skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes that would mean managers have to do something, and while some are incidentally useful and productive, there are few external incentives for them to be so. Yet there are many incentives to let you burn out after hitting a wall a hundred times.
I think paying is a dumb move, regardless of the "brand" of extortionist you're dealing with. It just signals that you're a mark. It might briefly make an executive's life easier, but it'll come back and bite you.

I didn't refuse to pay because I thought it would be inspirational or set an example or bla bla bla. It was because I'm not a dumb mark, and I'm not going to let my clients be. And personally, I'd rather burn my house to the ground than let someone rob it.
We’re turning off AMP pages at Search Engine Land
We DO have compasses with a "North" and "South" heading. And they are pretty useful sometimes.
Why would one exclude land from the calculation though?
Honorable mention: an aerospike engine has been flown by Arca space.

Well, kind off.. it's a spike, but they're using water steam as propellent, I'm guessing to "solve" the cooling problem. So not sure if it counts (and how successful their rocket will be).

But still..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsKE_SBY-kE
Imagine. Your macOS suddenly decudes that you don't need a web server running on your macbook, so it randomly kills it to free resources for your browser. Would you be happy with this level of care shown by the manufacturer?

It is not up to the OS to decide which apps the user needs running. Be it wifi scanner, vpn or some file sync process. All the user needs is a correct tool to know which app consumes what, and then there User must decide. Not some prick in google or xiaomi or samsung or whoever else.
Errr isn’t it natural language processing?
Creeping surveillance has nothing to do with philosophies or control systems. The technological era has made it really cheap to spy on people. It is going to take some real bloodbaths for principles to win over that sort of economic pressure.

Hopefully we never really feel the bite of cheap surveillance, but realistically? The Nazis weren't even a century ago. The next 100 years will be rough.
War is coming. Be happy for whatever good you had before.
> In your opinion. However, some people clearly believe it _is_ a tax loophole

Only people who are not familiar with basic accounting or tax economics can believe this.

> One of the talking points against inheritance tax is that it taxes the same money twice. If I'm a middle earner I pay taxes on my income, and I pay CGT when I dispose of assets to pay for my car or retirement or whatever.

OK, you are mixing two different things here. One is the "double taxation"(1) on assets in the inheritance tax. First, don't worry, only a handful of families pay this tax. But ignoring that, the double taxation applies to income not spent. It is irrelevant to this discussion, in which Bezos borrows to spend. If he didn't borrow and sold assets to spend, then those sold assets still wouldn't be taxed as an inheritance tax. So that double taxation unfairness complaint is again just a confusion about what is happening and has nothing to do with whether borrowing to spend is somehow tax avoidance.

Now as to the second point: "If I'm a middle earner I pay taxes on my income, and I pay CGT when I dispose of assets to pay for my car or retirement or whatever."

No, you only pay taxes on the gains. Think back to what we were discussing before -- you get $100 of stock, then it goes up by $10 and you sell. So you have two taxable events in which income is recognized - the income of getting $100 and then the income of getting $10. When you sell for $110, your cost basis is $100, not 0, because you already paid taxes on the $100. Thus there is no double taxation for you or for Bezos(2).

No one is treated differently here. It is the exact same re-upping you were complaining Bezos being given -- that re-setting is available to everyone else for any other kind of asset they have for any reason.

So here, too, this is just complaining about things that aren't actually happening in order to get a justification for complaints about "injustice". It's a lot of very angry people applying who/whom logic rather than getting the details right about how much is paid.

Now, if you want to talk about real tax loopholes -- for example, carried interest, mortgage interest deduction, differences in tax rates on long term versus short term gains, charitable deductions - yes, by all means let's get rid of these loopholes. Bezos pays too little taxes, not because he borrows, but because the long term cap gains rate is so low. Let's not treat LTCG differently from wage income. But trying to infer the money borrowed should be taxed at the amount borrowed is just insane. Borrowed money is not income. Bezos is not doing this to evade paying taxes, he is doing it to take advantage of spreads.

(1) It's not really double taxation, because what is taxed is the income received by the inheritor, who never paid any taxes on it before.

(2) Yeah, inflation is a legit complaint for both
What do you mean by out of date then? They're the best selling form-factor in many countries aren't they?

And it's not a US thing - the Germans, French, and British are also more and more switching their focus to the SUV form-factor.
Three letter acronym
>Second, if honoring customer promises were the number one priority, organizations wouldn't make them so casually and without figuring out what is possible.

