skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yah I totally agree and I don't like the fact that tech giants like Elon & Jack are using their influence to fluctuate the price of crypto so they can make a few bucks.
I find it greedy and disgusting.

I think these guys have become pretty delusional with the amount of power they experienced the past few decades.

The true crypto movement inside the developer circles of ethereum is trying to displace these assholes by flipping the value infrastructure to the actual service provider rather than the one who sits at the top of the centralized pyramid.

It will help poor people in the long-run when it allows more accessible services like driving and food delivery to pay more to them.

It may not work, but it's worth a shot and theoretically possible.

This current system of mega-billion dollar centralized tech businesses is actually very unnatural and strange in my opinion.
Applied for a job with them. Have off a really creepy vibe. Didn’t follow it up.
I'm not against the idea. Wikipedia lists around 150 professional standards organisations[0] along the lines of what could be done for journalism.

Again I think there's a place for blogging, factual videos on TikTok, people working their way into the industry more organically, and special interest groups, etc. But I do think there's a need for the bulk of mainstream news to live up to the responsibility they have to the public.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartered_(professional)
In other countries, people don't get billed for their healthcare, or the bill is small enough to be insignificant for most of the population.

But we can't have that in America, because half the country is convinced that would be SOCIALISM!!
Purely from the outside looking in so this may be a naive question: what are the chances for a mandated continuous monitoring system to actually provide more attack surface ala Solarwinds?
Automated tests are brilliant in maintenance mode. Find a bug, write a test. Lock in the behavior until the requirements change.
> throwing their weight around to try to cheat out some legislative relevance rather than compete on product

So well said and - a market economy cannot really coexist with an environment allowing buying legislation.
It's a shit-show also, with every vendor having their own solution and 0 interop. RGB addressing isn't rocket science I'm not sure why every app needs its own proprietary daemon to handle this - mercy on your soul if you have corsair + asus + gigabyte in your system as I do.
> IT people will need full control over that kind of stuff until the end of time, due to law.

This is the other edge of the sword when dealing with leviathans like Microsoft. They cannot directly target & oppress independently-minded assholes like myself without also compromising their target markets.

If some arbitrary megacorps need a way around this, it would be economically infeasible for Microsoft to develop special custom code piles for every one of them in addition to the builds that the general public use, and also ensure the corporate builds don't magically leak out somehow at that scale.
They've been pretty mum on the type system stuff though. Do you have any insight there?
Wait until you find out how many of these services post comments on HN.
That's probably because you didn't try to write anything significant in R besides running an analysis.

R is an interesting language which adapts "ok" to statistics and related fields, however it's very limited by today standards, completely REPL oriented and very, _very_ slow. In fact, the first thing one learns in R is to never loop on any set larger than a few hundred elements if you want your script to execute at decent speed.

All the R speed is actually backed by fortran and C/C++ extensions. This goes from the R core to all the scientific and biosciences packages.

R as a language has an extremely primitive interpreter and GC runtime. It's often much slower than python or perl. Although given the primitive GC and runtime, it's quite straightforward to write extensions for it. But *nobody* really wants to change language (whichever it is) to write extensions just to get some speed back. Especially when writing these extensions bars you from the entirety of the R ecosystem itself.
This seems useful for systemd when stopping services.
So can we defund the NSA then? If their conclusion is “lol just don’t use computers for anything important” why pay them hundreds of billions of dollars to “secure” them?
I integrated 3D secure for recurring payments with Stripe
I would need to see some sort of evidence that a phone call can identify problematic behaviour in a systematic way before I would by into this.
The customer is the biggest security hole. Most security breaches these days are social-engineered.
I see a lot of people shooting comments back and forth over which tech is better. Why does an argument before Congress need to justify the tech’s existence in a free market? If it works, it will sell.
Totally fair, yep. Thanks again!
The US is large enough on its own to keep petro cars running. There won't be as many advances without other markets to subsidize development, but there are enough people to keep things going. What will kill gas in the US is when there is enough charging infrastructure that people believe those 7% trips where you don't charge at home are reasonable, and so they switch their next car.

Once that happens petro will be left to things where nothing else will do. Things like farming, or heavy construction where you are using a lot more energy than batteries can supply: these are already diesel. And a few collectors, but the 1957 Chevrolet is something you only drive in parades anyway.
The fact that they can get away with refusing to collect evidence like that is absolutely infuriating.
Pay money to advance in ratings? Nonsense! Just come up with a clever way to employ Stockfish over the board!
> for example, in jurisdictions where body-cam data is a matter of public record, should officers be recording while inside someone's house where that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy?

