skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> a single person found something that persistently reduced TCO by 0.5%, that would pay for the team in perpetuity,

There are several problems with this line of thinking, although as I will mention, it's not actually crazy, just problematic.

Attribution is one, how will you know if the team actually did do something that increased profits? There are many teams are involved in a business. It's not at all simple to say he-did-this-and-she-did-that. In fact much of office politics is exactly that, pie-cutting.

You also don't know whether a non-specialist might have figured out the problem. There's a lot of smart people at Twitter, right? Surely some of them work in adjacent areas and have occasional time to look at other things? If a non-specialist might have solved it, what else might he have solved? Couldn't he also collect 0.5% slices of profit for the company?

How do big businesses ever lose money? They must have a load of specialists, right? And some of those will during any period be doing that thing that makes them pay for themselves in perpetuity? The big danger is you justify every expenditure this way, "they just need to find one thing". Security says they stopped a cyberattack that would have shut down the company for two days, kernel says they reduced runtime by 0.5%, sales claims to have raised prices by 0.5%. In the end there's a fair chance that all the claimed gains don't add up to your bottom line.

I remember as a quant trader we could buy any book we wanted. Programming, Linear Algebra, finance, whatever. "If you find just one good idea, that will pay for all the books." Hard to argue with considering the sums involved, but it's also hard to know exactly what ideas we got out of the books.

Finally, if someone claims to be making you money, they will also claim the money. Especially if it's clearly agreed (Yep AWS cost is lower by 0.5% exclusively because of a kernel team action). So them saving 0.5% won't necessarily mean the company gets that extra profit. They may feel they deserve a raise, or new headcount to spread the work. Or you will decide not to pay them and they will leave.
Google does this (each employee can nominate 3 people for $250 each per round of funding. Recipients are limited to $500/year due to tax) [0]

[0] https://opensource.google/docs/growing/peer-bonus/
That would actually be pretty interesting as art, I think.
Why using small amounts of blood important?

Are there some tests that need extremely large amounts of blood that the patient cannot provide? Or is the point to improve the patient's experience?

When I give blood for testing, there is no difference in my experience as a patient, however many vials are taken, it just takes a bit longer. What am I missing?
To answer your question, the firearms are needed for protection from both wildlife and people, but much more so people. It's useful to have a rifle to put down a cow that's been hit by a vehicle and/or broken a leg or something.

However, I live in an area where stumbling upon foreign cartel marijuana grows is relatively common. They are known to aggressively defend them with firearms which are not legal to own in the jurisdiction they're in. It's also not uncommon for a truck full of guys intent on committing armed robbery to roll up onto a client's property.

An AR-15 would be an ideal defensive weapon for that use-case.
</That's The Joke>
Use whatever gets your product out the door.

Performance, for the most part, can come later. Good enough is good enough.
> The crazy thing about Theranos is that so many people with experience in microfluidics (developed mainly for DNA sequencing although there are other uses) knew that their claims were impossible, technologically speaking.

I'd push back on this a bit - not because it's wrong in the case of Theranos, but because it's often wrong in the general case. A lot of the time 'industry experts' go on about how some new approach is impossible for X reason and they're often wrong.

Tesla is a good example of this (some people are still saying EVs can't work even today).

You really have to get in the weeds yourself to understand whether something is possible or not rather than deferring to others most of the time. I do agree though that her investors didn't do that.

She was also able to get famous people invested and on her board which I think compounded things.
In my experience, Facebook comment threads (while still awful at times) are very different from e.g. YouTube or Tumbler or Twitter comments. Sure they still devolve and become a mess sometimes, but from what I remember there was noticeably less "hard" trolling (i.e. 4chan style derogatory) on Facebook. People still light troll Facebook but not so much in the explicitly derogatory and assholish ways done in communities where expendable identities exist. In any event, because people use real IDs on Facebook, we can and do impose consequences. Remember when everybody used their first name middle name so jobs wouldn't see their underage party pics with substance use?... And then when everyones parents and grandparents joined people just stopped posting that stuff altogether and facebook "grew up".
Congrats Spenser & team!

I hadn't realised that you pivoted a couple of times before starting Amplitude. Do you have any advice for powering through in the early days and evaluating startup ideas to get beyond the dreaded 0 to 1 stage?
To Cut Inequality, Face Hard Choices
Further, as much as cannabis advocates may try and argue against it, there's much more chance of having a scary or frightening experience getting high than there is from alcohol. In my experience, even a small amount of weed can trigger severe anxiety attacks in usually healthy people. It is more volatile for sure
"...totalitarianism behind vaccine passports..."

Problem: An ongoing pandemic, requiring greater or lesser levels of isolation.

Solution: A vaccine. Vaccinated individuals are much less likely to suffer the ill effects of the disease and to transmit the disease. Isolation is no longer necessary.