I can't tell you how many times I asked, "who came up with this deadline?" and I get "someone in the sales team," or something like that.
> UTC has roots in 19th century british colonialism

Being a Yank who should hate this by identity, I feel reasonably qualified to say I don’t care. UTC is a standard already, so if we’re standardizing (which I agree we shouldn’t) there is no point choosing another hub.
Does this work well with image files? (PNG, JPEG, etc)
Show HN: Waldo is like having a big QA department, without a big QA department
For SSTO to be worth for a Starship-Superheavy class vehicle, the aerospike engines would need to be as efficient as the Merlin ones at the same weight and the removal of the Starship engines would need to account for added thermal protection of the lower part.

The napkin math seems workable, but rockets require a lot more than napkin math.

Having said that, Shuttles were almost SSTOs in the sense that the fuel tank could be placed in orbit (and reused as pressurized habitation space, with some extra work). Maybe some SLS-derived work can add some very large volumes able to dock into a future space station.
After watching some of the games AlphaZero played against Stockfish, I have to say I don't really agree that the moves make sense to a grandmaster... AlphaZero has this uncanny ability to sacrifice many pawns to restrict the movement of the opponent's pieces, something that you might see in advanced play but nowhere near the extent you see it with AlphaZero. Many more of the moves it plays are hard to make sense of compared to a classic engine such as Stockfish.

See GothamChess' very entertaining analysis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dT6CR9_6l4
The Telephone Exchange (1982)
Woman discovers AirTag on her vehicle after receiving iPhone alert
Suppose there was no Google result, and you were the first to ask about this. What would have been your next step?
I am sorry but this is incredibly misleading. Just because there are a few cosmetic issues in manufacturing doesn't mean it is not a reliable vehicle. I own two, Model Y and Model 3, and they are the best and most reliable vehicles I have ever owned.
Author here. We'd love this to be a thing, but this is young software, so we don't recommend relying on this as a single way of doing a backup for now. Bear in mind that our main use case is for things that you can reproduce in principle (builds of a commit history, see manyclangs).
First, there's always a customer, and so there is always a promise, and always a customer. Customer can mean you, your boss, an external client, the general public, the janitor who's keycard doesn't work on the ladies bathroom at 2am when no project managers, business line owners or even ladies are around to watch him clean.

Second, profitability is usually the number one priority.

Third, they DO use management approaches that make it maximally likely... ...that they achieve profitability.

Fourth yes, they would and they do. Unfortunately most don't understand that it is impossible to estimate a fixed period of time in which an unknown problem can be solved.

This always comes full circle to Steve McConnell's book Software Estimation. In my 34 years in IT, across three continents, in industry sectors ranging from insurance and telecoms to aerospace and defencee, and Nokia Maps, that book will take you closer to the grail than anything else on earth. And you'll still remain light years from an accurate estimate until the day you ship.
> I am not sure I agree with 3. Overall medicine is a very recent development. I am not sure what are the circumstances that would have enabled us to develop science and medicine significantly earlier.

I'm not suggesting that had monogamy not been there, science and medicine (for STD et al) would have developed earlier. What I am saying is that now that the means are there, monogamy and marriage have a 'legacy' element to it. That legacy is currently too deep into people's minds, culture and the law.

> Also, not sure if lack of monogamy would motivate research today but probably would to a statistically relevant degree.

Consider for minute that non-monogamy were to come to the world today suddenly like COVID did, leading to severe spread of STDs. (Note that this is not putting COVID and non-monogany on an equal front, it is putting the situation around them as equal.) My expectations would be that the needed medical developments for STD would also come by soon like the developments against COVID, though with the unwarranted transitory losses. If we are in agreement on that, we can consider a slower version where non-monogamy gains grounds over the next few decades. I think that will happen.
Author here. Maybe, it's a fun idea. I have toyed with providing a fuse filesystem for access to a pack but my time for completing this is limited at the moment.
Yeah fair you can FOIA it, if you have the money and are willing to wait multiple years. But the data is never released without doing that. The point is there is no way for the average person to know whether the drugs they are prescribed actually work or not, nor is there any way for doctors to know whether the drugs they're prescribing actually work or not, because whatever is published in the academic literature doesn't reflect the trial data. E.g.

"The fact that what gets published are the trials with positive results was most convincingly shown by a group of researchers at the Oregon Health and Science University, who followed up on our initial analysis of the FDA data by comparing the conclusions reached by the FDA with those reported by the drug companies in journal articles. Of 38 drug-company clinical trials that the FDA viewed as having positive results, all but one was published. In the same documents, the FDA described 36 trials as having negative or questionable results. Most of these negative trials were not published at all, and of the few that were published, most were described in the journal articles as showing positive results -- despite the fact that the FDA had concluded that they had not." Source: The Emperor's New Drugs, p. 67

Drug companies consider the raw data a trade secret, so they are never going to give it to you themselves.
Well... If you have a hydrolox aerospike engine, what comes out of the exhaust is just very hot water... ;-)
I have been following Andreas/SerenityOS for a quite a while now. It's extremely impressive - how he and the community support built an entirely new OS.
https://github.com/SerenityOS/serenity/graphs/contributors
> That assumes that second person necessarily takes away something from the first person by the nature of her existence.