Public records laws already generally anticipate that public records will frequently contain sensitive, protected data and have general processes (involving redaction or denial of unprivileged general public access, depending on the circumstances) for handling public records to which that applies (source: spent a couple decades in government dealing with public records containing PHI, other PII, and other legally restricted-access information.)
> By that logic, would you ever release a 1.0?

Of course! But you need a well defined feature set you want to have for 1.0 and stick to that. The scope of that is up to the people who run the project, I did not make any demands what this specific software should include in their 1.0 release. I did not say that it needs to be perfect, include all bells and whistles imaginable, all possible CPU optimizations and smell nice in order to merit an 1.0 release. What I'm saying is, that you should make an effort to ensure that the implementation of this feature set is somewhat stable.

So rather to the contrary, I would also suggest to keep the scope of a 1.0 release smaller than that, just like you suggested:

> Imho, just having a stable API that works on x86-64 without optimizations would be enough for a 1.0 release.

Releasing an un-optimized reference implementation as 1.0, or maybe only one optimized code path for x86_64 would IMO be perfectly fine. If they decide they really want optimizations for all kinds of CPUs in the 1.0 release, also fine with me. What the scope for 1.0 should or should not be is their choice. And it's also completely besides my point.

I'm specifically arguing against doing what pornel seems to imply: My point is, you shouldn't release an implementation you know misbehaves in some cases, because "we can fix it later".

I'm a fan of semantic versioning. And I firmly believe that in addition to API & ABI stability, for a major version release, some effort should be taken to iron out the implementation of that API as well. Of course bugs can, and will, crop up later and can be fixed with a patch level release, but IMO you shouldn't rush towards a 1.0 release with a backlog of known bugs for the next release. That's what I meant with "kind of misses the point of the versioning semantics".
> No technology will work if the people using it is corrupt.

Not if the people above them are not.
Sadly, the people above them need corrupt police because corrupt police is easier to control than the good one, and their members can also turn themselves into private police serving the same politicians who saved their asses.
It's a "do ut des" scenario in which everyone has something to gain, except common people.
Have you changed the channel? USA Network and NBC Sports network are 24x7 obscure Olympics, as is CNBC nights and weekends. Judo, women's weightlifting, the men's bike road race, badminton, ping pong, handball...
Yes, the Rapid 38 Muni takes 30 minutes to go downtown from my nearest stop while the regular 38 Muni does it in 32 minutes from a stop that is 2 minutes closer to my house. And that is on a route with dedicated bus lanes. Crazy that the Rapid 38 is only 2 minutes faster.
I think you may be underestimating how much "because they are at the edge of complexity they can handle" is a driver of mainstream SE. In particular, as a factor in the popularity of frameworks and libraries.

I'm not taking a stance like "if it was hard to write it should be hard to use", but quite a lot of software only seems to exist in order to hide complexity away in black boxes, often in trivial ways.
Indeed. I didn't mean to attack Morphy, I just interpreted the quote on its own, thinking it was made by some random person (in different places in the thread people had quoted various writers etc. not necessarily great chess players).
Some other more empathetic reasons:

1. They live in one city, and received a job in another. 2 hours would be Philadelphia to DC or NYC for example. But they can't get a more local job (those don't exist, they can't land them, etc.)

2. They can't move for some reason. Their partner can't get another job. Their children are in a school and they don't want to move them until they graduate. Their parents are family are nearby and they must be near them, medical issues are possible, elderly, etc.

3. They just really love where they live

4. They Can't afford to live.
Factually incorrect. Travel abroad to Germany, get care, and then attempt to default on your bills. You will be threatened with legal action.
Game theory predicts that market participants who discover Tether is a scam would publicly praise it while simultaneously moving away from it slowly and quietly to avoid spooking the market - leave some other sucker holding the bag.

We also know people can be irrational so those who depend on Tether to operate simply cannot acknowledge it is a scam.
Using LLVM is not exactly an indelible architectural decision — switching to a bespoke JIT would be entirely possible, it’s just not worth it yet. Moreover, if you want to generate world-class high speed code, you really need something like LLVM. So yes, it’s a bit of a drag but it’s also a massive enabler of critical performance. That’s the real reason the project continues to use it.

There are a number of approaches to reducing latency further, which are being pursued. The most promising current avenue is better tooling around system images (compiled executables with additional functionality beyond the core language pre-loaded): generating them faster, generating them incrementally (load one, add a few things and produce another), and generating them automatically for the set of packages in the current active project (not feasible until the first two are done). That will give an experience comparable to compiled languages.
The miners who charge fees to process transactions, are they not middlemen?

Centralized processors have infra costs, perhaps they have found a good price point already

You could also be more respectful if you are on HN
I think it depends on which version you're updating from.

I'm still on 14.5.1 and it shows as a 922.4MB download.
> Seems like you are attempting to highlight edge cases in order to defend police corruption and their ability to hide their activities under the guise of public privacy.

