skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You might be right. I would probably even agree with respect to certain decisions.

But I'm also doubtful of your and my armchair quarterbacking, especially when it's hard not to bring in a self-serving angle (as in, it would obviously be better to prioritize X, where X is something I really want). Mozilla does a lot of surveying of current and potential users, and evaluates things in terms of maintenance costs that might not immediately be obvious. I'll bet that neither of us would be able to accurately predict all of those findings.

Stories like "...but power users are who are going to drive adoption, so investing in them is clearly the right strategy even if they're a small component of current users!" are intuitively persuasive. But again, someone who has studied the situation extensively is going to know things that we won't. Off the top of my head: "power users" is an amorphous group (and "self-reported power users" only weakly overlaps with "users who depend on advanced features"); the range of things that cater to power users is vast and all over the place; security, privacy, and maintenance concerns are far larger than the "why can't you just..." crowd ever seems to realize. None of which mean power users are unimportant, just that the tradeoffs are not at all clear.

Again, I'm not saying you're wrong. (Well, except maybe about the anti-competitive bit. The time frames of any legal or governmental action on those grounds is far too long, and often far too sidesteppable. Those things are good for dead companies to eventually receive justice, and for the playing field to be leveled out for future companies. The ROI of $1 spent on chasing down the legal or regulatory rathole pales in comparison to $1 spent on development or marketing.)
I'm relatively new to Django (longtime Flask user), and what struck me about the Django ORM so far is that it seems much easier to write extremely low performance queries. I didn't really feel this way when using SQLAlchemy or peewee, but perhaps that's just my inexperience.
Edit: Not a lawyer, and what follows is intended to be more of outlining my understanding and trying to ask clarification on what I'm clearly missing. Sorry if it sounds a bit defensive. Just a very strange lawsuit, specifically in how the service was forced to shutdown instead of being allowed to continue to operate.

Isn't that a valid use of the non-profit status? That as long as the funding from donations was going towards that expansion only, it can still be considered a non-profit? Looking at the quick Wikipedia definition, that seems to be the case, if you consider Locast's mission is to provide retransmission of OTA broadcasts to all people in the US.

> "A second misconception is that nonprofit organizations may not make a profit. Although the goal of nonprofits isn't specifically to maximize profits, they still have to operate as a fiscally responsible business. They must manage their income (both grants and donations and income from services) and expenses so as to remain a fiscally viable entity. Nonprofits have the responsibility of focusing on being professional, financially responsible, replacing self-interest and profit motive with mission motive." [1]

PBS is also a non-profit, but PBS does something similar in that certain content is locked behind their "PBS Passport" subscription. If this ruling that requiring donations view without interruption, then PBS is also violating non-profit status based on your statement regarding "Locast chose not to operate like a non-profit." But Locast attempted to resolve that and remove the interruptions entirely, but was still required to completely shutdown and was given 0 chance to adjust... My understanding about hte reasoning for shutting down is that using collected funds, via any means, expansion across the US isn't allowed for some questionable reason under the section of the law Locast was using.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_organization#Managem...
I couldn't disagree with OP more about God being a person or AGI being a mirage, but just because a being not subject to the laws of the universe was able to create an intelligent entity within that universe does not necessarily mean that any inhabitants of that universe or natural forces within it are able to replicate that feat.

But I'm also guessing OP's meaning probably invokes a non-material source of intelligence, i.e. a soul, and that by "intelligence" they mean something more like "consciousness", something that experiences the world as opposed to an action-reaction construct like an algorithm or machine.
> 1. Nobody can promise to never sell. If you believe that you’re a fool. They held out longer than most.

I don't think this "nihilism-ish" view is healthy. Otherwise, you might as well just argue nobody can promise anything, and anyone who believes any promise is a fool.
Car2Go didn't work out because keeping their cars well-distributed throughout the city was an impossible problem to solve. Because of the "park anywhere" feature they would all naturally cluster at a few hotspots very early in the day and stay there. A by-the-minute car service is pointless if I have to take a taxi to get to the car.
Air Force Platform One uses it.

It's hyperbole to say you can use it for the entire lifecycle. That might work fine for one-product monorepo shops, but Gitlab still doesn't scale well right now. Aside from basic issues like the runners not working well, the binary artifact repositories are way behind what something like Artifactory or Nexus offers. It's extremely annoying not having group and server scoped registry tokens except for the container registries. It makes it more difficult than it should be to publish modular libraries to be used elsewhere in your organization by other products. It's effectively unusable if you're working behind an air gap and trying to mirror public registries. The only way I can think to do it is creating a dummy projects with every kind of package registry enabled and push all of them into that one repo, but that won't work for things like Maven that have a notion of namespacing.

