skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
By the definition of formally correct, yes, you’re right. But dynamic programming still allows programs to be functionally correct, and verified by testing, which is more often than not good enough.
I'd be more receptive to the discussion if they didn't seem to be so "rub it in your face" about it.

I have gotten the feeling that introverts (especially those who write about it on blogs) have a chip on their shoulder about silly things like "needing to communicate clearly" or "having to interact with other human beings".

If you want to be successful, you need to know how to communicate clearly, and you need to be diplomatic and know how to affect the outcome you're looking to. "How to win friends and influence people" is still a good book to read on the subject. And what the hell is that "dating app" section, as if "witty one liners on an app" is somehow a contrast, or even a good thing, compared to meeting people at a bar or social event? The whole article is whack.

As someone who has historically been an extrovert but has become more introverted in the past two years, I feel like I have gotten a handicap - I feel I have lost skills that I need to regain.

I also think the WFH revolution (and the glee with which it is embraced) is a pendulum on the far end of positive, which I think will swing back a bit when people realize all the dreams of WFH don't materialize. Many people won't become nomadic. Many people won't move to that low-cost midwest city, save hundreds of thousands and FIRE at 45. All the things people are taking for granted now, like having an existing network of work contacts from the pre-covid days) will evaporate, and they'll be left trying to replicate what they took for granted, from home.
Doing illegal things, mostly.

If you are working a w2 job and paying taxes and paying your mortgage / auto loan... crypto doesn't really help you.

Blackmail? Awesome. Buying illegal substances? Awesome. Gambling? You got it...
What you've said is true. Refusing to use the older insulins is what is killing people. Having to use the older insulins is shitty, and it shouldn't be happening, but it's not the thing that's killing people.

However, actually _saying_ that tends to get people up in arms, harassing you about how it how it shouldn't be necessary for people to use the older insulins, and how the newer insulins shouldn't cost what they do. Even though everyone actually agrees with them and they're arguing against a point that nobody it actually trying to make. It is... frustrating trying to get people to understand that you agree with them, but you're talking about something different.

I had this exact discussion with one such person yesterday, and I was trying to explain that they are sabotaging their own goals by misrepresenting the issues. And that I WANT them to succeed in changing things, but they're making it harder to do so.

Edit: You're already being downvoted for stating something that is obviously and undeniably true, because people are not bothering to understand what you're saying. I'm sorry for that.
Are you talking about the Democratic Party? They are more responsible for the extreme cost of healthcare in the US than any other political faction. Mandatory insurance, COBRA payouts… Did you know Gretchen Whitmer’s dad was the CEO of BlueCross?

I say this as a leftist: the Democratic Party is the party of the health industrial complex.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2021/01/joe-biden-public-option-h...
I know relatively little about Windows, but toggling Secure Boot by itself should have no such effect. Secure Boot is a firmware policy that affects what OSes are permitted to boot and a few other boot-time things. It has essentially no relation to your disk.

If you have Bitlocker enabled, all bets are off. Make sure you have a recovery key set up.
I mostly agree, but many of these choices are constrained by problems.

We use gmail (or fastmail) because of the spam problem and your own email server getting blacklisted. Also the complexity and know-how necessary to be a linux admin.

Many use FB (or other centralized social media) now because of network effects, but also because of how easy they are to use.

Things don't have to be this way - in theory you can have a system designed from the ground up to solve these kinds of problems in a way that's still easy to use and possible to maintain. It's just way harder than doing it the centralized way and it's harder to figure out a way to generate money to make it self-sustaining.

The only group I'm aware of trying to do this from first principles is Urbit - there's always a lot of knee-jerk responses when I mention them, but it's a really cool project even if it's tall odds that it'll work out in a serious large scale way. They're at least aware of why previous attempts always fail and they're not afraid to rebuild the entire stack to fix it.

Ethereum and DAOs are also similar in a way - a method to have applications and organizations built on decentralized state that can actually work with financial incentives to support it.

We're still in the middle of experiencing the shock of what the internet means for us: https://press.stripe.com/#the-revolt-of-the-public - it'll be a while before we understand how things will change, but they're already changing in strange ways - hopefully when the dust settles it'll be better and not worse.
What would such a contract look like?

The whole point of crypto-like contracts is that the terms of the contract are defined solely by code. Ambiguity is, by definition, impossible.

If you remove that, why not just use a regular contract?
IMO, the only feasible solution is to regulate surveillance capitalism out of existence. The market is not going to solve this.
I have seen similar ideas before of trying to build a startup around a human interaction. Usually never works out because people don't want another tech startup invading their personal space. I would think hard and long before doing this.
One of the funniest things I can remember about uni shop bill time was that some aerospace engi's needed some really special washers. They were quite expensive and the shipping time was going to cut a deadline extremely close.