I'm not sure where you're getting that from what I wrote.

I'm not saying police shouldn't use bodycams (I explicitly said I think they're a net good). I think there might be specific circumstances where not recording might be appropriate (e.g., if they're inside someone's house). I think those circumstances, if they exist, should be determined as a matter of department policy, and not left to the whims of individual officers, and that in circumstances other than those, officers should have to be recording at all times, and there should be consequences if they don't. Things officers do in public would pretty obviously be examples of that.

The only thing I was pushing back on was the notion that it's universally the case that LEOs should need to have cameras on for every minute of ever shift.
My point was that Sony entering the film and music industries, which happened in 1991, soured their relationships with the other studios and labels. Compact tapes predate that by several decades and CD and 3.5” discs both do by 9 years. Clearly Sony had no problems getting their media formats adopted before that strategy shift. After that they had to fight tooth and nail.
> anyone who looked outside their window would see EVs all over the place

In Germany this is not the case. Also: A typical residential building over here has 3× 230 V / 63 A which results in ~43 kW. Medium charging power mentioned by Tesla is 11 kW (16 A), so if we wanna leave some headroom for the residents you can charge 2-3 Teslas maximum there at once.

Of course you could dig out the electrical cable leading to the house, add another house connection etc. but that would also mean all the electrics of the whole house have to be brought up to current standards etc. Also at some point the main cable under the road will be the limiting factor, and this has to go as well.

I think EVs have an advantage over hydrogen now that they are not in totally widespread use, because their true infrastructure cost will only appear once everybody wants to charge them at once, and this is certainly not the case right now.
>> the second is the first iteration of computer money.

I mean... I am charitably trying to find interpretation/context in which this is meaningfully true, and failing. In which way is bitcoin more "computer money" than any other money these days?

I purchase things, pay my bills, obtain payment, invest, and do all my transactions at least 95% digitally, with "computer money".

Uncharitably, I could call Bitcoin "that, but less practical / more wasteful". Charitably, I could say "There are specific goals/circumstances where Bitcoin has benefits".

But I feel it's decades late to be "first iteration of computer money", unless there's some squinting and extremely specific ad-hoc defining that I haven't imagined. Even the "Money" part (as practical transactional currency) is these days increasingly less relevant,by proponents and pundits alike, as opposed to "investment vehicle" or "storage of value".

(as for chess, I don't know; I gave up when I realized how much memorization, as opposed to developing of understanding, was involved to get much better; it may indeed enable self-knowledge and mold character at some level beyond the ones I've achieved. Therefore, I cannot contribute to discussion on whether Chess is practical/efficient/meaningful way to grow those characteristics - i.e. hammering rocks for 5,000hrs probably grows character at some level but may not be sufficiently practical/efficient to matter. I respect it like a do Golf - it takes immense skill, dedication, and investment to develop it to a high level, and world-class players are incredibly good at it; but it's not a skill I desire to grow myself anymore).
> I think you failed to see the "professor of public health policy" in his title.

No, I did not. Public Health Policy and an MBA are non-clinical.

Clinical Doctors that are actively treating Covid19 patients, that are actively using what will be Standard of Care using antivirals, anti-inflammatories, anticoagulants, steroids, ACE2 inhibitors, and other drugs, using well-known medical therapies for sick patients are the doctors that I want to hear from around treatment A, or treatment B. These are the doctors with the experience and the know-ho for these severe diseases.

Again, as a radiologist, or hospital mgmt, the fine doctor is not a clinical doctor actively performing these treatments with these drugs and immunotherapies. Radiologists diagnose.

This is the domain of an Infectious Diseases specialty in severe cases, and an Internist in less severe cases, with the active support of the associated other specialties (cardio/pulmonologists/vascular/etc for all the involved body parts for which there are specific specialties acutely impacted by covid).
No one is particularly rational. Reasonable is maybe 50/50 at best. We can strive though.
Somewhat famously, symplectic geometry had its fair bit of foundational issues.
I am not even sure it decreases the cost of staying. Hotels are remarkable value except during peak season, and even then airbnb are also expensive. No financial benefit to the tourist.
Could there one day be a stamp that also has an RFID/HSM inside, that signs things digitally but gives the same UX?
“Everywhere you see a bus lane or a bike lane, it's underutilized.”

Those can easily be underutilized and yet take more traffic than a lane filled with cars would take.

“If you're stuck at a stoplight at an intersection with a gas station, a pizzeria and a toy store and you need gas, food and a birthday gift for your nephew, you stop and buy those things.”

I don’t drive a car, but I doubt that because I don’t see how that would happen. It would take you minutes to find a spot to park your car and go shopping. The people I know purposefully decide to go into the town to do such shopping.

