skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have written a post on the topic of writing a technical book recently which might interest people who are thinking about doing it: https://andregarzia.com/2021/04/writing-a-technical-book.htm...

I have also launched a free eBook generation SaaS at: https://little.webby.press it is completely client-side, there are no accounts and no tracking, just have fun building your own books.
Generally don't comment on sub-posts, but Boiler Room is a great movie! And very apropo to the current market stock/crypto craze going on right now.
> Or, does this vehicle, after acceleration has completed, purport to continuously travel faster than the wind at an indefinite steady state?

Yes.
The vehicle can go faster than the wind in steady state condition.
Depending on efficiencies 'any' velocity is possible.
It creates thrust by leveraging the different speeds of two media (air and ground). Also works as a boat with two propellers.
Or as long that there is no penalty for making false copyright claims and until you're considered guilty by default.
This makes me feel old, thanks for that.
Here are the facts:

- Ken Griffin owns 85% of Citadel

- Citadel handles 40% of stock trades in the US

- Citadel has $38 billion of assets under management as of March 2021

- On January 25, it was announced that Griffin's Citadel would invest $2 billion into Melvin Capital, which had suffered losses of more than 30% on account of its short positions, particularly on GameStop

- On January 28, Robinhood, an electronic trading platform favored by many traders involved in buying GameStop stock and options, abruptly announced that it would halt all purchases of GameStop securities except to cover shorts and would only allow these securities to be sold if already held (but not sold short); the price of GME stock declined steeply shortly thereafter.

This is not a silly assertion.

EDIT: PS - I know US Senators can be silly, but here is the implication from a US Senator and former law professor: https://www.warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/02.16.2021%20Let...
Berkeley’s Hidden Network of Hillside Paths
I didn’t think about that, good idea. What I’ve actually decided to do Finish the discussion here that really brought this to my mind, is that I’m going to turn the video over to the band. I’m going to let them put it on their YouTube page that they can monetize it. I would rather they get the money then some scam artist in Brazil; or whichever nefarious actor tries to do this again.
Best optimization of weather conditions has to be seasonal. Seattle and Portland may be horrible 8 months out of the year but the summer months are quite perfect.

What I want to know are which cities are great seasonal cities in which I could potentially buy a condo for the high seasons, and then leave in the non-high seasons for a potential rental at a still competitive price.

For example: SF sucks in the summer, but maybe the tourists don't know that.
I don't find the distinction is quite so clear. There seem to be two forces coming to bear.

One is specific expertise in some domain. Here, there's a challenge in that generalists must of necessity have lesser specific expertise than, well, experts. This a general problem (so to speak) of synoptic or syncretic works. (One such has a wonderful disclaimer in its preface, I'll see if I can dig that up.)

The other is self-interest in a specific application area. This is where knowledge becomes secodary to bias, and there are numerous cases of people with deep expertise in specific fields proving poor counsel for considered and complete judgement of them. Edward Midgely (inventor of two of the greatest scourges of the 20th century, leaded petrol and chloroflourocarbon refrigerants) is perhaps the exemplar of this tendency, though he has ample company.

As I mentioned earlier in thread, Alvin Toffler, author of Future Shock (1970), does pretty well in giving both the optimistic and pessimistic side of technologies. In my estimation, the book's strengths largely come from critics, its weaknesses largely from specific domain experts. Toffler himself (and his often under-credited wife) are not domain experts themselves.

There's a generalist-class which often climbs on the cheerleading wagon, though, and that is those who advocate for numerous technologies, though they might better be seen as specialists in advocacy, public relations, and propaganda. Beware those whose principle interest is in making others look good. (Or bad.)

There are also experts who have voiced strong cautions over specific technologies. They're often sidelined for doing so (a general hazard of whistleblowing), though some have seen success. One such case is Paul Baran, a co-inventer of packet-based switched networks, the technology on which the Internet was based. Baran wrote numerous articles whilst at RAND cautioning against risks of computing in the 1960s, many of which read as highly relevant and prescient even today. Those are now freely available to the public at my specific request:

https://www.rand.org/pubs/authors/b/baran_paul.html

I've compiled a listing of other early cautions concerning privacy and surveillance around computer technology:

https://toot.cat/@dredmorbius/105074933053020193
Why should we value greatness more than morality? Should the magnitude of someone's impact overshadow the morality of their impact?

Opinions of celebrities don't exist in some sort of extra-dimensional cloistered thought bubble; they influence other minds and affect society in very real and measurable ways. Amplifying the celebrity status of these individuals by cherry-picking their acceptable works will in turn, unavoidably, also amplify their less-acceptable opinions -- though probably not by the same magnitude. But in general the masses are terrible at sorting out "oh, this is a righteous opinion that I should listen to" vs "this is a despicable one by the same person, but I have the intellectual & emotional maturity to be able to compartmentalize it". We're too tribal a species, on the average, for that. Our brains, societies, and cultures have not evolved to effectively handle multiculturalism well, ivory-tower internet freethinkers notwithstanding.