So they were able to send one of the grad students who watches over the after hours student machine shop a few hours away to a place that had the metal needed in stock and then have them CNC all the washers. They charged typically charged a good bit for physics/aerospace dept. to use said CNC, still ended up being much cheaper and much faster... for simple washers.
You should also check out IDoRecall[1]. It's a great alternative and has the possibility to create recalls out of notes, too.

[1] https://www.idorecall.com/

(NB: I am not the creator, nor am I being paid to promote it. Just a regular user who found it particularly useful for my studies and personal knowledge.)
Indeed, wonderful! Thanks hboon (and viksit).
Sounds like the author should have a chat with dang and compare notes.
Alternatives are hard but it is not a good practice for devs to have a copy of the prod database. It is also bad for devs to share the test database because they will always be trashing it for each other or be afraid of trashing it.

For instance you don't want personal or commercially valuable information to walk out the door.

The cost in terms of storage, CPU and devs waiting for tasks to finish against it is vast.

Really devs should have a small test database to work with that exercises everything important. If a dev personally can use 10 copies of this database they can afford to have it and they can have it now.

The full database is nice to have if you want to debug specific problems in the full system, debug performance problems at scale, do a dress rehearsal of an upgrade, etc. You still need it for some things but if every dev uses it every day you are in trouble.

If you don't know how to make a small database that works then don't know how your system works and making any kind of change to the system is risky and expensive.
trolls obviously know this. they want the audience that comes from posting on a high traffic website. Posting your opinions on ramdomguydog. blogspot.com does not deliver much audience.
> This argument does not help. Those same folks cannot carry around a crypto-buck either

I'm not a big DeFi booster, but I don't think that's true. All it takes is a mobile phone. There's some pretty compelling videos coming out of El Salvador showing just how easy it is to instantly transact Bitcoin between two people simply by scanning a QR code on the other person's phone and then sending a Lightning Network transaction. This is already reality on the ground, and seemingly more accessible than getting access to credit.
> Chief among those use-cases being securely transferring commodities to people in countries that your own fiat regime's financial infrastructure refuses to deal with, for them to then convert to local fiat money.

Ah, the "I want to break laws" use case for cryptocurrencies.
I'd think that a robot that could neatly wire up racks with cabling (ethernet, power, & fiber) would be quite doable and useful. Does anyone here have experience with such a project?
did you just reinvent Befunge, but unironically?
This situation resembles more that one episode of Rick and Morty where Rick changed value of blemflarck[0] from 1 to 0.

[0]https://rickandmorty.fandom.com/wiki/Blemflarck
The only audience are people who don't know about that or have more to win than to loose.
It’s more regulated though. That’s the point is there’s some control in usd, for better and worse.
Show HN: Open-Source 95% Hacker News Clone – [Next.js and Node.js]
If anyone wants something like Roblox that is free (as in freedom) software and runs natively on GNU/Linux, check out Minetest. Similar blocky aesthetic, mods made in Lua just like Roblox, mod content only has to be on a server, so you can join without prior setup (unlike modded Minecraft, more like Garry's Mod and Roblox), and the game is also available on Android. Not just a similar game you play with other mobile players (the way Minecraft Pocket Edition was), rather the same real game with the ability to pick up where you left off on a computer and join the same server with the same mods using your credentials for that server.

I'm sure there are fewer players and less content, but it seems like a more sane base to build on for your creative ventures. They're not after your money the way Roblox often is either.
> Those same folks cannot carry around a crypto-buck either.

Many of them can. Smartphones have much higher adoption than credit cards in these areas.
> Legal contracts do not work like a software program and that characteristic is a feature not a bug.

Not everyone agrees with that. Everyone using smart contracts is opting in to code-as-law - nobody who doesn't want that needs to use or touch them.
You'd have to ignore the rest of the comment to honestly think this is a reply to the point OP was making and I was clarifying.
Windows For Workgroups 3.11 had TCP/IP, but no PPP dialer for home users.
My team just implemented the native date inputs for a client's site this past week. With native date inputs working for every good browser but safari desktop (it's in technology preview), we saved lots of time and effort with minimal styling of the native date input. Plus, it works soooo much better on iOS, the interface for date inputs is great. I assume it's similar on Android these days.
I’d honestly rather pay a (higher) fee to a service I like and is transparent. A service where my money is paying for the uptime and development and I give consent, and not where some “evil” AI is tracking my every step and then has the audacity to recommend me ads of things totally irrelevant to me.

I respect that services have running costs and I’m happy to cover my usage, but I have to understand that the average consumer doesn’t give a crap, or is simply ignorant and doesn’t know.
Not only do top software engineers or designers need to work in ultra-collaborative environments - even if that were not the case, and regardless of these being highly paid professionals, their rise in prominence will in no way shift "the balance of wealth and power" in the world.