No, it does not. It just asks whether the second person has the freedom to do something that will restrict the first's freedom. Either way, the two are no longer fully free. My point is that the very nature of freedom requires allocating and restricting it in certain ways. There is no such thing as not restricting anyone's freedom.
Military reasons the primary reason we study history. There is the hope that by studying the wars of the past you can learn something - a tactic, strategy, or something else that you can apply to a future battle and win. Some rich person might get interested in something else from time to time and fund the study of that, but nobles always funded military history because it was one of the few ways you could learn if something worked without doing it in a war yourself.

We think of monks as the only literate people in the past, but that was far from true. The common person might not have known how to read (I've seen good arguments they did a little, but I'm not qualified to evaluate them) but the rich did, and they hired scholars who could read to study things that were important to them. Any rich person who didn't have scholars studying military matters wouldn't last long in war as many seemingly obvious ideas don't work in real battles.
There are other examples author could have used - google tracking location of every android user at all times, to improve maps of course.
I’m not saying apps shouldn’t be allowed to run in the background. But for notifications specifically it’s an unacceptable solution. It just doesn’t scale to the number of apps the average user receives notifications from.
Author here. I'm unsure whether this would apply very well to cargo or not. If it has lots of pre-link object files, then maybe.
>If you're taking suggestions, you might enjoy Janet[1].

Just curious about why you'd suggest going from a popular stack to Janet? I'd rather suggest Common Lisp as it's a way more stable, mature and standardized technology.
eh. my highest salary in the past 10 years has been $170K and that was living in some of the most expensive cities in the world (NYC, Bay Area and Tel Aviv). Now, I'm single, so I'm able to compromise a bit by having roommates, but I was still paying over $1K a month in rent in all the places. With that said, by being single and earning that amount of money AND living in one of the longest stock market bull markets ever (and yes, those of us who started working in 2009-2010 are very very lucky) I would expect someone like that to have been able to build a net worth close to $2mil without much effort. the bull market and "normal savings" (say $50-$100K as you mention) did most of the work.

but, as they say, past performance isn't indicative of future results.
New York Times Buried Kenosha Reporting Until After Election, Says Ex-Reporter
Crypto group loses bid to buy US Constitution copy
My best advice, try it! I have used it many times for server apps with great success, namely "forms-over-data" systems, some even with a large user base but low concurrency.

Some tips to make this work:

- use the latest version

- use write-ahead logging

- use synchronous execution model

- favor insert (and delete) over update

- favor many small, simple queries over larger, all-serving queries

- open and close connections quickly

- employ app level validation

- define a typed schema
So? This would be an objection no matter where it was centered. Center it on Antarctica and someone else will find that objectionable.
Have you looked at Open EdX?
Author here, I don't currently know how this compares to git-lfs. It it is possible git-lfs would perform quite well on the same inputs as elfshaker works on. If git-lfs does already work well for your use case I'd recommend using that rather than elfshaker, as it is more established.
Sorry for the late response. I wasn't on HN yesterday.

Someone else answered this well, but: money. A Seattle initiative is roughly 10%-20% as expensive as a statewide one, and it's still an incredible challenge to raise enough to do this. Ask me where I spend my time.

Qualifying for the ballot in Seattle requires about 26,200 valid signatures (10% of votes cast in the last Mayoral election). They must be collected during a 180-day period that, due to deadlines to make the November ballot, must is basically January-June. Since January-March is wet and cold, people aren't outside as much and many initiatives just do April-June.

Collecting 26,000 signatures in 90-180 days is all but impossible with volunteers, which means the core challenge for an initiative is fundraising to pay signature-gathering costs. You can divide 26,000 by any number of valid signatures collected per hour - 3, 6, 12, whatever - and it's still a lot of time and thus really expensive.

So, that's for the Seattle ballot. Getting on the WA state ballot requires 324,516 (!). Yes, 12x more. And that cost scales roughly linearly; the few efficiencies of scale are offset by new inefficiencies like travel. There's some efficiencies with overhead, but that's a small % of the cost.

So, that's why. It takes 5-10x more money.

Of course, voters would need to support it statewide too. In Seattle, this will pass; our job is to get it on the ballot. A statewide campaign may also need to do at least an education/awareness campaign (roughly the last paragraph of your comment) and potentially even try to change public opinion. These can cost even more than collecting signatures.

(If you're reading this and thinking "Wow, Troy knows this stuff - and it's interesting and there's a plan to do this!" - it is and there is! I'd love your help as a volunteer and/or your donations.)
> They are a religious order of intergalactic police-monks, prone to (white) saviorism and toxically masculine approaches to conflict resolution (violent duels with phallic lightsabers, gaslighting by means of “Jedi mind tricks,” etc.)

