skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> … half (okay a third) of the shares are reserved for employees and one of the results of employment is to become a shareholder.

So to become an employee you need to "buy in" to the company? Or is this your sign-on bonus? Can an employee divest themselves of their shares, or are they only a token shareholder with no ability to trade? Do new hires dilute their shares or does the company need to decide the maximum number of employees in advance?

This is an interesting structure but I don't think most employees would care for it very much, since it forces them to be invested in their employer rather than holding a safer diversified portfolio. I would certainly be opposed to requiring this structure as a matter of corporate law—I don't want to be a shareholder in my employer. I have that option already and I choose not to take it. If the company should happen to fail I don't want to lose my job and my life savings simultaneously.

> This results in a power balance between capital and labor (both of which are required for a successful business).

It would certainly change the power balance, by undermining the power of the shareholders to direct their own investments, which hardly seems "fair". I do not see this as an improvement, either as an investor or as an employee. The reason for the former is obvious, but even as an employee I want the shareholders to be free to handle their own domain, which is ensuring that my employer remains a profitable business capable of remaining in business and keeping those steady paychecks coming. People like to complain about undue focus on quarterly gains, but in practice my direct, financial interest in the company, and that of my coworkers, is very short-term; most obligations between us are settled within a few weeks, the longest (like accrued/borrowed paid time off) last a year or less. I can leave at any time and I don't have to worry about finding a willing replacement first. The shareholders, on the other hand, are invested in the long-term success of the company. Even if they don't personally hold the shares for long, they need someone else who believes that the company will be successful to buy their shares. So as an employee who prefers the certainty of a paycheck over the vagaries of investment returns, and would rather not to be looking for new employers on a frequent basis, I am happy to let the shareholders take responsibility for the company's long-term success and reap the corresponding rewards when they make the correct decisions. I do not want to interfere with their decisions, or to empower my coworkers without a shareholder's stake in the company's future to do so.
Honda Fit owner here as well, the car is great, but unfortunately it's being discontinued in a lot of places. I think only Japan will still have them, and they even have an EV option.
Can I intercede and say that $170 cable bills were never a thing outside the US?
Like a bug bounty where you give attackers an SSH login.
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-4842-6134-7

That's a pretty good book (admittedly I have not finished it yet, life got in the way) about CL's condition system. Worth a read if it's something that interests you. Also, I'm pretty sure that price dropped a lot from when I last looked. $10 for the print book isn't a bad price, and $7 for the ebook.
"There are still other ways for them to get paid" is not the same thing as "they would in actuality be paid the same amount". I agreed in my message that it was always possible, and yet it wasn't happening. I don't care whether it's theoretically possible that artists could be paid, I care whether they are actually paid. NFTs are actually getting them paid. You seem to be missing, or avoiding, this point.

I am not making an argument about technology, or sociology, or any of the things you seem to be worked up over. I am strictly saying, NFTs get artists paid, in far greater amounts than they had previously, and I consider that valuable. I've yet to hear a refutation (or an acknowledgement) of this, and I consider it a strong refutation of your own quote "Absolutely nothing about adding a cryptographically secure certificate of ownership to that is valuable" - adding the certificate of ownership radically increased the size of the market, and got artists paid. QED.
> ...we, as society, have chosen to establish capital controls.

Obviously that's not the case if entire societies use bitcoin now, as soon as it is an option. We didn't choose the mess, it was foisted upon us.

You can make excuses for the current system if you want to, but you're wrong. You can shame people tired of paying a quarter of their pay to western union to help Tia afford a water tank so she can have running water during the weekdays. You can demand people just follow rules that make no sense to them because "we as a society" have Good Reasons™ for them. But if you expect them to, if you act like their behavior makes no sense, you're deluding yourself and nobody else.
I long for a corporate messaging service that incorporates deliberate scheduling. Being forced to choose specific business-wide delivery windows, alongside a /discouraged/ urgent option, feels as though it would go a long way to ameliorating the interrupt-driven messaging culture of most organizations.
I think not being subjected to terrible, emotionally manipulative ads for 1/3 of the time you’re watching TV/Movies is the actual win for consumers in the streaming era.
Can you point to something useful or insightful from him?
I don't see how that is relevant here. Wash trading is market, price, and reputation manipulation, not money laundering or tax evasion.

I'm not sure Coinbase's need to report money laundering applies.
I use Plex (I don't pay for a Plex Pass) too, and I don't have the same issues.

1.) This only happens for me if, say, I use youtube-dl to download a music performance and then drop it in. Every time I've gone outside of my Sonarr/Radarr setup to manually add a TV show or movie, it's always handled the metadata just fine. It's when I throw it a curveball (that, tbh, I expected) that it doesn't handle it for me. Maybe I've just been lucky?

