provide benefits at a reduced level (~76%) when the trust fund runs dry in 2034 (which is just accounting in the gov budget). A variety of small measures can be implemented to ensure ongoing solvency, and likely will take place, even if extreme measures like a contribution from the general fund is needed. The US does not default on its obligations, and as long as there is economic activity, there will be contributions to social security.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_Trust_Fund
> Turing-Complete doesn’t say anything about convenience though,

e.g. c++ template mechanism, also Turing complete.
There is no way the tax base of the boonies can support the initial and operating costs of a rail line. Therefore it is not an option, and why you do not see it anywhere.

Even suburbs cannot afford all of their ongoing infrastructure obligations, and why you see many dilapidated areas.

This is all becoming apparent now because birthrates have plummeted hence what used to be masked by economic growth due to sheer population growth no longer has the ability to be papered over with increased tax collections due to increased population.
> I work for a large (not FAANG but spatially close) ecommerce company, and I’ve yet to see substantial changes or learnings after outages or mistakes.

I worked for Amazon and postmortems were taken seriously and done regularly - but things can be different in other teams.

If people warned about a risk in the past this would be noticed.

If nobody flagged the risk people would start asking why.
> During harvesting and planting, as much manpower as possible was needed. The rest of the time didn't require 40h of work 50 weeks out of the year. It left time for leisure, building, crafting, etc.

Because fabric for cloth magically appears from nothing and they sew themselves. Same for bedheets and such, they fill themselves.. And candles are gift from Santa, animals dont need care and houses fix themselves. Wood is just there, without preparing and cutting it.

Yo and food also creates itself from grains, just like that. And small kids changed their own diapers and washed them.

Speaking of which, did you tried washing without washing machine and modern chemistry? It used to be huge physically demanding work.
Regulatory capture is the true evil of our current setup. Ajit Pai was inevitable, and he won’t be the last or even the worst.
There's no comma after that phrase indicating that it's a separate item in the list.

I believe that is intended to be read as "digital
electronic product or embedded software found in medical settings."

After all, the description of what the bill does apply to is "digital electronic equipment". Interpreting it to apply to "equipment" but not "products" doesn't really make sense.
> It makes no economic sense to move out and get an apartment. The cost of living in major metros makes renting nearly equivalent to paying a mortgage.

That might account for them living at home, but not for not pursuing a job.
What are the FIRE cultural phenomena?
Easy on the gas, bud.
You are correct in that handling that volume of physical cash is likely more difficult than I implied, though I don't think removal of cryptocurrency from the equation removes the ability to scale.

In my mind, the catalyzing effect of a cryptocurrency in this context is from:

1. The ability to move something of value digitally

2. The thing of value being resistant to governmental control--crypto can't be easily seized, but a US bank account can.

There may be other properties of crytocurrency that make it useful for ransomware, but I doubt there aren't other vehicles that could be used--though alternatives are likely less lucrative due to the overhead in laundering your ransomeware payment into hard currency.
The real solution is just to not allow them to merge in the first place. Anti trust regulations need teeth first.
Get people to believe I have a drug that hasn't been proven to work yet despite attempts to do so?? That seems pretty easy.
The internet is incomprehensibly vast. Yes, there might be a copy (or multiple copies) of a video you made in your youth on the internet. But as long as it isn't a) prominently available and b) attached to your name, you might be OK.

The situation we have today does allow you to address such a problem: Google can remove search results. It's not possible to do that on the blockchain.
Modern System Administration
I appreciate this response! I agree that a legal process seems to be the best solution (so far) to collectively deciding what is and isn't ok.

The legal system has its own faults of course. It's administered by fallible governments and can have individual bad actors. But could a legal system expect to exert control over a decentralized system like a blockchain?

Put another way, if there was a "crypto twitter" clone, and someone posted revenge porn or personal information about someone (home address, let's say), wouldn't that post be forever embedded into the blockchain? Would a legal system ever be able to remove it?
If the company in your example can be contacted to overturn ownership, essentially degenerating the immutability and irreversibility of the ledger to levels comparable of existing solutions, then what is the actual advantage of this not only inefficient, but inefficient by design method of bookkeeping?

I find it hard to reconcile "99.9% of transfers very cheap" with the property that at least proof-of-work and proof-of-space actively rely on literally counteracting any effort at becoming more efficient.

"Classical" distributed ledgers in databases are not already more efficient by several orders of magnitude, they are made more efficient through advancements of technology, and those efficiency gains are actively sought out by participants, given that they usually directly translate into profit through reduction of overhead.
I agree with you that this route probably isn't best for _most_ men, which is why I said that it makes "some" sense, but I should have clarified that it's not broadly advisable (even by someone like myself who took this route). If you aren't very comfortable with who you are by yourself, and happy with yourself, and also very focused and determined to do something quite ambitious professionally, then yes I think finding a partner to grow with and lean on is the best route.

