skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Here's my hot take: as long as voting is not mandatory (with the ability to go to a poll and officially "abstain") all democracies will eventually spoil. The incentive to manipulate with voter suppression is just too high. Look no further than the United States if you're from there.

A third party simply accelerates this by fracturing the already abysmal electorate. However mandatory voting isn't sufficient. The abolition of FPTP (winner takes all) is also necessary. Inequality (and not necessarily just income) is only accelerating the flaws in anything other than pure-democracy.

TLDR: true democracy will never exist without something like mandatory score/range/star/etc voting. yeah I know the USA isn't a pure democracy. perhaps that's the issue.
I didn't want to editorialize the original title, but to add to it:

1) The insult used was "pimmel", german for "dick".

2) According to netzpolitik.org,
the offender was summoned by the police before that, did show up, and did confirm there that it was his account. https://netzpolitik.org/2021/andy-grote-was-fuer-eine-pimmel... [german]
Amazon to cover 100% of college tuition for U.S. hourly employees
Why are you mentioning Bausch and Lomb? RayBan is a brand from the Italian conglomerate Luxxotica
The incompleteness theorem can be proved in a few lines given the right definitions up front. It's basically the same as the undecidability of the halting problem, which has a proof that is written as a poem: https://introcs.cs.princeton.edu/java/54computability/haltin...

There is a wonderful book by Torkel Franzén about the incompleteness theorem that is 100+ pages, but it is not purely about the proof. It's a popularization that discusses bogus ways philosophers have interpreted the theorem, and stuff like that. It is called "Gödel's Theorem: An Incomplete Guide to its Use and Abuse".

Meanwhile Aschbacher and Smith's proof of the classification of quasithin groups really is a book of 1200+ pages: https://books.google.com/books?id=SbO2irSQHMEC

And of course the proof of the classification of finite simple groups has afaik never been published all in one place, though there are some book-length expositions of it referring back to the original papers. It is a set of papers spanning around 20 years and adding up to around 10,000 pages. It is sometimes called "the enormous theorem": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enormous_theorem
Well, I don't know how to put it into strings.xml specifically, but there are localisation systems that handle it without much fuss. It requires a bit more effort from developers and translators, but it's not that hard in concept.

For example, Fluent (https://projectfluent.org/, used by Firefox), or MediaWiki's localisation system (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Localisation#Message_paramete...).
Fair - perhaps because all opposing voices have been disappeared… it is after all one party.
As far as I know that is still the case with Yang's UBI, which is why I brought it up in my original post.

"The most important part of Mr. Yang’s 2020 guaranteed income plan was not the size of the checks but how he intended to pay for them. He promised to fund the program by implementing some new tax policies and “consolidating some welfare programs.” Anyone who wanted in would first have to make a choice: continue to get the bulk of the direct government benefits they currently received, or forfeit them and instead get $1,000 a month. Other than Social Security retirement, disability benefits (and potentially some other credits), no one could get both a Freedom Dividend and government assistance."

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/16/opinion/andrew-yang-ubi-n...
I guess it's like having income, a mortgage and spending over your income but borrowing against your increased house valuation. If the price of housing keeps going up, you can keep on borrowing, if it goes down you default --just as many a country has had to do.
Because Apple is legally required to remove the rule they violated.
Is Palantir the new Cyberdyne? .... and Foundry is Skynet?
Then first, remove the dependencies, there are places that you can start manufacturing stuff cheaper than China, and without the risk of Chinese stealing the IP.