If someone thinks that paying a small group of people six-figure salaries will shift any type of balance in the world, they need to take a hard look at their assumptions and views.

The article lacks any intellectual rigor.
> The financial system trades trillions of dollars in automated systems that make split-second decisions in a way that precludes human supervision.

Nope. Regulations require human supervision, in some way, of that trading.

Furthermore, those trades have exactly the kind of non-algorithmic softness that omk talks about: if an algorithm makes a trade which is obviously incorrect, you can ask the exchange to bust it.
> When algorithms in the real world create lose-lose outcomes, people override them, which is why when your credit card gets stolen you don't end up paying for stuff.

An exploit where I take all your bitcoins isn't a lose-lose outcome, and neither is that. If I steal your credit card and you have to pay for my stuff, you're the only party who loses.
Are you sure? Pretty sure they can. Either way they can donate huge amounts to PACs, create their own PACs, run ads, etc. Bribery is pretty much legalised, it's ridiculous. See Citizens United v. FEC for example.
You can get masa harina at Albert Heijn (the bigger ones). But other than that: no.
Having access to the notes you had written for each of the characters (provided the deck owner wrote that word card by including the cards of each character).
Most newbies want to progress just enough to not be completely frustrated by the experience and no further.

In your terms, a huge chunk of the population want to be suckers for life.

Plus not everyone is competitive and wants to excel at a game.
You know, I checked and their breakdown of earnings video is from 4 years ago. My mistake.

Thanks for letting me know because I was shocked at how little money they seemed to be making from ads vs Patreon.
I think the author is making a lot of assumptions here. I'll break them down.

> High-paying careers favor those with the stomach for deep, solitary work.

I assume he means programming. Just because you work in a solitary environment doesn't mean you're an introvert. It really more requires the ability to focus more than anything in my experience. I've known a bunch of great programmers who were also extroverts.

> In-person schmoozing has taken a backseat to an online workday where the ability to self-motivate matters most.

I don't think this has changed because promotion is based largely on human bias more than anything. Making an impression on someone is still as important as it ever was, we just do it using a different medium. (zoom, teams, slack, email).

> Crafting a witty one-liner on apps determines your dating success — not the ability to pick someone up at a bar.

It might get you a date, but your personality gets you the second date.
You say "it isn't really practical to turn 2000+ miles of public roads into a sports venue with barriers, security, etc on a rolling basis for a couple of days." and "some responsibility lies with the organisers." which seems contradictory to me. What more should the organizers do?
You can pick any N dimensions of personal preferences and tendencies and form a type system off of it. That isn’t useless, you’ll find interesting patterns which tie together those in the same category. It’s clearly limited but it’s not the same as the literally meaningless Zodiac sign.
The way I view it is that you look at components like a database -- a bunch of tables that don't really tell you much about the business logic; the main thing they do is offer data coherence.

And like a webserver, the business logic has been entirely moved out of the data storage -- you construct an "object" out of the raw parts from the database, and you operate on that. The main thing is that you can construct multiple objects from the same raw dataset -- different views (as in MVC).

I think however it's a mistake when you assume most game's design -- where largely there are a very small amount of entities, and a small amount of behaviors, and really the game design is about careful placement of these fairly rudimentary entities on the map. In that scenario, the flexibility of ECS does you no good -- the game design is itself inflexible, so making your logic flexible is largely a premature optimization. If there's only one reasonable "View" of the entity, being able to construct an infinite set of alternative views is pointless.

ECS appeals to me more when you start talking about simulation-style games, where the game is far less hard-coded. Dwarf Fortress is ridiculously flexible in its game design (at runtime), and ECS would be a natural fit for that (entities in DF are literally defined by tags, and groups of tags, and those tags get modified at runtime[0]). It's not spaghetti code then -- it's really the only reasonable way to approach the problem.

Defining each entity uniquely makes a lot of sense when your entities are largely unique (perhaps with a common base, e.g. for physics). ECS makes more sense when your entities share of lot of logic, but random subsets of it, and especially so when the game itself treats that random subset as dynamic.

[0] http://www.dfwk.ru/Creature_standard_1.txt
Finally someone has put into words my frustration with this healthcare system.
Turns it into a useful material for making tires.
Right, when I said "actually concurrent", I meant the code -could- run simultaneously (or more formally, that the items of execution aren't necessarily causally related). Any sequential operation could be spread out over an arbitrary number of Erlang processes, without it actually being concurrent. That design isn't concurrent, you just are involving a bunch of processes that wait.