It can't really replace something like Jira, either (and in Platform One's case, it doesn't). You can only create an issue in a repo, but there is plenty of work organizations do and want to track and organize that can't be directly tied to a code change, let alone a code change in only one repo. So where do you raise an issue to track work not related to writing code or related to writing code but across multiple repos? I've seen people create dummy repos that serve no purpose except being a central place to put issues, but that is just working around the limitations. It's fine as a bug tracker, but not a general purpose work tracker and project management solution.
It sounds like you only skim read the first paragraph.

The article says they were thought to be 2000 years old but have recently been found to be 6000 years older than that. The second paragraph makes the new dating range explicit.
Seems like that last item is the thread to pull on--get the DOE to cough up some dough to help ensure that lab employees have reliable home access. If you dangle the promise of federal money you can probably get Santa Fe and Rio Arriba counties interested in the idea too. So now I'm thinking your manager needs political experience above anything else.
Yes. And I'm not young. I knew the original trilogy very well when the prequels came up.
What makes it more nature? From everything I've read and my own experience, it seems snap is leagues behind flatpak.
Not OP, but:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28566111

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28569366

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28568600

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28566108

All are actually pretty popular opinions, especially on HN. Personally I interpreted the original question to be asking for opinions contrary to prevailing HN sentiment.
This isn't a concrete software recommendation, but the DNS would lend itself exceptionally well to a distributed p2p resolver that would prevent most queries from hitting centralized servers in the first place - it's just a simple distributed database. You'd need some sort of multiparty trust metric to avoid tampering (or DNSSEC), but modulo that peers could just freely pass around records.

There would be a little more complexity these days with large companies changing answers based on the address of the requester, but that doesn't seem too hard to account for or even just ignore. And to reduce traffic even further, you could take some liberties with TTLs, for records that actually don't change often.
My friend told me - the recruiter even went on to say - if he shares info about equity grants - then it'd be called "Insider Trading" :-).
Timing of the CFO joining is interesting to me. From the S-1, Brian Robins joined GitLab in October 2020, so the desire to go public may have been there but an IPO is an enormous amount of work and I can imagine goes much better with an experienced CFO at the helm who has done it before. Therefore, "because of COVID" sounds like a contributing factor certainly, but may not be the whole story.
It seems like basic sanity checking on the proposed actions is not being done. Why not?

With safety systems you always want multiple levels of overlapping checks.
New Zealand is an example. Auckland has an outbreak right now and has relatively severe restrictions again, but the rest of the country has very few restrictions beyond mask use. My life would have been impacted far less had I been in Auckland instead of a big city in the US.
I love reading about self-driving cars and cryptocurrencies on HN. Suddenly, all the orders-of-magnitude improvements in efficiency/performance/scaling/production/integrity/etc. go out the window. Apparently they get replaced with conversations that devolve into how bad humans have been at the tasks that the fanboys are hoping get replaced by marginal-at-best tech.

E.g.,

git discussion on HN: of course we all know how git leverages merkel trees to make it workable to produce millions-of-line ambitious projects across timezones with people we've never even met before (much less are willing to fool around giving repo permissions to). But goddammit it takes more than five minutes to learn the feature branch flow. That's unacceptable!

self-driving car discussion on HN: I've seen plenty of human psychopaths nearly mow down a pedestrian at an intersection so how is software doing the same thing any worse?
You would never want to understand why this is better?

Here is a couple of reasons:
1. It is backed up by a statically typed, safe, elegant language that is like a strict teacher that tells you to fuck off when you make a mistake...
2. HMR is possible with this...
3. Look, WASM is not fighting against you, it is fighting for you... anyone who is targeting JS and is forced to do so is welcome to choose any other language you want...
This is super cool and the video explanation is very intuitive. Robotic manipulators seems like the obvious application; I wonder how the torque transmission compares to a more traditional arm design.
It's not "hard tech" per se. Rather it's companies that are (essentially) pre-revenue and/or pre-product.

E.g. Ginko did $100m in rev in 2021 and is at a 20B market cap.

Why would a company do this? Simple: Money. Spac sponsors "guarantee" a ~20B market cap. Investment bankers in a regular IPO might offer $4-5B (still 50x sales).

So what's the difference? Spac sponsors are willing to take "venture" style risk, and traditional IPO underwriters are not.
I've been both in-house and consultant to a variety of big corps in a variety of industries, and I can say that invariably every single one is messed up and inefficient.

Yet still somehow customers buy the products and (more often than not) the company delivers a product that is half working enough to be tolerated and used.
It requires closer inspection in this particular case, but losses are not always bad if they’re calculated. For example, if you spend $100 to bring in a customer that yields $200 in a year, it makes sense to “buy” as many customers as you can.