2.) Completely agree with you here. I'd love to know if there's a workaround, though I haven't spent any time looking into it.

3.) Not the case for me. My home page goes Recently Watched -> Recently Added Movies -> Recently Added TV -> the streaming bullshit you mentioned. The UI loads with the left menu open, and all I need to do is hit "down" one for TV, twice for movies; no scrolling necessary. To your point, I wish that it didn't show those extra streaming options at all.
Yeah I agree that this is the closest thing to an agent model that I've seen reliably work in the software world, but in a way it's also close to the "packaging" thing/problem in the film world. I worked for someone doing it about 20 years ago, in the end he wasn't very good at it but it seemed like a viable business model, it got me into a lovely gig that lasted a couple years.

The thing is, how does the talent find you? Or are you small enough that your existing network is enough?

And are you pocketing a percentage of their rate, or negotiating their rate and the client rate independently? Meaning, is it in your direct financial interest for the parachutists to make more money, or only in the sense that you want them to work with you again in the future?

Good advice about watching turnover in job offers, thanks.
And yet, weirdly enough, despite NASA's expertise, the launch vehicle most similar to Falcon 9 is...Russian Zenit.
>doesn't degrade the scientific body of knowledge, it adds to it.

Yes. The simple corollary to Bayes theorem: all observations, even biased ones, improve your knowledge of the world.

But it doesn't say anything about efficiency. A single photodiode mechanically scanned behind a pinhole can capture the same image as an image sensor behind a lens, but it takes millions of times longer. A self-reporting survey will say something, but it will be very noisy. How many self-report surveys would it take to match an actual double-blinded study with double digit participants? What if the answer is "hundreds"? Should we wait a century for all these surveys to be done before even attempting data analysis? (After all, surveying the same set of people over and over won't give you additional data. You need to wait for some of the survey respondents to die) What about all the people in the preceding 99 years who, perhaps reasonably, look at a stack of fifty self-reported surveys that all say the same thing, and come to an incorrect conclusion? Science is right eventually, not right right now.

You say that "millions" of participants should be useful, almost automatically. Why should that be the case? If you're off by an order of magnitude somewhere in your stack of assumptions, the data could be noisy enough that you need to be sample from a population of a hundred billion. If the data is bad enough or biased enough then even a large survey wouldn't be powered enough without a world population ten times bigger.
justwatch.com works pretty well, at least in the USA.
Ask HN: Best resources on learning to be a better teacher or mentor?
I'm a ~senior engineer, worked for a handful of startups and larger companies. Mentorship and training is an area of work that I really want to explore, but I don't think it's my strongest skill right now. How can I improve?

Some people seem to have a natural ability to break complex topics down into comprehensible pieces. That's something I'd love to learn more thoroughly.
The TV app on macOS and iOS does this. Except for Netflix stuff, but that is because Netflix does not want to participate.
> There’s a lot less effort required to update an existing IPv4 system to accept a few more ranges than to entirely rearchitect a network to work with IPv6.

I'm not so sure, actually.

It's still a case of literally billions of devices that just plain need to be replaced.

Not to mention millions(?) of multimillion dollar routers that need to be scrapped, even though they handle IPv4 and IPv6 in silicon just fine.

> But as to the actual proposition, I would rather the 240/4 space was changed to RFC1918 private space, or at least half of it.

Nobody's stopping you. It'll never be usable on the Internet anyway.
Really that's just an inherited property from physical art
This is part and parcel of participating in the centralized domain name system.
Yes, some people are selling a lot more art because of NFTs.

For one thing, there's only so much space on your walls for prints, but a huge enormous amount of space in your wallet to hold NFTs. Whales / superfans can spend even more than they otherwise could - which isn't a bad thing for artists.

Another thing is the immediacy of selling. Tweet little corners of something while you make something, tweet about it when it is done, and one or two days later when the auction ends, you have money. A whole of of the friction and delay is gone.

On the other hand, super fast distribution, and direct artist to buyer "connection" on a mass scale means that to make the mega-bucks requires being something like a music star or an instagram / reality star celebrity. Or maybe it's like YouTube / twitch. There are a lot of creators, and some percentage of those creators have massive audiences and some have ten people. Or zero. That kind of change we've seen before in other types of art, and now it's coming here. There are a lot of people who have made NFT's that have never seen a sale. It's not a magic money tree.
That's a pipe dream. Even the least desirable muscle cars are fetching $25-30k for "good" condition. Anything remotely desirable is going for far more than that.

You could probably get an 80's Camaro or something, but that's not really a "muscle car". That term is generally applied to models from the 60's and 70's.
Do you have a link/timestamp to a video with such a reaction? I've seen him get frustrated or bored and then challenge people to try to think harder or differently, more deeply.