That said, you are right that a synch point around a controlled resource (i.e., "we only want to support processing 5 requests at a time") would still have concurrent tasks (i.e., ten requests come in; there is no casual relation between when they run). Of course...that's an intentional point of synchronization necessary for correctness; it still strikes me as a strawman to say that you don't get parallelization for concurrent code, just because you forced a bottleneck somewhere.
At least to me, and possibly others, any system which I have my money invested and I can lose everything I own with no recourse due to some exploit is completely laughable and something I will never ever touch. There's a reason folks keep their life savings in a Chase bank account, because if something like this happens you have recourse to recover your money.
This is the kind of sentiment that watching too many Alex Jones documentaries will give you. It's funny that you think places like America, which can't even manage to legislate sensible climate-saving policies, would ever get to an extremist state of banning cars and pets, or forcing you to eat bugs for protein. You are laughably out of touch with reality.
dang would tell him to have a feature to grey out troll comments
I've always felt that the introvert/extrovert dichotomy is such an oversimplification that it fails to be useful as a form of categorization. The degree to which someone is outgoing vs reserved is highly context dependent: maybe an individual is extraverted in their personal life but more restrained in a professional environment. Measuring these things is also so subjective that much of this is just a wash. Pieces of business-pop psychology like this one seem mostly designed to tell their audience wants to hear with just enough of an edge to provoke engagement.
Looking at what goes on inside human rights tribunals (at least in ontario), I don't see how things are just fine. If anything, the tiny population size of Canada means nothing particularly exciting ever happens in Canada..
Would an "upgradeable" crypto-coin solve that flaw?
> There are plenty of mobile-only banking solutions that are widely used in non-western worlds, and that's likely a model for emerging economies. When electronic banking comes, OP is saying that standard banking ("perfected over millenia TM") is honestly quite preferable over algorithmic contracts.
Update on Windows 11 minimum system requirements
The Fourth Frontier (2006)
I'd say most of the systems you mention either a) have human failsafes b) have years of pre-algorithmic precedent such that the algorithm matches some well-known accepted process or c) are speculative in nature and therefor can assume the risk of a faulty algorithm.

Algorithmic stablecoins are mostly in category "c" so far. There is no human failsafe and there is no predetermined process that can shape the algorithm.
> Obviously they are only worth as much as we all collectively believe

I agree, which means both fiat currencies and Bitcoin have no intrinsic value, only what we collectively believe.

> BTC is more like gold this way than the dollar

agree
Question though, would you personally eat it? Do you think other vegans might?
Coinbase Receives Crypto Custody License from German Regulator BaFin
One interpretation would be that they view the risk of poor transactions as less than the misdeeds of the current system.

Eg, fiduciaries who structure transactions to reap fees, like Bank of America, or places like Comcast who routinely mischarge.

I’d be curious to see a study on bank fee abuses or rental scams and how much the public loses each year to racketeering by entrenched players.
If you use Clojure than yes, software transactional memory is readily available. https://clojure.org/reference/refs
Respectfully disagree. I live in a smaller US state and I’ve emailed my representatives and received a personal reply from both of them. One actually engaged and we politely discussed a public policy issue back and forth in an email thread. More often than not you can walk right into their office and meet them if you’d like.
> rather than paying a middleman a fraction of a percent.

Having a middle man doesn’t ensure safety. It just means that you have someone to blame if it all goes wrong. And even if you blame them, they most likely won’t see any negative repercussions anyway.
Obviously we've had plenty of discussions about censorships and online fora and I've got nothing to add there.

But does this strike anyone as specifically anti-science? If science is a process that's continually open to revision and re-examination, it seems like claiming a right to ban wrongthink goes directly against that part of the philosophy. What good is it to claim to be evidence-based if you also claim the ability to censor evidence that you've decided, a priori, that doesn't fit your desired narrative?

I mean it's one thing to allow political discussions to be moderated but it seems like science claims a particular philosophy that must be open to challenge, right?
>Rome's conceptualization of citizenship was radically expansionist compared to that of the Greek states which were flourishing at the same time.

Agreed.

> As for, say, the Hellenistic kingdoms, I think it's clear that the ability of the Romans to actually absorb those kingdoms and have them come to see themselves as "Romans" (a trick the Seleucids/Antigonids/etc. never pulled off) speaks to a real and meaningful difference here.

There's something here, but it's not appropriate to generalize from the polis to the Hellenic Empires and I'm not sure it's so clear cut. Greek culture spread widely. For example, the Maccabeean Revolt shows they were Hellenized Jews willing to go pretty far to partake of Greek culture, especially if you take the modern view that assigns the Hellenized most of the responsibility for the policies sparking the revolt.

* There's an unfortunate paucity of sources, that is just about none, on the Hellenistic side of the revolt, so we can't rule out the traditional account. Either way these Jews clearly existed.