But is the company “default alive”, as I think Paul Graham calls it? That is, could they cut that spending tomorrow and actually have money coming in that more than covers the costs of keeping the lights on?
After I made the post I remembered they already do it. Brands can pay to sponsor existing videos that put them in a good light. These recomendations do have an [Ad] tag, but the extra views and impressions are allow to feed into the algorithm which then doesn't have to maintain the [Ad] tag going forward:

https://support.google.com/google-ads/thread/10007177/using-...
That does seem bad.

https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-and-bulletins/what-...

> If you invest in a SPAC at the IPO stage, you are relying on the management team that formed the SPAC, often referred to as the sponsor(s), as the SPAC looks to acquire or combine with an operating company. That acquisition or combination is known as the initial business combination. A SPAC may identify in its IPO prospectus a specific industry or business that it will target as it seeks to combine with an operating company, but it is not obligated to pursue a target in the identified industry.
They are a great company and could have gone traditional IPO. However, with going SPAC they were able to bring 2 billion dollars into a company with super high valuation. They make less than 50mil and we’re valued at 18 to 20 billion. So don’t buy in now, you will have plenty of chance to buy this great company

Edit: Also just to add on by bringing in that 2 Billion dollars they have essentially secured the future of the company for a long time
> Despite watching both videos on the linked page I can't actually find the footage of her but presumably she was drinking something before it was shot.

She is the one singing and dancing in the back center left of the video... Its kind of entirely centered on her...
But managed horribly. When .net cute would have made it a first class citizen and support for vs code being offered adequately it would have been a nice sorry especially nowadays with notebooks and web ides
That holds true for maybe one of the top fifteen best sellers: https://www.newsweek.com/15-best-selling-cars-us-2021-160697...

The Camry isn't #1 because people are trying to look cool.
Reminded me of the Colorado experiment
https://baye.com/colorado-experiment/
> France is an interesting example. I believe their wealth tax targeted more than just the super rich and it led to a heavy exodus of millionaires from France. Also by not having an exit tax, it was easy enough for people to leave France to avoid this.

It probably wouldn't work that way in the US, since it has an exit tax and it also taxes income globally regardless of where you currently reside (and I'd imagine any wealth tax would work similarly).
We had an enrichment program from 65 to 84, but only on a small scale. At a similar time we were also only a week or two away from having nuclear warheads.

As a nation the pivot to having nuclear weapons is quite straight forward. The technology and resources are available, and the infrastructure has been researched and applied at smaller scales in the past. We're also quite invested in hypersonic projectiles, so it wouldn't take a whole lot to arm a formidable arsenal, the highest cost being political capital.
In Rust, no clue because I've never tried. However, I did find a hot reload of WASM compiled from C++ [1]. If they're not equivalent, I would imagine it's a matter of ecosystem maturity rather than it being impossible.

Realistically, hot reload is going to be something like inotify(7) hooked into a compiler and whatever it takes to reload seamlessly. If it's been solved in one general purpose language, it's likely to be possible in another.

[1] https://visualstudiomagazine.com/articles/2021/07/29/cpp-hot...
'low quality' content is ostensibly demoted by this system, which was built on the biases of the developers themselves.

At the very least, YT should recognize that this metric is quite subjective, and given the vast scale of information out there, they simply cannot be the experts.

Sometimes I just dont want any magic, just give it to me.

If I like seeing 'flat earth' videos, then recommend the next best 'flat earth' video, just keep it simple?
The batteries really aren't that pricey. Most ebike have 100-200$ worth of cells and BMS electronics in them.

The batteries are sold at a massive markup.
Looks like the submitter is an anti-China news bot: https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=ktln2
1. If revealing their source code breaks security, then it's security by obscurity, which does not work.

2. Every similar law has exceptions concerning classified information.
Deep water subs require serious fixed reinforcement (like gigantic periodic rings) to prevent being crushed at low depths that would stop you from easily exposing the interior for unloading - but given that they're only going 50m deep I'm sure you could have some mechanism to pop the sub in half and get all the access you need. I feel like turbulence is sort of a solved problem by way of pallet packing - but that actually raises a larger concern of mine - the sub they display is pretty tube-shaped which means it's either not going to use pre-packed pallets (definitely the case if the image shown is to scale) or it's not going to use pre-packed pallets efficiently. Habours leverage pallets to minimize the manual labour needed for loading/unloading so while the ship might open like a sardine can it's not going to see a lot of use if someone needs to lift boxes out of it one at a time.
This link is displayed on the homepage from the button labeled "Subscriptions" and is part of the main site-wide hamburger menu. How is it people miss this feature? I have always used it as my main YouTube home page
I disagree with this characterisation.

Gitlab is losing money. They do need the capital.