Problem: Large portions of the population refuse to take the vaccine. Isolation is still required for this portion.

Solution: Allow those who have been vaccinated freedom from isolation.

Problem: TOTALITARIANISM!
I'm honestly very surprised there's no mention of banksy's shredder stunt in the piece. I would have thought an artist would somehow try to portray themselves as being as cool as banksy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXKE0nAMmg4
Agree with your criticisms but his points on herd immunity are pretty good. If you want a more scientific dive into it this Alberta neurosurgen did a pretty good analysis on some of the same aspects, all referenced:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/not-justified-canadian-...
Utility-Scale Solar, 2021 Edition [pdf]
How's the per seat pricing working out for you? I'd see a lot of people just using a shared login for this.
> This is certainly not novel.

Which other artist has done it?
Yeah safari reminds me of my struggles with IE6 issues in 2004, since they can't control the web they go and cripple their browser.
No.

First they ran in simulation, not the real market. It may be that that act of being in the market changes the market enough to make your strategy work. (though typically it is the opposite - things work in simulation but applying them to the market makes them not work). As such this paper doesn't really tell us anything useful.

Even if we ignore the above, they only tested a few different strategies. That says nothing about any other trading strategy that someone might apply: any of them might work.

I still think day trading is a bad way to invest, but this paper doesn't prove anything even though it speaks to my bias.
Well he has said that he won't return them at the deadline. But I guess he has to say that for now.
> events can get lost,

Well, yes, but QoS=1 or 2 with a reasonably large queue I haven't seen loss issues.

What kind of loss problems are you running into (that I should be worried about)?
> do you beleive[sic] that suppressing freedom of speech

wildly wrong take on what the first amendment means....
It's funny how people seem to be far more wary of their cells being subjected to a controlled dose of a carefully selected strand of mRNA than they are wary of their cells being subjected to a much larger bundle of mRNA that happens to include some variation of that carefully selected strand amongst many other things that together turn the cell into a weapon producing more copies of itself, and that will eventually kill every carrier whose immune system does not come up with a countermeasure fast enough. If the mRNA vaccine that contains a tiny subset of the virus is scary, how can the full version not be far more scary?
What kind of medical professionals?
Of course they can, because they do. What are you really trying to say? Is it that you believe no other moral authority should exist besides the law?
Awesome. That means more than any tech specs to me.

Wait a sec, are you on HN via Simula right now?
Philosophy of Progress with Jason Crawford [Idea Machines #40]
Provide a better education for the poor. I don’t mean education about a particular subject; better education in general.

In almost all conspiracy theories, one side has a lot of facts, the other has a lot of “feelings”. If you try having a conversation with someone who believes in some conspiracy you’ll eventually get to “I just don’t feel…”
- jareklupinski
You sell it as quality. Think of ordering the quick paperback printing with black and white photos vs getting the full quality hardbound with a glossy photo folio in the middle. Premiumification vs free to read. It is also egalitarian as users aren't paywalled, get access to the content and only pay if they want to use the extra bandwidth.
Depends on your outlook towards intellectual property
That sounds like it solves part of the sync problem, but not conflict resolution or offline business rules in a general way.
I initially read that as "Beer Bonus Program"
This beats the con artistry of NFT scams any day.
>I also find it frustrating that some armchair psychologists have decided that people like me with more nuanced views simply want to repress and censor things that we disagree with which is not what it's about at all.

Well, you've got to draw the line somewhere, right? /s

But seriously, I think one can be a free speech advocate without being a free speech absolutist, and believe that we are heading in the wrong direction. In fact I think it's wrong to think of 'where to draw the line' at all, because what is acceptable discourse is not, and should not, be thought of as static.

I think a much better question is how 'the line' is shifting, as the amount of things we can't talk about is both a lagging indicator of institutional health (because being able to have uncomfortable conversations is a sign of emotional maturity), and a leading one (because public discourse is necessary to solving problems we don't understand or would rather not acknowledge).
I understand that SpaceX ephemerides they publish are more accurate than the typical two-line element set. But the TLEs using the SGP4 propagator typically have errors on the order of 10s to 100s of meters [0] (and more, the further you are from the ephemeris time). Is the estimation really enough to get to down to the meter or sub-meter accuracy? Is that why it really requires 8+ satellites to get a good fix, i.e. it takes that many measurements to reduce your variance and GDOP?

[0] https://conference.sdo.esoc.esa.int/proceedings/sdc6/paper/4...
Do they raise cattle / own farms like most of my clients? I don't know how you'd get by without one for that use case.
The act of violating the contract (w/ the museum) itself is the art-work here.