"Either way, I think people should stop paying attention to whatever he's saying since it is often neither insightful nor productive in any meaningful way."

Should we do the same with you? How ridiculous.
I have a ‘65 Mustang coupe and ‘66 Mustang convertible and daily drove each of them for a while. The sad truth is: they are beautiful and fun, but aren’t actually very good cars by modern car standards.

I remedied some of that by adding a modern 5-speed, hydraulic clutch actuator, front disc brakes, dual circuit brakes, relocated upper control arms, traction bars, limited slip diff, a modern alternator, and modern H4 headlights to the convertible (which I bought already non-original). But it’s still a flexible, leaf-sprung, solid rear axle car with poor sealing and weak environmentals.

$10K isn’t going to happen and was unlikely 5 years ago, but way off the market for even a good driver-quality car today. (Odometer reading is not a major driver of pricing in the low [driver] end of the market. Many of the cars have a 5-digit odometer of questionable reliability anyway, so a car reading 25000 miles could have 25K, 125K, 225K, or 47K miles. It’s condition-based way more than miles-based.)
If they screwed up somehow, they're kind of obligated to fix it. Otherwise, they just stole somebody else's domain and let you register it.

I would be a little skeptical. Make sure that the email really is from your registrar. Also, it's likely that "do nothing" is your best course of action, in any case. If the email is legitimate, there's nothing you can do to stop them. If it's a scam of some kind, you avoid increasing your exposure to risk.
Upon reading the responses my earlier comments generated, I suppose I should have disclaimed that I'm seeing this problem as the OP had portrayed it, which is as a thought problem in logic and economics, rather than an actual approach to preventative medicine. As a thought problem, it can be broken into basic, of-necessity simplified elements, e.g. preventable vs. non-preventable illnesses, fee optimization, etc.

The idea of actual healthcare being dependent solely on optimization of greed is, of course, ludicrous.
The differences are:

1. Most of society already agrees that paying for in game assets is stupid, so there's no need to make the argument.

2. People who buy in game assets do it because they actually want the thing they are buying, a large portion of spending on NFTs is people who are just hoping the prices will go up
If you have cause, for hundreds of years "all sales are final" doesn't impart protections against damaged, defective, or falsely advertised goods.

The only thing "all sales are final" prevents is someone deciding after purchase that they no longer want the item purchased.

Even with the law telling a bitcoin vendor they must return the coin, there is no way to return the coin without the vendor performing that action. Cash can be forcibly taken as can property. Bitcoin, however, is completely locked away.

Now imagine how much harder that is when the vendor is in a different nation.

Societies functioned well for 1000s of years with these sorts of rules because the ability to remotely order goods/services wasn't in the reach of most society. The technology for someone to rob you from the other side of the globe simply did not exist.
> You absolutely can, that's the entire point of receipts. If the seller refuses, that's where trade law comes into play and you can sue.

'Sales are final' is a trade statement; in most U.S. states under most conditions you cannot return an item when this is stated (even if you have a receipt).

> This of course, isn't a great comparison because in the modern day cash is almost never used for anything other than small transactions (or by the uber paranoid). To even be close to the same you'd have to compare it to putting cash into an envelope and mailing it. Not exactly a common practice.

Many people around the world still use cash for most of their transactions. And, as couched, the economy still functioned perfectly fine 30+ years ago where most people in the developed world used cash for most of their transactions as well.
JustWatch is pretty good.

https://www.justwatch.com/
1/3rd of Healthcare Workers in U.S. Hospitals Not Vaccinated Against Covid-19
People pay money for things that are pretty pointless. That's true.

Paying for an NFT seems especially pointless to me (and I suspect to most people). But maybe if the crypto folks keep lecturing us all online, more and more people will start to come around...
… and if you live an abusive or failed state, the blockchain encryption just means that the kidnappers will start running XKCD 538 on you or your family until you give them your password. This is not a problem with a technical solution.

Consider also the scale: what percentage of cryptocurrency users live in regimes like that versus the percentage who have functioning courts but are one exploit/phish away from irrecoverably losing all of their cryptocurrency?
A sub-10 mile ambulance trip can easily cost $1000 US if it's not covered by insurance. If you're already barely eeking out a living working paycheck to paycheck, that might be a bit too much to manage.

America does not have much compassion in healthcare, the fear of medical debt may outweigh the fear of death.
> The claim that new IPv4 space has no value is ridiculous. These ranges don't have to be perfect.

yes, they do have to be perfect, because having a range which is not usuable by a part of the networks and devices that make up the internet drastically decreases their value.