It is not a UK/EU issue. At the end of the day CCP think itself as a rising power and will want to expand its power to anywhere on earth. The belt and road initiative is basically modern day colonisation, instead of taking over a whole country or city, Sri Lanka lost a port for 99 years. [1]

1: https://www.ft.com/content/e150ef0c-de37-11e7-a8a4-0a1e63a52...
I think the choice is between willingness to commit violence and willingness to accept violence being committed against you.
> The Federal Reserve can, but the government cannot.

however every crisis for which the government feels it needs to print money it asks the federal reserve which appears to usually oblige them

their seperation to me seems just like some kind of circuit breaking control, but generally they will align to print money when they want, unless im missing something?
Java apps weren't an alternative? Wasn't the initial promise of Java in the late 90s to write once and run anywhere? Not applets but the desktop applications using Swing or AWT.
Does anyone have specific details on if the Korea law[0], which Epic is using as a basis for this request[1], has the ability to make apple reinstate Epic's account? Since the ban happened long before this law was even proposed, it wouldn't seem like the law would be retroactive.

0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28366063

1: https://twitter.com/FortniteGame/status/1436105346184056832
The flu shot is not mandatory, nor should it be. Partly becase low effectiveness, partly because it's sensitive to mutations, partly because the risk of complications, while not zero, is relatively low.

Polio vaccine is a bit of an outlier. 3 doses give 99% effectiveness.

MMR 2 doses is 97% effective against measles and 88% against mumps.

The jury is still out on how effective mRNA is against covid delta, studies are all over the place, 42% to 96% for Pfizer. A lot of people are concerned that mutations evading the vaccine are likely to occur, including Pfizer CEO.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/polio/hcp/effectiveness-dur...

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mmr/public/index.html

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/heres-how-well-covid-...
Really? Of all the countries in the world, Korea is probably the most fanatical about gaming, and the payoff for getting Fortnite into the Apple Store would be considerable.
In my experience leisure time is absolutely wonderful. Just puttering about, reading, gardening, and maybe some hobby coding, to name just a few things, without anyone else telling you what to do, is fantastic. There is great truth in Twain's observation that "Work consists of whatever a body is obliged to do, and that Play consists of whatever a body is not obliged to do."
What I’m saying is that if you create a bank and I make a $1m deposit [0] your bank has

Liabilities : deposit $1m
Assets : reserves $1m

Now you can lend $900k to someone, who takes the money and tranfers it to someone else’s account in another bank to buy bitcoins or whatever. Your bank has now

Liabilities : deposit $1m
Assets : reserves $100k, loan $900k

And you cannot make more loans until you increase your reserves which means getting new deposits (so we’re no longer talking about a bank with $1m in deposits).

Say you get an additional million in deposits, your bank has now

Liabilities : deposits $2m
Assets : reserves $1.1m, loan $900k

And it could lend and additional $900k.

Alternatively, it could get funding from another source like borrowing from banks of issuing bonds. For example

Liabilities : deposit $1m, bond $1m
Assets : reserves $1.1m, loan $900k

I don’t think any of this is controversial, let alone wrong. By the way, for simplicity in those balanced sheets the “reserves” is all the funding available which has not been lent, not just the required reserves ($100k for $1m in deposits, etc.)

> If the banking system as a whole is leveraged 9:1, that implies each individual bank is leveraged approximately 9:1.

One of the main points of the paper under discussion is that this doesn’t happen. Reserves are not a binding constraint on lending.

[0] I don’t know if it makes much sense to talk about whether it is “actual cash”. Maybe my employer took a loan to pay me, maybe not. Maybe it was in cash, maybe by cheque, maybe by bank transfer. Would that change anything?
> It appears to be something that the author completely made up in order to support his revisionist interpretation of the history of ancient Sparta.

The author addresses this VERY directly and at length in a "Conclusions: Who Matters?" section of one of the posts. For example (though the whole section is worth a read):

> All too often, I see students read the Greek contempt for the poor man, the non-citizen, or the slave with horror but then immediately turn around and replicate those patterns of thought in their own thinking about these societies (well of course the ‘mob’ cannot be trusted to rule – Thucydides and Xenophon said so – to which I am endlessly responding, ‘yes, but should you believe them?‘).