And also as I mentioned below but just to make sure it's clear: if you aren't comfortable dating, then you should date as often as you can because it can be genuinely fun and fulfilling and lead to very positive outcomes. If you _are_ comfortable dating and do well with the opposite sex of your preference, but just aren't satisfied with what's out there or it feels forced and unenjoyable, then you _might_ benefit from focusing more on developing yourself rather than focusing on the partner search. It's a cliche but once you're truly in a good place with yourself, you tend to attract to the right people into your life.
I'm not an economist, but I do think my intuition about money is correct.

>How so?

Money is supposed to be medium for the exchange of goods and services. At first, gold acted as a perfectly acceptable medium. However, as the economy grows, the supply of gold does not at the same rate, hence why money slowly became less and less tied to gold. First came fractional reserve banking and then the end of the gold standard. As long as the dollar is tied to gold, you always need to factor in the opportunity cost of holding gold into making an investment or a loan. For the decades following WWII, the American government could ignore this effect because the Bretton Woods system basically allowed the American government to pass that opportunity cost onto the Europeans and Japanese who were desperate for economic stability, but that wasn't sustainable forever. The wealth the American government got from essentially renting out dollars trickled down to the people, which is why I think many people reminisce the gold standard.

>Its called the Cantillion Effect... Private equity and venture capitalists are often very close to banks too

So can you define what you mean by being "close to the Fed"? I think the Cantillon effect just describes how the rich asymmetrically benefit from monetary expansion. The rich and poor can both take advantage of cheaper debt, but only the rich can afford to use that to grow their wealth.

I don't think that this is enough reason to stop monetary intervention though. I'd much prefer our status quo to another Great Depression. The problem isn't that the Fed expands the money supply when the velocity of money falls. The problem is that they are unable to shrink the money supply when the economy recovers because with the rest of the federal government is required to issue $1 trillion in debt every year to operate. In theory, returning to a gold standard would incentivize Congress to be better at fiscal policy, but I'm pretty sure that they would just instantly become bankrupt.
No it's not. Those premises are reasonable and many people hold them. They're not affirming the consequent just because you can draw the conclusion from them. It's actually kind of the point of premises, to draw consequences from them.

If you disagree, we can discuss where. But there is no fallacy here.
I could see this being kind of relevant because Risus is probably the most tabula rasa of any other RPG out there, hence the subtitle “The Anything RPG”. You can hack anything you want into the game.

I knew the game was up for sale a week or two ago and it was somewhat controversial. Part of the sale included obligations to fulfill some outstanding Kickstarter stuff, which was sometime in 2012.
DevTools Tips
The Misogyny at Moog
The old style control panel is part of the Windows api, if they drop it they’ll break things like mouse drivers that often add tabs to the dialogs.
Looks cool. Let me play with my performance data.
Assume for a minute that you don't believe in God.

Then explain how religion is not used to control (read: enforce moral standards).

God himself throws a temper and kills entire cities when they don't obey him, like any good dad would do, am I right? Murder their kids if they misbehave... (Sodom/Gomorrah).
You should turn Slack off outside business hours! And, remove from your phone. If there is a true emergency, this is why people are on call.

This applies equally to whether wfh or in office.
I think your perspective is different because you're probably more senior than I am. I feel like I benefit a lot from listening to the more senior development on my team and by listening to my boss reason about the decisions he's making.

If you're very confident in yourself and your work though this probably is less of a problem.
I think you're confusing it a bit...

One expression still is "everything but the kitchen sink", which means all reasonable effort.

But that means the kitchen sink is now the metaphorical "last thing", i.e. the full extent of our effort, the theoretical maximum.

So to "throw the kitchen sink" at something is to put in all your effort, literally everything you've got. (And there's no need for junk in the sink...)

It's a different expression with a different meaning but derived from the first.

And of course metaphors are very often silly... that's why we love using and abusing them! :)
what do these young men have to look forward to in life? home ownership and having a family probably seem so financially out of reach that kids are not even trying.
That's how you do it.
Yes it is and yes you can! There is more information here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Historical_Map
I remember reading on a different post (can't find it) that productivity went up sharply at the beginning of the pandemic-induced WFH trend, but then subsided over time. The thinking was that people were on their toes early on for fear of being viewed as a slacker, but then once they adjusted to WFH they relaxed. Maybe someone else saw this study...
I like it! Also, obviously applies to in-game stores like in Roblox, Fortnite, etc.
> Why I said US culture is that's where this so called culture originated. Because you don't like doesn't mean it's not American.

Parent isn't protesting your usage of American, but the lumping of black US culture with non-black us culture. They defend this meaning in their follow up reply. To re-iterate, most (all?) descendents of slaves in the US cannot trace their heritage prior to the slave ships so its not possible to do in this country what is done in yours ("Nigerian" instead of the more generic black). The same thing has happened with whites in the US for different reasons.

> I will refuse to distinct culture by race

Any way of grouping people, artificial or not, can produce a unique culture. In the case of black americans, the history of slavery and the ensuing oppression that followed has done just that. We'll never erase the legacy. It is possible we'll one day lose the distinction of "black" culture as anything but an historical artifact, and have only american culture, but that would take generations AFTER stamping out the final remnants of racism as a starting point. As it stands, some of our parents attended segregated schools, and many of us have friends or even family who still hold genuinely racist beliefs. That manifests in many ways. We are a long way from slavery, but we still have a long way to go.
> Mail arrives consistently, on time, and at competitive prices.