The reason IPv4 space is so valuable is because migrating to ipv6 still has a higher friction then ponying up money for additional ipv4 space. It will be a matter of time before this changes and implementing ipv6 is far easier in comparison.
Does it have to be the CCP that disappeared her? China still has all the hallmarks of a third-world country with things like corruption, and certainly life is just as cheap as a place like Russia. Interested parties could have just had her off’d, no ccp needed.

Say what you want about America, but we don’t ‘off’ our #metoo people. I’m actually laughing in a sad way at how humans literally have an ‘off’ button in these other countries that these societies just flick. There really is another version of cancel-culture out there.

> The 35-year-old former top-ranked player in women's doubles won titles at Wimbledon in 2013 and the French Open in 2014. Peng also participated in three Olympics

^^ That person had an off button in China, unbelievable. I grow disillusioned by the moment.
Only viable solution
Dang, tell that to Edward Snowden.
> you don't have to trust the computers, you trust the open source code being executed by the network

You're contradicting yourself.
The Party couldn't care less, unfortunately.
Well now you're shifting the goal posts to a different topic. I was responding to your claim of this set of companies being random and your concern about some not being included

The size of these companies is irrelevant to that point

And who are these companies you keep mentioning? They don't even come up when I search them on DuckDuckGo. That's how small they are in comparison to the companies the author included as "big tech"
no, the companies that find me contracts tend to have connections with other companies, I contract through them and invoice them a little over $100 an hour and they charge those other companies what I charge plus maybe 30 more an hour. Sometimes they make more off of me per hour, sometimes in order to sell me to the other companies they take a cut. Sometimes they take a cut to make the sale, sometimes I take a cut, sometimes I demand more.
You would likely recoup the costs and possibly earn terrific ROI by having 3 additional smart cookies on board full time since it would only take a couple hours per month to manage COLO. Maybe even less. AWS is a beast on its own and unmanaged can lead to a ticking time bomb of a mess.
This isn't a very strong post. Customers are losing because you can't access an episode of a show you like?

Difficulty in watching some things has been present from the earliest days of streaming, and has only been less of a pain as the world has moved away from cable. (I never had DVR, so the pre-streaming world for me meant either watch it live, record it to VHS, or maybe catch it "On Demand".)

I know what it's like to be in your situation (usually when trying to stream live sports), but the remedy is almost always to do a bit of research and decide if you want to take the path they want you to take.

I'm very happy with the streaming landscape right now, and I think it's way better than it was five years ago.
> [PoS] comes with the obvious benefit that you no longer need to expend countries worth of electricity doing redundant calculations to decide the next writer to the blockchain; however, it also comes with the problem that now those who have enough money can just sit on it forever to gain more and more money (and more and more control over the blockchain as well).

This is interesting because I think in reality proof of work rounds to proof of stake at the limit. If your PoW coin becomes super valuable then using your coins to invest in miners is the same thing as staking your PoS coins right? I mean, logically, not environmentally. Then you just benefit from all transaction flow, earning free money forever.

If staking is the same as buying an ownership stake in a miner then does the nothing at stake problem not also affect proof of work?
If it's easy enough to start and stop a subscription, lots of people will do it.

My family wanted to watch Mandalorian so we subscribed to Disney+. It took us two months to get through the series so it only cost $15 or so which seems like a pretty good deal for that many hours of TV. Since I subscribed via Apple, cancelling was painless. We did the same with Peacock for a different show.

HBO, Hulu, and Netflix seem to have enough stuff that we watch that we've stayed subscribed to those for years now.
The difference is that in cloud you get live migration (generally) that works. So if whatever machine you are on dies, you don’t have an expensive and disruptive rebuild/restore cycle to deal
with.

Since this can take a day+ even once you get new hardware, and architecting most software stacks so you have the redundancy and ability to migrate services around without downtime is hard, and hence expensive if you don’t have the expertise (AND randomly available time), running on dedicated rented hardware really shouldn’t be compared to cloud.

It’s a fundamentally different type of experience for the vast majority of people.
> The money is yours and no government can confiscate it.

Well the FBI owns the largest Bitcoin wallet. And I am pretty sure it's not from mining.

Ref: https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@loryon/fbi-is-global-stakeholde...
The same thing as if they decide that you are using your cryptocurrency to evade taxes, child support, launder money, etc.?
Trucks in a basic work truck trim are pretty sparse.

Kind of wish I kept my 89 Caprice when the transmission seal went bad about 5 years ago.
It supports both Android and iOS but tests are kept separate between platforms.
I think pricing is dependent on multiple factors but it's easy to create a free account and try to see if that would a good fit.
Probably something built in the 1980's, if not the 1970's. Fuel-injection was pretty near ubiquitous by around the mid 80's as best as I can remember. I doubt very many, if any, cars were built new with carburetors anytime from 1990 on...

Edit: the above refers to the US specifically. As other commentators have pointed out, the situation is different in other regions.