On another side, I think this is quite a good deal for the museum. This story is pretty popular on the internet in many countries, and $84k sounds pretty cheap for an international ad campaign. Plus, the artist is still delivering a kind of modern art.
can't wait to see more work coming from this brave new branch of 'con art' :^)
When you work for fascist regime, don't be surprised being swallowed by it one nice morning.
On average, but prices come from the value of the company behind them long term which is not always brownian and so someone who knows the company can get in/out ahead of someone who trusts only brownian motion.
Technical analysis sort of "works" in the same way that e.g. astrology "works", in that for any given plot of stock data, you can typically draw a of a number of technical patterns which seem to fit. I've never seen any convincing evidence to the contrary.

But one thing is for sure, if technical analysis works then a neural net will trivially pick up on existing strategies and although the cutting edge is always kept secret in the financial world, we probably would have heard of ML techniques rediscovering technical analysis by now if it were truly successful, since even an amateur could build and train a neural net from free data to learn technical analysis.

P.S. if simple technical analysis techniques ever worked, I also predict that they would quickly stop working as such arbitrages eventually disappear. You're not trading against news or patterns, ultimately, whether traders realize it or not, they are trading against mass financial psychology and HFT algos. Once neural net based training becomes the predominant tool, it will be interesting to see the collective patterns that emerge, likely totally disconnected from actual fundamentals. It may be chaotic, or it may be close to steady state, but it will definitely be in a state of flux as neural nets come online and constantly train on the latest patterns. It's a battle against the arrow of time.
Dollar Tree breaks the $1 barrier as costs take a bite
Open Source Quadruped Robot Kickstarter
I imagine there would be as much similarity between the AI symphony and Beethoven's one as there is between Beethoven's other symphonies, which isn't that much. The human mind just has so many more inputs besides previous work to influence its output. Beethoven's whole life experience factored into the Ninth's creation.

That's not to say we shouldn't try it out.
> How many rich people, active in the stock market, got caught by surprise by 1929?

When I wrote "elites", I wasn't talking about "rich people" in the common sense. I doubt many elites were surprise considering the 1929 crash happened because the elites decided to start ww2 - japanese invasion of manchuria in 1931.

> How many rich people, active in real estate, got caught by surprise by 2008?

Once again, I'm talking about elites. Not bernie madoff.

> You say "causing it". They may be, but I suspect most of them aren't actively, deliberately causing it.

Of course they are. The masses don't decide when to go to war, when to upset the global world order, etc. It's the elites.

> So they can still be (and are) caught by surprise when it happens.

Absolutely. When the catalyst is external to the system or they are the elites who are left out of the loop ( aka when on group of elites decides to turn against another group of elites ). Unless you think the man-made and controlled system is an organic and natural system.

Shocks to a man-made system can result from natural disasters or it can result from the elites themselves. In the former, it most likely will be shocked to the elites. As for the latter, it won't except for the out-of-the-loop elites.
There are at least four people close to me who become more entrenched in their anti-vax stance the more this stuff happens.

It's so obvious to me how counter-productive these measures are. However I don't suppose increasing vaccination rates are part of the goal of these measures, but just protecting YouTube from having to do moderation or take responsibility for the content on their platform.

My mom for example, after many conversations and a great deal of effort on my part to present data and evidence that was free from shaming and judgement, has made two appointments to get vaccinated, and subsequently cancelled them. The second cancellation came after Biden's recent speech blaming unvaccinated people being directly responsible for killing the vaccinated, a nonsensical supposition.

This is scary stuff. The moral absolutism that the platforms endorse is creeping into more and more subjective areas, and essentially obliterating any hope of nuance or increased understanding about changing strategies and data.
Can You See Me Now? A measurement study of Zoom, Webex, and Meet
I think for some people, the root of the behavior is addiction.

A relative of mine was told by their trusted doctor that they have to quit smoking, or else it would kill him.

My relative expressed the idea that he'd rather lose a day of his life (possibly longer) for each cigarette he smoked than have to give it up.

He was addicted. He couldn't kick the habit. And I have never smoked a thing because of that, either out of fear for me getting addicted myself, or just as a lesson learned that it's a lot easier to avoid the addiction than fight it once it's latched onto you.
The fact that it is back up is even worse. If the take down was correct, why bring it back? If the take down was wrong, where was the initial oversight? It's all so arbitrary.

The back and forth is what really reinforces that nobody knows what they're doing and content creators are really just at the whim of tech giants. Trying to come up with and impose policy on what humans produce is hard for the justice system, with it's multiple levels of courts and lawmakers and hundreds of years of jurisprudence. What hope does one company have.
The thing that blew my mind was React gave a decent abstraction for externally set values vs internally managed values in props/state. And then the community immediately declared State as evil, and boiled the ocean to replace it.

All UIs need state. Yes state is bad in most cases and makes programming harder. No abstracting it into 4 different files doesn't make it any clearer.