And who’s talking about a new highway? If car drivers become part-time cyclists, there’s no need for building new roads.

Also, it’s not a given that ease of access by car is good for shop owners. Some data points:

https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2020/03/18/going-back-to-...:

“When the council proposed to take away some of the car parking spaces the local entrepreneurs stunned the council by demanding all the parking to be removed. That was novel at the time (and to be honest it still is exceptional) but could be explained because the pedestrianised area is so close to this location. The merchants simply saw that business is booming literally around the corner at locations without moving and parked cars.”

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jul/29/how-groningen...:

“there was also fierce opposition, especially from businessmen and shopkeepers who were convinced it would mean the end of their business if cars could no longer cross the centre. We tried to explain that we wanted to create a pleasant urban environment that eventually would attract more people to the centre and to their shops. But they were convinced they would go bankrupt if customers would not be able reach their shop by car,” says Van den Berg. “In the end, it turned out they were wrong.”
Crime is definitely up, but even if we assume it's under-reported or the numbers are being fudged, it's still nowhere near the level of the 90s. It's up from a historic low. I think a lot of people either aren't really aware of or were sheltered growing up from how bad crime used to be. People's real-world experience is based on their recent memory, not on 90's levels of violence.

There were a little less than 2,000 shootings in New York City in 2020. That's very bad, given that for a few years the city had managed to dip under 1,000 shootings. An extremely noticeable spike. But as a point of comparison, in 1991 there were over 5,000 shootings in NYC. And those numbers aren't taking into account three decades of population growth. Even when you look at crime overall and not just violent crimes, we were coming off of a ~5% national crime rate in 1991.

From what I can see, GP is correct that we are mostly looking at a return to 2012-level crime stats, and in some areas maybe a return to 2000-2010 levels. I'm convinced that people just can't remember any earlier than that. The 90s were really bad, if ~55% of Americans think we're at those levels already, then ~55% of Americans are just wrong. They don't have an accurate grasp of what crime used to look like.

When you look at >2015 rates, then you do see crime going up. That's a real thing, and it's worth paying attention to. But that doesn't really change anything about the overall trajectory of crime over the past decade. It especially doesn't change anything about the overall trajectory of crime over the past >1 decade.

> But when I go to the grocery store I end up paying more for things like milk and meat.

There's a much simpler explanation here, which is that food categories like milk and meat are completely excluded from many inflation calculations, specifically because their prices are highly volatile. An increase in the price of food won't be directly reflected in any reported inflation numbers, at least as far as I know.

Like many high-level economy measures, inflation is not always a useful way to talk about how costs are changing and what regular people are experiencing. It's purposefully disconnected from many "on-the-ground" prices of goods that are important to consumers.
check out some of the DeFi projects for more hands-on applications (they all have githubs too):

Sushi, yearn, aave.

Right now with the current function invocation costs, ethereum ecosystem cannot support meaningful apps outside of trustless banks which is why L2 is extremely important. It's going to unclog a massive drain if done right.
For future reference, I did confirm from a support person that live streams are not offered in the US "due to legal reasons". You can only receive it through select cable, satellite, and other operators. Sad.
MCA (manufactured citric acid) is on my list of ingredients to avoid, as it seems to cause sores on the inside of my mouth. I don't get the same reaction from lemons/limes, so I figured it's the fungus contaminants.

Juices are commonly contaminated with MCA. I refer to MCA as a 'cosmetic food ingredient', which are added to change mouthfeel of a manufactured food and do not provide nutrition. Gums are the other common cosmetic food ingredient - they are added to change the mouthfeel or storage properties. Most gums are safe; I avoid all foods with carageenan, as this one supposedly has inflammatory properties.

The fine article says that Italy used to make citric acid from lemons, but that this got too expensive. I didn't realize fungus-derived citric acid has been in use since 1919.
Anything about making their workplace less coder hostile?

Open plan office - great for sales, HR, marketing and reassuring insecure managers/leaders/CEOs they have worth - not so great for people who need to concentrate hard to solve hard problems and write good code.
I’ve always thought “cultural fit” was an odd thing to prioritize when we have research showing that (actual) diversity is more helpful for avoiding groupthink. Especially when this term is just begging for bias to creep in.

One lesson that stuck with me was the Houston Rockets GM putting some barriers around how emotional judgments were allowed to influence decisions. Small rules like “don’t give players nicknames” or just giving less weight to personal interviews were good experiments in how to keep screenings more objective. We don’t have the granularity or measurability of new hire data as NBA offices do, but I think these concepts are still useful.
comment referred to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27950388
What's the problem with that? If someone has trouble with phone interviews why should a diagnosis be a barrier to being able to give the best performance they can?