The flipside of cancel culture is moral nihilism, in which speech has no consequence and exists purely as a form of harmless intellectual exercise. But that's just not how it works in the real world. Speech has consequence, and for those wishing to prevent those consequences, sometimes ignoring the speaker and refusing to amplify their voice is the only realistic option they have, if they have no power to censor them outright or sufficiently amplify contrary opinions of their own. A canceled author isn't really very different from a boycotted company; it's a moral vote by a like-minded mass of humans who together value their version of morality more than that author's impacts. It's really not that difficult to not be an outspoken asshole.

Saying "I don't want to read this book" or "I don't want to play this game" because you don't like the author's values is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. It's very different from, say, government ban lists. So what if someone doesn't want to read Harry Potter or watch Weinstein movies anymore?

Back to the first question: why ought greatness be the measure of a person, instead of righteousness? Our species is largely full of mediocre apes with mediocre thoughts who nonetheless manage to coexist and thrive to some degree, yet are all too often led astray and into peril and evil by the "great" Machiavellian few among them. How does that help anything at all?
It's all about incentives, and the football analogy is spot-on. Hockey is another great example: fighting in hockey could be eliminated with a simple "both fighters are ejected" change (but nobody will because the fans love the fights).

The laws and policies driving YouTube's ContentID were built when the content owners had YouTube over an existential barrel: had YouTube not come to a solution, they could have sued it into oblivion. The resulting implementation massively over-corrects in that direction. Barring a legal change to de-fang the content owners (or to impose penalties for false copyright claims), nothing changes.
Thank you for the Adam Neely example, I forgot about that.

To summarize, Warner was being sued over Katy Perry's Dark Horse, claiming that the melody violated the copyright of Flame's Joyful Noise. After Neely published a video at no expense or request from Warner defending Katy Perry, Warner rewarded him by copyright claiming him.

It gets even more absurd. That lawsuit against Warner? It was found that Katy Perry's melody infringed on Joyful Noise, but when Warner issued the DMCA claim to Neely, they said Neely infringed on the melody of Katy Perry. In other words, they issued a claim on something that a judge literally just ruled that they do not have copyright on.

If it couldn't get any absurd, there's one last thing I remember. In the DMCA claim Warner has to select a time period of Neely's video where the Katy Perry's melody was being infringed, and the time period they chose was actually when Neely was demonstrating the melody of Joyful Noise. So perhaps even Warner's lawyers can't tell the difference.
This has been going on since time immemorial. A part of me thinks it's a necessary evil in a world where people won't fund revolutionary ideas. However, that also means Milton and Holmes etc.
I can imagine the state of your country if Musk and Jobs would be considered toxic there.
Why do you think Elon Musk is obviously different? He's definitely had many events where he has lied about aspects of his business. You could argue that it doesn't matter now that he has built something real, but that's down to a lot of luck, not ethical backbone.
I have a similar sensitivity around my primary vocation: I'm an artist with a day job, like many others, but since my day job is programming and I take it seriously, a lot of people think of my art as a "hobby." Which it very much is not.

FWIW I have found that three things help me deal with this sensitivity:

1) Take it as motivation to be more outwardly "professional" about my art. Improve the website, be more active on social media, try harder to exhibit, even (ugh) sell things.

2) Remember that most people are just saying that out of ignorance: they don't have a mental model for anything outside of "work for the Man" or "mess around in free time."

3) Have examples ready if someone needs an explanation, and also as inspiration for yourself. For instance: was William Carlos Williams[0] a "hobby" poet?

[0]: https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poets/william-carlos-willia...
Ahh, that makes sense. I guess I'm an old man in that I still see games as something you load through a disc or a cable.
there's only one thing that comes to mind when I see the .cx top-level domain.
Genuine question, as a private individual looking into residential storage, what kind $/kWh should I be expecting if I could get the system and install it myself, and why is it so much higher than the big manufacturers? Is it just volume?
Microsoft Live accounts get the same treatment. Those sons of britches cancelled my kid's Minecraft account and screwed up his ability to play with his friends. Because he was using my email address. He doesn't having an email address. He is 9 for crying out loud.
Forgotten Oil and Gas Wells Linger, Leaking Toxic Chemicals
In Tesla’s case, bigger the lie more they believed.
Hundreds of thousands of daily active users, I built both the backend and the mobile app. I think I'm familiar with common problems on both sides. Trust me, dealing with UI platforms is orders of magnitude more pain in the arse if you set the quality standards to the highest. Even the codebases were approx. 1 to 20-25.
I'm having trouble finding the source, but this has been happening for a long time and, unbelievably, it happens by design. Twitter intentionally errors out tweets linked from third parties under some conditions in order to evade techniques used to fingerprint users.