There was an issue with composition in React. HOC didn't scale very well, and Inheritance is almost always Bad (TM). That said, I do think hooks were an esoteric choice versus a more explicit service registration/DI pattern.
np, i'm in the space myself and am actively exploring vendors :) tbh there's not much in this space rn that's not a deep integration, so unless you're looking for it, the material can be a bit opaque
Art if you attach the context
I've recently transitioned my home "IOT" network (and servers) to a Wireguard-only network. It's wonderful. All the routing accessibility through firewalls or with dynamic IPs just disappeared. All services are exposed only on the wireguard interface, meaning security and connectivity are solved (to the 80/20 level) with just Wireguard.

That kind of removed the need for a static broker entirely since now every node has a static IP on my wireguard network and are accessible no matter what network they are actually on. Pinging my mobile phone from an air quality sensor was an eye-opening experience.
The science is evolving, and these differences from a year ago are proof of that. I don't think the vaccine makers were very proud to admit that their wonderdrug wasn't what it was promised to be, but that's the way it is. The only remaining choice for anti-vaxxers in the face of increasingly contagious variants is take the shot or risk death. Your call.
I can imagine there's a high correlation between the price increase and the fact that all that "stuff" is stuck.

https://am.jpmorgan.com/us/en/asset-management/institutional...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28687992
Well, a few days ago we had this article on HN...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28682582

(Tesla suing people for defamation over social media posts)
Age adjusted all-cause mortality between vaccinated and unvaccinated in England
.net is also my choice for this. Xamarin on mobile and hopefully blazor on web in the future. Kotlin is the other contender to keep an eye on in the future (Kotlin Native and Kotlin Multiplatform)
At least he had the decency not to leave his excrements [1] behind, claiming it to be an art object, like that other guy. So I guess it is not the worst example of contemporary art.

[1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artist%27s_Shit
Not quite nuclear launch codes....
There were also lone wolf mass shootings before the internet, so what does this prove?
>Reddit now will become the place that inspires mass shooters instead of 8chan

I can guarantee that there are plenty of evil doings on Reddit and Facebook.

One argument, and a more honest one, that people can make is that (a) social media is toxic and (b) it should be made illegal generally. Bingo bango, no mass shootings I guess.
wasn't tons of isis and taliban propaganda being posted on twitter long after they banned the orange man?
Hey, if you want to die, go for it. It's your freedom.
Points 1-3 make a lot sense to me.

What about 4. Impact on neck.?

Is there any risk of repetitive-stress neck injury from all the looking up and down?
These are so cringe, I love it.
When we say an elite high jumper or pole vaulter or gymnast is defying gravity, it's hyperbole. Here it's just nonsense.
It gave newspapers and magazines the ability to do exactly that, and some absolutely have. It's pretty easy to draw parallels between those and "content creators".
Be careful what you wish for https://opensea.io/collection/take-the-money-and-run
We can call it "art crime".
Have you read the conclusions of the study? Do they comport with events of the past 5 years? Not at all
I found an article that specifies phone models and explains why[1]. It's iPhone 11 and 12 because it requires a UWB/U1 chip. This thread (via Craig Federighi)[2] asserts UWB isn't the part that's used, but those phones have a newer Bluetooth chipset.

[1] https://beebom.com/how-find-lost-iphone-turned-off-erased/

[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/iOSBeta/comments/otcn02/iphone_rema...
Because of the way they are constructed, Randomized Control Trials will never show any benefit for any antiviral against COVID-19. Not Remdesivir, not Kaletra, not HCQ, and not Ivermectin. The reason for this is simple; for the patients that they have recruited for these studies, such as Oxford’s ludicrous RECOVERY study, the intervention is too late to have any positive effect.

The clinical course of COVID-19 is such that by the time most people seek medical attention for hypoxia, their viral load has already tapered off to almost nothing. If someone is about 10 days post-exposure and has already been symptomatic for five days, there is hardly any virus left in their bodies, only cellular damage and derangement that has initiated a hyperinflammatory response. It is from this group that the clinical trials for antivirals have recruited, pretty much exclusively.

In these trials, they give antivirals to severely ill patients who have no virus in their bodies, only a delayed hyperinflammatory response, and then absurdly claim that antivirals have no utility in treating or preventing COVID-19. These clinical trials do not recruit people who are pre-symptomatic. They do not test pre-exposure or post-exposure prophylaxis.

This is like using a defibrillator to shock only flatline, and then absurdly claiming that defibrillators have no medical utility whatsoever when the patients refuse to rise from the dead. The intervention is too late. These trials for antivirals show systematic, egregious selection bias. They are providing a treatment that is futile to the specific cohort they are enrolling.
How on earth is YouTube supposed to do that? They have no control over the however many thousands of public school systems exist in the United States, let alone education in the rest of the world.
I have used ZMQ for this with great success. The one-line python calls to send data between nodes are really nice.