That's absolutely not true in most parts of their coverage area, especially the extremely dense ones (for example in Manhattan). With FedEx, it is.

> Because everyone needs equal access to those services. Everyone, no exceptions, regardless of how profitable it is or not.

This, even if we take its premise on faith, seems like an argument for subsidy, not necessarily a publicly operated service like the USPS. Food access is required for all people but we don't have government farms, we give people food credits. We have private hospitals and Medicaid, for another example.

I'm also not sold on the idea that in 2021 (that is, email, webapps, and government subsidized smartphones with browsers and government subsidized network service) that equal access to postal mail is the necessity it once was. Many services now are unusable without an email address, and while they require a postal address the stuff there can be ignored forever if you can access the website and receive email.
It's a fascinating topic! Wikipedia has a pretty detailed entry on the topic and reports the earliest known ransomware attack to be as early as 1989[1][2]!

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransomware#History

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_(Trojan_horse)
Family That Figured Out How to Spend Every Waking Moment Sailing the World
"If you are not running a database at home, you have the database in a replication setup."

That's one of the perceptions I'm saying isn't always true. Especially in big, non-tech companies that have a mish-mash of crazy legacy stuff. Traditional H/A disks and backups still dominate some spaces.
There's an interesting complex around the Proto-Indo-European root 'walhaz':

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic...

From which we get Wales, Cornwall, Gaul, Walloon, and Wallachia. Originally the name of a particular tribe, but came to refer to angry foreign neighbours more generally.
The boss at my firm doesn't understand the concept of remote work. I did the job interview with my mask on and when there were hard restrictions on moving between cities in my country, so I had to have a signed document with me if the policed stopped me. I got my second shot 2 weeks ago and I'm working as usual.
i've sometimes thought that APL could mesh really well with spreadsheets.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7Mt0GYHU9A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UltnvW83_CQ
It's not just companies. It's differing jurisdictions. The Middle East would hold that promoting homosexuality is "harmful" (not unlike the US even a few years into the 21st century). China would hold that it is harmful to promote a different political party than the CCP. India finds it harmful for people to kiss in public. There is no legal process that discerns "truly harmful" material from that which is perceived. Harm or lack thereof is limited to individual assessment
Relatedly, "cycle", "wheel", "circle", and "chakra" are all from the same Indo-European root via different languages.
>I seem to lean quite far on the freedom side of most arguments, but I do acknowledge there are times when action may need to be taken in the interest of the public. My objection is that I neither want it to be impossible to take action or for a foreign company to unilaterally decide what action to take.

>What we need in situations like this is a legal process. If one doesn't exist, it's not for companies to start deciding what information the public should have access to and what is "harmful", but for democratic countries to pass laws with the consent of their local electorates to decide what legal protections and processes need to be put in place.

What is interesting is that I wouldn't even have to change a single word here and I can equally apply this reasoning to encryption. It is almost always unpopular on HN to suggest that universal end-to-end encryption might not be a great idea or that encryption backdoors are something that need to be seriously discussed, but those opinions are born out of the same underlying logic.

Free speech is good, but no society wants universal free speech since there are legitimately evil people who will use their speech for malicious means. Same is true about encryption. Why are we ok with removing revenge porn from Google results but need to just accept that we are allowing child porn to be shared via easily encrypted channels?
Just keep in mind that you do not want to end up in a "race to the bottom".

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_to_the_bottom if you are unfamiliar with the term.
> For the first time, some of Apple's own features will only be available on computers with the company's homegrown silicon.

No, it's not. Only M1 Macs can run iOS apps in Big Sur, which is a pretty major feature.

And it was just a few days ago we were seeing rumors that the Mac Pro is going to get a refresh which is still Intel-based...
The manufacture, storage, and ultimate disposal of all those spare parts also has an environmental cost, unless you assume that the measures end up driving some industry wide shifts, such as toward many more common parts, on-demand manufacture of certain elements, etc. It's a lot easier to warehouse a bunch of STL files than the actual bits, and maybe if your dishwasher's controller unit is just a 3v3 Linux computer with a standard GPIO connector, then a "spare part" in ten years is a totally different unit that happens to plug in and run the same interpreted software, and everything on the other end of that connector is just standard discrete parts like drivers, signal conditioning, etc, that can be replaced a la carte.

In any case, there certainly have been some proposals for how to bring some of these costs into the economic picture, most obviously pricing carbon and charging upfront disposal taxes for things like automobile tires. More aggressive measures might specifically punish the extraction of anything non-renewable— John Michael Greer talks a bunch about this [1] in a framework where the "primary economy" is in fact the natural processes like rain, pollination by insects, fertilization by animal waste, etc. Anything humans do on top of that which disrupts it is "secondary economy" and should have to pay the appropriate compensations for stewardship.

It sounds reasonable, but obviously it's a political nonstarter in any place in the world (like Canada) whose economy is mostly still built on conventional primary industries like oil, logging, fishing, mining.

[1]: https://newsociety.com/books/w/the-wealth-of-nature