Essentially if I control a certain number of Twitter accounts and I have the handles of some of my own website users, I can selectively block those each of those users from different twitter accounts. In the background of my web site I can attempt to load tweets from all of my accounts and time how long these requests take.

Because blocked accounts load much faster than actual tweet threads I can statistically identify the users of my website by the combination of fast-loading tweets. The errors you get loading tweets not directly referred from Twitter is a consequence of Twitter attempting to circumvent this.
No, just one of their people making a video showing "how to build a custom gaming PC" and ... not doing a particularly good job of it. After a few days of mocking they took the video down, and then a while later made sure everyone remembered again by copyright-striking some Youtubers that had made reaction videos using material from the original video. "the verge PC build" on youtube should find stuff.
Varda Space raises over $50M to build space factories
Additionally, if it's a DMCA request, there are stipulations that it needs to be made in in good faith under penalty of perjury, so hopefully that makes it a bit less likely to go that far for a spurious case, but I'm not sure anyone has ever been found guilty of perjury for this, when AFAIK there are plenty of cases where it was obviously the case, so... who knows.
That is such a Hacker News answer.

Some people rely on their relationships with other people. They build support systems, form groups, and take comfort in the company of others. Being cut off suddenly and with no means to reconnect would isolate many people. This would be extremely damaging from a mental health perspective alone.

In addition, so many people have reconnected with old friends, family, teachers. One friend of mine used Facebook to find her birth parents. That avenue disappears completely.

I don't know why you would say it's "good" for these companies to disappear. These aren't megacorps. It's small, local companies that rely on FB advertising. Bed and breakfasts, wineries, anything that depends on tourism. They're always hit the hardest. Walmart isn't going to care if they can't advertise on FB anymore.

Your comment shows a lack-of-understanding and compassion for your fellow human.
It's also not standalone. And is half the resolution of Quest.
There are Pandoc binary releases for Arm64.

https://github.com/jgm/pandoc/releases

But it looks like this was before that (didn't have the 2020 when I read it).
Well you don't know the long term effects. So you can't say the trade off is worth it. It's just blind optimism on your part, not even shared by the vaccine manufacturers, that put in their government contracts clauses that they will not guarantee that it works or take liability for any side effects. Despite making billions on these drugs.
I thought copyright trolls were out of control when I got a copyright strike for five seconds of a recording of President Kennedy but this is beyond ridiculous.
>Generally people would not call that screenshot "adult".

That's not my experience. Again, criticize advertisers for taking ads away from such tame content all you want, or YouTube for making it even possible - I agree (mostly with the former). But it seems pointless to try to make a semantic argument that excludes her content from any reasonable definition of the word "adult".

>in general, the term 'adult' is used (... in the US) to refer to pornographic content

As used in the US, the term "adult" can mean porn, but can also refer to sexual content much more broadly. It's contextual.

>That's what youtube means, it's what advertisers mean

I can see the word "pornographic" being used in the most generic, clinical sense possible to describe any kind of content intended to sexually stimulate, in which case, yes, her channel has pornographic content, but you're obviously using it more colloquially, in the more normal sense that would exclude her channel's content, but then of course that's demonstrably not what they're referring to.

This all seems moot. They explicitly state their definition of "adult", and it is far from porn, and her channel is far from porn, so... what does porn have to do with it?
Why do so many machine learning models never get deployed?
All CPUs are just rocks that we tricked into computing. Why buy a computer?
Dunno, is Pinkerton notorious for that?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haymarket_affair

Edit: wrong Pinkerton massacre.
That's not argument for censorship, rather an argument for eschewing (or outlawing) algorithmic timelines.
You think 15 years is good you should see the lifetime of books. Some work for hundreds of years!
You don't need technology to play with friends. This can be a valuable early lesson to your child about genuine friendships.
Relevant article/thread from a day ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27984908
Companies are bureaucracy, and owners still find value in consolidating their interests by incorporating.

Workers can find the same value in consolidating their interests by unionizing.
The article says it's selling like hotcakes, but also that it may be at 8M sold worldwide.

By comparing, the Nintendo switch sold ten times as much.

Surely 8M is good sales but isn't this a bit over hyped?
Soon. We want to perfection our product before we take all Mexico and then Latam!!!
"I just want to know what he needs done / and let's go make the thing."

I think this is the problem. It's really really hard to do that at scale. Different people require different types of messages in order to get it. You need to repeat your vision of what needs to get done again and again and again. That can be hard for an introvert. It doesn't mean you can't be shy, but I think that's why it can be a challenge.
On second thought, since the author is taking advantage of HN to advertise their product, perhaps they should consider making more of the essay available so that potential customers can ascertain they aren't purchasing click bait or some inane twiddle twaddle.
Some fans.
Watch women's hockey at the Olympics. Actually all hockey at the Olympics. No fighting. Great hockey!
Yes, and...? It seems worth clarifying. I am concerned that you are perceiving my comments as being fastidious or conspiratorial in attitude, that is definitely not my intention and I apologize if it sounded rude, I am just concerned with the details on "how it all went down" so-to-speak.