> Indeed, this credulous approach to the source tradition – accepting not only the facts they give, but also their guesses about what is to them the distant past and their judgments about the moral worth of a Sparta that probably never existed – is so common that it has had a name since the 1933, le mirage spartiate, coined by Francois Ollier. Rousseau and Jefferson had an excuse for their gullibility – we do not.

https://acoup.blog/2019/08/23/collections-this-isnt-sparta-p...
But it wasn’t the law then when they violated it.
> every single person in power got elected without ranked choice voting

Jared Golden would beg to differ:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_United_States_House_of_Re...
The article is completely wrong. The monoid operation is not array concatenation (wtf?) but the monad join operation.

Here is a correct explanation: https://stackoverflow.com/a/3870310
OK that makes sense as the intent. 'In lieu' means 'instead', not 'because', so I think it was incorrect usage that confused me.
>>The researchers also analyzed data from 13,639 working Americans who participated in the National Study

In my experience the act of working has dramatic impact on my perception of free time vs. when I have not been working. We tend to count hours and evaluate their "productiveness" when limited by work, vs. focus on overall outcomes and accomplishment when not. I doubt the latter would echo the feeling that too much free time is a bad thing I know I didn't.
CLDR should work

https://unicode-org.github.io/cldr-staging/charts/37/supplem...
Isn't it more like, no mutation?
Technological Progress – Our World in Data
> This sort of "category-stacking" where mappings between categories are treated as categories themselves where we can then further discuss another level of mapping between them, is the core of category theory.

I've started to call it "fractal math". Not to be interpreted as the mathematics of fractals, but rather as mathematics which is itself structured as a fractal (metaphorically speaking, of course).
> The precise terminology is vital; it's how we avoid these errors when talking about this very abstract stuff. Given that the OP is very wrong, precisely because of the kind of attitude you've taken here, I hope you'll take this opportunity to reconsider your views.

Your behavior is precisely the behavior that someone new to FP would see and say "Hard pass on that", which goes into the greater problem of FP being unapproachable to beginners because of the unnecessary gatekeeping. If you cannot communicate with a beginner in language they understand, A.) you don't really understand it either, B.) you're just pushing them away from whatever you're advocating.
Stitch Fix Stylists Are Unheard, Overworked, and at the Mercy of Robots
I don't like creative explanations. Definitions are easier.

A functor is a PAIR, please notice the emphasis, of a type constructor F and a map function with the following signature: a -> b -> f a -> f b.

Its not a type constructor, it's a pair of two things, the type constructor AND its map function.

Now that we said what it is we provide the usual simple example of Array, Record or Option, show the type constructors and show how we map them.

Is it really so hard to grasp starting from definitions rather than examples and contrived blogs?

I wish people understood that fp is much easier to understand by reading definitions.
Taiwan is thoroughly infiltrated by PRC intelligence, facilities for nuclear programs would be glassed before TW could develop any capabilities.

PRC fought with US / USSR while both were nuclear powers and China was not over much less important core interests than TW. Like there's currently 10s and eventually 100s of vunerable mainland coastal nuclear power plants that TW missiles can strike right now. TW has a lot of ability to fuck up PRC if they want to. Scope of TW actions/resistence will determine proportionality of destruction by PRC. Though ultimately there is nothing TW can do to deter PRC who has fought harder opponents with less means and more sacrifice.
Just today, Don Syme wrote up thorough explanation on why he won't be adding type classes and more higher-order-types (or whatever the correct term is) to F#. As someone learning F# and starting to use it in production, I love it because it shows that there is a focus on practical FP even at the very top of the community. https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues/243#issu...
As a counter, I could imagine this to be alarming if hypothetically US is openly interested in invading Mexico who is allied with China. China then decides to place nuclear arsenal near Mexico city to defend it. This would be far less alarming than China initiating placement of nukes in Mexico without any intention from US to invade Mexico.

The subtle difference is offense vs. defense. If China openly agrees with the world to never invade Taiwan, US placing nukes in Taiwan would be unacceptable. But that is not the reality here.
How is it going for the Nylas Email Client? Does it still exist?