While it's true sometimes shareholder interests can lead to the users getting screwed, that's a very short term and dangerous game to play. It's the equivalent of killing the Golden Goose. Companies that play that game may find themselves out of business in short order. They're opening opportunities for the competition.
> not other clear examples of fraud

My point is that I wouldn't blame Holmes if all she did was dupe rich investors. I read an article recently where the author believes that the jury might feel the same way. It is hard to sympathize with millionaires and billionaires complaining about losing a few million dollars.

The problem, again, and what is different in this case is that people could have died if they had acted upon fake tests results. I don't know if or why the prosecution did not consider that to be a separate crime. I guess it's like Capone. if you cannot get him for the murders, you get him for tax fraud. Read Bad Blood by John Carreyrou if you haven't.[1] It is a horror story.

Also, Pao conveniently ignores that Holmes's ex-boyfriend, Sunny Balwani, is also on trial for the same crime. And he is a man.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Blood:_Secrets_and_Lies_in...
I like the idea, but as a mariner who has ran into mysterious things in the sea i'm more ambiguous.

one of the major advantages of (most) ocean-going vessels, aside from usually having a crew aboard to negotiate with over VHF as to who goes where when trying to navigate around them , is that the above-water visibility aids in navigation and avoidance.

a future where trade channels are filled with AI-driven low-depth submarines that have no real crew aboard to communicate with sort of worries me, but all I can do is hope that the people who put them together and control them get it right -- otherwise it could turn a lot of trips dangerous.

for those that are in the business : is there an established method by which these unmanned ships that I keep reading about deal with VHF traffic of those around them? Perhaps the ship is receiving and sending back to some proxy site somewhere for a crew to communicate to nearby ships offsite?
Also, in Jenkins' defense, it's often nice to have a general purpose automation server. I never liked Jenkins, but I miss being able to create jobs that check the health of your deployments, report filesystem usage to user of your developer workstations, run very large-scale end to end integration tests independently from builds, update wikis and documentation automatically. There is plenty of automation that can happen outside of code CI that may not be related to code changes at all but is still useful.

Understanding of course Gitlab does have a notion of scheduled jobs that just run on a timer rather than being triggers by a changeset push, but that still isn't enough, and embedding shell scripts in yaml strings is a very poor substitute for Jenkins' Groovy DSL when there is any kind of complicated logic required by your jobs.
unless it goes from matter to something else (like two particles with oposite poles) when being cooked up inside the black that tries to get away from each other
> Genuinely curious: how would you even go about advancing autonomous driving without testing it in the streets?

The onus is on the company trying to do this to figure out a safe way.

They don't (should not) get to test in production with real innocent lives on the line just because they can't come up with a better answer.
Anyone who has to be the family IT person. Though it's a love-hate relationship. On the one hand, automatic updates (particularly security related ones) keep my family members' systems, well, up to date and secured. On the other hand, UI changes mean I have to go and update my own systems and figure out where that damned option or button moved to so I can help.

Since user interfaces (in particular) are not cleanly separated from the underlying system on personal devices, updates end up deploying both. I'd love for my family to get an updated browser or messaging client that only addresses issues around, say, the SSL implementation or HTTP or Unicode handling that specifically address security concerns. And then separate updates that alter the interface which become (somewhat) opt-in updates (though eventually they will be effectively mandatory). But that's not the reality of software development.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28569079

> 2. If you have set your history to expire after some amount of time, it will start re-recommending videos you've already seen once it has forgotten you have watched them.
I guess what would be useful is a "Visual Basic for the web". Back in the day, one could bring up pretty large applications quite quickly using Visual Basic and Delphi.
> Most of the “ultra-wealthy” have their wealth in the form of stock in public companies. This is certainly true for the examples she lists. If they’re all going to have to sell 2% of their holdings each year to pay for this wealth tax, who are they going to sell to and where is the money going to come from?

The stock market.

> It seems like this is a recipe to generate some temporary funding for the US government by selling off our national assets (e.g. ownership of major US companies) to foreign investors.

Without domestic ownership requirements, that will happen anyway, for instance: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/jeff-bezos-just-sold-nearl... ("Jeff Bezos has sold $6.7 billion in Amazon shares over the past week"). I reckon that's about 3% of his wealth.

And frankly, the wealthy have been expatriating US national assets for a long time, just not the paper financial ones. I don't see why we should be especially concerned with those, since what they mean is controlled entirely by US law.
SPACs are a great way to not have to hemorrhage IPO money to wall street bank cartels, and to lose billions w/ undervalued IPOs. I'm not sure what you're on about.
Same with the housing market. I cashed in this last month on my house and just going to wait out a correction. Totally not sustainable.
Security professionals.