To address the matter of payment-for-order-flow, it's a practice that is currently banned in countries like Australia, Canada, and the UK, largely due to conflicts of interest. There is actually another way of brokering which these countries use instead - it's simply paying a fee to execute the trades, old-fashioned and usually minus the confetti. That said, market makers are often given a good chunk of direct order flow anyway, which tends to move the flow off-exchange even if they are not paying for the privilege of obtaining order flow.
I remain unconvinced. You didn't actually provide any examples of the Exxon article being edited nefariously. And the reason the BP article is better is because their PR people gave up? Nah.

They're both awful companies doing terrible things to the earth. I don't need to believe in your wikipedia conspiracy to have a low opinion of them.
No, it does not have the highest possible energy density.

“Energy density” generally refers to the volumetric energy density, where hydrogen is one of the worse methods of storing energy. Hydrogen has the best “specific energy density” or gravimetric energy density, IF it is compressed. You should include both if you want to be accurate.

This is why hydrogen has lost when it comes to cars. Hydrogen has pretty bad energy density to start with, and then you’ve got to store it in cylindrical tanks which is hard to integrate efficiently, and can’t easily be made into a structural member of the car itself.

As a “battery” (with fuel cells) , it also doesn’t have great power density. Power comes for free when adding batteries. Every battery added improves power capacity. Not so with hydrogen. You need to add both hydrogen and more fuel cells to get more power. That’s why BEVs is also doing well for racing cars and hyper cars (see pikes peak race for instance)

In places where volume and power isn’t important, hydrogen could be promising. Trucks and ships are obvious candidates.
WeatherSpark is my favorite platform for this question. Lots of data and look-a-like places. Highly recommended.

https://www.weatherspark.com/
Youtube can do whatever you want with your content, pretty much.

Here is the relevant parts of the Standard Youtube License:

> By providing Content to the Service, you grant to YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicensable and transferable license to use that Content (including to reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works, display and perform it) in connection with the Service and YouTube’s (and its successors' and Affiliates') business, including for the purpose of promoting and redistributing part or all of the Service.

> You also grant each other user of the Service a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to access your Content through the Service, and to use that Content, including to reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works, display, and perform it, only as enabled by a feature of the Service (such as video playback or embeds). For clarity, this license does not grant any rights or permissions for a user to make use of your Content independent of the Service.

This license pretty clearly gives Youtube the ability to show ads on your video and give the revenue to whomever they want. Further, if the interface to claim copyright of your video is part of Youtube (and not a DMCA claim), you give the copyright trolls a license to do that (they are after all using your video through the Youtube interface). You have no standing to sue the moment that you grant Youtube a license to do whatever they want with your work.
"Right to work" laws force unions to represent workers who are not union members.

The truth is that no one is forcing you to work a union job.
I can relate. I’m very introverted in that I need a lot of time alone to be in my head (the lockdowns this past year were a cakewalk). But I’m not shy at all. I love talking to strangers and have very low anxiety when it comes to public speaking.
This is the FSF that put Richard Stallman back on the board? No thanks.
"I say potato, you say starchy nightshade tuber"
Oh look, its the hiring manager at Activision! Good job confusing equality for equity. A decent manager could easily achieve gender equity with a "25:1" ratio. Unfortunately it seems that might be beyond your capacity as a sub par hiring manager
I have a pretty deep background in patents, but not much in copyright. So I find it interesting that you can get a copyright on "typing on my keyboard."

Unlike a patent, which can be pretty broad, a copyright is only THAT expression of an idea, not every possible expression. So I would think your copyright only covers typing on your keyboard, not any keyboard. Or maybe, the exact rhythmic sequence of key presses you did, not any sequence.

But how that is enforced -- I have no idea. I can easily believe that YouTube's automated copyright checker doesn't do a good job with that.

If you went to court and sued someone for violating your copyright, you would lose (unless they used your keyboard and/or did the same rhythmic pattern). But probably YT doesn't know that.
> it's easier for more people to raise a lot of money for risky endeavors.

Is it easier to raise money for risky endeavors or for "hot" endeavors. I'm not sure this no structure to how a lot of people are now allocating capital is actually contributing anything positive, just pure malinvestment.

AMC is a perfect example. It's a company that raised hundreds of millions at valuations 10x of what it had months ago. Is AMC a "risky investment" we should be allocating capital too? Box office receipts and still down 50% and may never fully recover. Why is AMC a good use of that capital rather than institutions that can replace it completely?