Also very importantly: Are users paying premium for the Nylas Electron Qwality, or is it cheaper to just use Office 365/AWS/Google?
I think the point that you are missing is that some people -- especially rich people -- just will not spend money they don't have to. Why would they sell off some of that stock every year to pay taxes if they don't have to? Certainly if there are loopholes that allow them to legally avoid paying, but I guess some people also believe (and so far are correct) that they can get away with outright tax evasion. And I expect many of these people are also of the opinion that the government overspends and wastes what they'd give them.

I'm not saying it's right, or altruistic, or anything, just that it's unsurprising and not that hard to understand.

> I'm not sure how old you are, but there was a time before Amazon. It worked pretty well.

Not the person you're replying to, but I'm old also enough to remember having to physically go to stores to buy things, and all those other things you mention. It was annoying. Today I can tap around for 5 minutes on my phone, and then two days later a delivery service drops a box at my door. Why would I want to spend an hour or more driving to a store, wander around, hopefully find what I want, wait in line for a cashier, lug my stuff to the car, and drive home?

Sure, the old way worked fine, more or less, but the new way is such a much better experience in nearly every way. The main two ways it isn't is if it's something I really need same-day, or if it's something I really want to be able to see/try before I buy. Which you'd think would be more often than it actually is; in practice it's pretty rare.
Pretty sure they'd nominate Jr if anything happened to Sr.
> would it pain you greatly to sell off some of that stock every year to pay taxes on your gains

I imagine it would be painful because you'd lose control of the company. If someone founds a great company, why should the taxman take it away? And why should we expect the new owner to be any better?

As to whether Amazon provides something millions of people want, the facts speak for themselves. People choose to shop at Amazon, despite all its problems, instead of a brick and mortar store or another website. No one forces them.

I'm not a big fan of Amazon myself, but whether you (or I) think Amazon is good is irrelevant. Millions of people love it.
NFT's represent a rather beautiful but whacky idea: that money supply is controlled by the critical reception of new artwork. Not the opinion of the snobby art world, but a completely democratic market for art populi - where the aesthetic leans meme - think less MOMA and more favorite contestant on American Idol.

This means NFT's have the ability of dynamically change the money supply based on the prevaliling Keynsian animal spirits across society, versus bitcoins pre-determined money supply schedule. This is a novel feature to the crypto ecosystem: in a way it's moving the activity of mining for block rewards from a robotic and silicon-based process into a creative human process of mining for memetic uptake.

Another interesting opportunity is for patronage to sponsor our society's artists. Just like Florentine status competitions of religious paintings supported Da Vinci's works, our crypto merchants could be supporting the man who will still be going viral five hundred years later. Let me know if you find him.
> I'd also wager that there'll be much less domestic support for sending hundreds of thousands of Americans to die over Taiwan than there was as a response to Pearl Harbor.

The US was interfering in Japan's affairs (particularly hampering access to oil) in the lead up to late 1941, even though support for either war was in the low 60%s prior to Pearl Harbor (amazingly as low as 7% when the Netherlands, Belgium, and France were invaded).[0] The US government, in some respects, forced the Japanese's hands in a stretched gamble by attacking it first. In a hypothetical confrontation, given the historical support US (among others) have shown Taiwan, even the existing interference alone could force China's hands to take some action that causes a drastic increase in domestic support.

In other words, my wager is that you're probably correct, but the probability of a forced action after some aggression has taken place, which subsequently causes an increase of domestic support would be more likely to occur.

[0] https://exhibitions.ushmm.org/americans-and-the-holocaust/us...
> The US government cannot (legally) print whatever they need

Yes, it can.