As far as the plot of Star Wars is concerned, that's true. The corruption and zealotry of the Jedi and their contribution to the fall of the Republic and the creation of Darth Vader was one of the primary themes of the prequel trilogy, that unfortunately got lost in the awkwardness of the prequels' execution.
> Regardless of what you think your process is, somewhere near the top of the leadership pyramid, it all boils down to a customer promise upon which hinges your organization's reputation.

Yep, this is exactly how I think about it as well, no matter how hard you try to train people to adapt to scrum with story points, at some level it turns into time estimates and deadlines anyway. So it's always going to be more or less pointless. Even if you do scrum with story points and estimates perfectly, just the fact that it is detached from time makes it useless anyway so it's just wasted paperwork that nobody wants to see.
Africa has spawned eight unicorns in five years
We Created a Mobile Tool to Write Code and What We’ve Got
ganache is the standard, thanks for building ;)

1. we're starting to see the emergence of next-gen managed crypto cloud, so one can just start building on alchemy free tier for example, i can still use truffle in my dev env, but i can also just roll the functionality i need natively to the cloud

2. solidity packs a lot of fintech logic in a concise amount of code. an experimental auction dapp came in at like 150 lines. i'm not exactly building Compound here (yet)!
Sure, but we're also talking about drawing inferences about AGI from how superintelligences based on ML processes actually behave rather than from stories. The current of the state of the art suggests an AGI might not need to know anything about fusion power to invent it, if it is equipped with a system to perfectly simulate the outcomes of experimenting with fusion power like Alpha Zero is with the games it plays. I'm not sure we can accidentally code one of those.

The "cheat" argument suppports my argument, not yours. Rather than do something incredibly difficult and indirect like master advanced physics outside the scope of the simulations it can run to invent new power sources to legitimately produce very low cost paperclips, a system to maximise paperclip sales indicators is probably going to exploit gaps in the simulations it can run or data its already supplied with, like data entry errors in a region or logical holes in the supply chain pricing model, or the marketing simulation not including indications of languages spoken. So it might actually be worse than the management consultants at optimising paperclip revenues. On a related note, if you did want your AGI to invent fusion power but your fusion power emulation engine isn't up to scratch, it's likely to design reactors that are very performant inside the simulation but don't actually work, much like those evolutionary systems exploiting physics engine bugs when faced with the comparatively simple task of learning how to walk.
Authentic. And by all accounts, he was drunk-dialing in '64. Think you can hear a belch at some point.

Edit: if I recall correctly, he liked to drive people around his ranch while drinking whiskey out of a styrofoam cup, with lots of ice. When he needed a refill, he'd stick his hand out the window and shake the cup, at which point a secret service agent would sprint from the car pacing behind him to fetch him a refill.

And then there was the thing where he liked to drive new guests into a lake to scare them, since they didn't know about his amphibious vehicle, but that's a different story.
The open source solutions that exist are not very good/difficult to work with. The proprietary-commercial solutions that exist are not very good/difficult to work with.

This may mean that it's a hard space to do something "very good" in; compare and contrast to "ERP" systems. Or "enterprise" systems generally -- an LMS is definitely an enterprise system. (Meaning: purchased for an entire organization; those with the most power in purchasing decisions are for the most part not those with roles as core users; often purchased based on "feature checklists", or "what are my famous peers using"; needs to support a kind of 'workflow', which can vary drastically among different organizational customers or even within a single customer).

Consider when it's a pitfall to actually "give the customers what they are asking for". (pitfall to quality/ease-of-use but not always to sales)

Those making procurement decisions need to have someone to call and complain and ask them to fix things -- even if they don't fix them. It's important for the careers of those making procurement decisions to have someone else to blame -- and "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM." This entity to blame hypothetically could be a vendor offering installation/hosting/support for an open source solution... but it's a risky business to be in, when those doing procuring would rather take the safe/familiar route, and the product you are offering installation/hosting/support for, any competitor can too.
From what I understand about the seminal Apple vs Microsoft case in the 90's, theres a limit to how much "look and feel" can be patented.
Skepticism pursued in a manner that overly impacts others is morally wrong.

If someone doesn't want to be vaccinated -- refuse vaccination and deal with the consequences.

Don't request (to use my example, not the OP) 100s of pages that you have no intention of reading, the production of which consumes valuable resources during a public health crisis.
The Nazis rationalized their actions in their own eyes. To them, they thought they were doing the right thing. So it doesn't matter how right you think you are if you're manipulating people's emotions in the same ways to end up in a similar place.

No, it's not different this time. Australia is already denying people their rights for their own good and putting them in a fancy prison, not for some obvious harm they did, but for something they might have.