> The Federal Reserve can, but the government cannot

The decision-making part of the federal reserve (the Board of Governors) is:

1. An executive branch agency, independent within the government, the same as (e.g.) the FCC, and

2. Has all of its authority delegated from Congress from Congress’ Constitutional powers via statute.

Anything it can legally do is a subset of what the government can legally do, which can be recalled and reassigned to other parts of the Government, or exercised directly, by Congress at will.
A couple of interesting posts from Software Freedom Conservancy make it clear that what Tivo did (breaking proprietary software when reinstalling Linux) is allowed, even by the GPLv3 and that allowing reinstall of libre software is a requirement of the GPLv2 license.

https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-t...
https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/
https://events19.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017...
But a psycological cause wouldnt result in the damage found on the victims, right?

Didn't one doctor who examined some of these people describe damage that looked like "a concussion without a concussion"? I.e. damage to the brain you'd see on people who had conxussions, but they experienced no physical trauma?
You can add up the mass of one up quark (2.2MeV) and two down quarks (4.7MeV each) and compare that to the mass of a neutron (939.565MeV)
The Future Shape of Ruby Objects
I'm afraid you're right about the GOP and it scares me. If Trump had been a better technocrat, I think it would have been very difficult to unseat him in 2020 and he could have brought the US in a very conservative, adversarial direction by effectively implementing his policies.
The state is not a private entity and so what limits a private entity’s criminality need not have the same impact on the state. One can borrow with full faith and credit. These restrictions you have synthesized have no impact on the state. The state is the will of the people and only the voters can stop this activity. Remember when the state does it, it’s not really crime from the perspective of the state itself, just something you disagree with. This is why checks and balances exist and matter and also have nothing to do with monetary policy.
The article asks: "What's a Monoid".

The next header is: What's in a Monoid.

If you are going to toss funky sounding words around then please get the basics right.

A thing and what's in a thing are rather different things.
Engineering aspects aside, I couldn't get past the "welcome screen" => "collect phone number" => "validate phone number" flow. Surely I'm a dinosaur when I expect some sort of value before I give you my personal information. I guess this is what disqualifies me from particiapating!
The categorical definition of a monoid is different than the usual algebraic one (although one can be recovered from the other) and usually treats a monoid as a single object (hence "mono-").

In particular, usually a monoid is defined as a single object category (sometimes a "monoid object" is defined inside a category, but that's a different presentation). The usual multiple objects of an algebraic monoid correspond to different arrows/morphisms within a monoid.

So for example, while the usual algebraic presentation of a monoid would say the integers form a monoid with an identity element `zero` and normal integer addition forming the monoidal operator, the categorical definition says instead that the monoid is the category that consists of only one element Unit and the morphisms (x => x + 0), (x => x + 1), (x => x + 2), etc. We have an identity morphism (x => x + 0), which when composed with any other morphism does not change it (x => x + 2 composed with x => x + 0 still is just x => x + 2). This is a common pattern in category theory: everything is reduced to composition.

So that's a categorical monoid, just a single object with a lot of morphisms and an identity morphism. We can back out the usual algebraic definition by associating with each morphism the "element within" (i.e. associating (x => x + c) with c), but it represents a different way of thinking.

We can also talk about a monoid object in a larger category in much the same way.

Hence now that we can talk of a monoid as a single object, we can then say that an endofunctor is a monoid (given the proper mappings on an endofunctor, i.e. natural transformations).
> Sync for me was super stable for Palm, but one thing that really hurt Apple was that they more or less IGNORED the desktop.

Apple definitely ignored the desktop with the Newton. At the same time I think that just reflects different philosophies between Apple and Palm with respect to PDAs. Apple saw the Newton as it's own device while Palm saw it as a loosely tethered satellite device.

This difference I think contributed to Palm's success over the Newton. The Palm's more limited scope allowed it to be much smaller and cheaper than the MessagePads and (as you point out) required it's desktop integration to be much better.

Had WiFi been available (802.11b spec, not the pre-spec versions) by the time the MP2000 came out it might have been able to survive as it's own non-desktop platform. The necessity of wired connections and the lack of good desktop sync was a huge drawback for Newts. With the Network Connection Kit they had cool networking capabilities.
How many psycogenic illnesses are known to cause physical damage?