skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Assuming that they are independent factors. In many instances, a life may be saved by the interaction of two variables. Signaling and egress often contribute in complementary functions.
You have to remember that just because a thing can theoretically be achieved, doesn't mean that we have the motivation to do it. We still don't have any planes as fast as the now-shuttered SR-71, and that thing was developed 58 years ago. We have had electric cars for nearly 200 years, and they are barely starting to become mainstream. The technology for an elevator has been around for thousands of years, but it took tall buildings becoming more common for somebody to both imagine a simple enough mechanism, and see the market for it. There has to be a large enough will and force applied for technology to become reality, and even then it might die on the vine.

AGI would only ever be possible in our lifetime with a new Manhattan Project, and even then it would take sooo much longer than nuclear science. Commercial software development today is just laughably bad. Only slightly better than it was in the 1970's. The only thing we have going for us today is processing power, and it's still at least a century away from having the kind of raw power to brute-force compute the kind of probabilities to even accurately predict the weather. Reproducing the cognitive ability of a 5 year old is still a very long way off.

It would actually be significantly faster to develop AGI by just mapping a brain. Sort of how autonomous driving is developed today; just run the stupid car on the streets for a billion hours and end up with a gigantic statistical model that you smooth out by hand, rather than trying to make a pure algorithm that can drive correctly in any situation.
AI and the Future of Work
> I can't envision a World where someone who sought out to solve a problem would not want to directly put themselves in the position of it's intended target demographic or end user to gain better perspective about how to best optimize what it is they are developing

Really? How about in industries where it's straight up impossible for the developer to do so? How do people function in those industries? How does cutting edge tech get made in, say, the medical industry?

Are you suggesting that people building machines to perform brain surgery should have to go to med school and specialize as well as becoming an engineer?

Or maybe there is a different way to gain insight into what you're building, still build cutting edge solutions to real world problems, without having to actually be able to perform the job you're trying to augment?

Here's a question. What would you say to a blind programmer who is working on autonomous driving vehicles? Do you think such a person could never do a good job, because they have no experience driving a vehicle?

There are tons of extremely valid reasons why a software developer might not want to or be able to put themselves in their customer's shoes directly, without it being "white glove developer syndrome" as you put it. And they can still be excellent developers.
All of those TOTP credit cards do have batteries in them. Some of these cards use LCDs and some use e-paper.

Battery life is specced for 3-5 years mostly.

The scale is also using some sort of internal battery. It could be a gel type battery or a CR2032 or similar inside. My CR2032 powered scale is going on 12 years with the original battery.

TL;DR: there’s batteries inside.
People might start to notice something amiss while you're setting fire to the first staircase.
I was born in West Germany shortly after reunification and have family both from the East and West. All pretty much working class, on both sides.

I don't think it's fair to characterize the people the author talks about as children raised under privileged circumstances necessarily. Many working class people, mothers who had plenty of support in raising kids, people who enjoyed relatively egalitarian and free education for the first time and so on have legitimately good memories, and are today some of the most dissatisfied with the state of affairs. In particular the role of women seems to have been mostly lost. When the East had already granted reproductive rights, women in the West got abortions in the Netherlands.

This is generally written off as "Ostalgie" (pun on nostalgia) in exactly the same way the author describes.
More or less all iOS and Android mail clients.

https://www.imore.com/best-email-apps-your-iphone-and-ipad

They do support imap, but they process your messages on their proprietary cloud service. What sane person would agree to that?

In the US there seems to be not a lot of concern about data protection yet, so there seems to be a market for those services.
Edmund Burke covers this sentiment very well, and yet did not live to see it here:

"They would soon see, that criminal means once tolerated are soon preferred. They present a shorter cut to the object than through the highway of the moral virtues. Justifying perfidy and murder for public benefit, public benefit would soon becomethe pretext, and perfidy and murder the end; until rapacity, malice, revenge, and fear more dreadful than revenge, could satiate their insatiable appetites. Such must be the consequences of losing in the splendour of these triumphs of the rights of men, all natural sense of wrong and right."
Taiwan is an amazing place. I suggest anyone eligible to join the program and refuse employment after the training in Taiwan.
It doesn't though, the Gameboy is more like the Altair or Compucolor which had 8080 CPUs.
At most of the places I worked at where we did estimations - the person with the lowest estimate got assigned the work.

If you estimated the lowest on multiple things - you got the one where you deviated the most.

If you overestimate everything - and you never finish things close to the mean estimate - that's a sign you're a low performer...
Open source is doing better than ever and doesn't need saving.

This is all very, very terrible. 1% dues go to a pool to match charitable donations towards tooling? So the total maximum is 2% of all member pay? What's to stop a programmer from donating 100% of his salary to himself for developing his side project and doubling his salary?

Minimum bureaucracy? In an organization that exists entirely as a bureaucracy with the power to decide the level of bureaucracy? How does that work exactly? Might, perhaps, the legal fund take most of the money a year in, or the dues triple while the pool shrinks? Me thinks, probably.

Not to mention, the pool funding is decoupled from the license. At some point you're just shuffling money back to where the paychecks came from. Some people don't write code at a shop, they do it for fun. Why would they license it under a union license? Why would those people join the union? How would those people join the union?

More code licensed in this way decreases the pay from the pool, or, some tools don't get funded and you've basically given carte blanche to unionized companies to free ride on you. Such a scheme misaligns incentives significantly worse than the status quo.

What you think you've found is a game theoretical silver bullet to the tragedy of the commons. Pardon me if I'm too skeptical, this is a very hard problem. If the solution to such a problem looks simple, it's probably because you don't understand the problem space you're working in.

It's all convoluted nonsense, sorry to be harsh, it solves no problems, it is incoherent drivel that sounds like someone who is more interested in unions than solving a problem. When all you have is a hammer...

The solution to the free rider problem in software is simple: if you want to be paid for economic benefit people derive from your work, license it so that you get royalties if it's used as a dependency of a commercial endeavor. Most people don't do that, because most FOSS contributors don't consider it a problem. They're either happy to work on it, or they derive some other benefit, like having a tool available to themselves, having it on their resume, getting some level of control over industry standards, or something else. But if you don't want to work for free, don't work for free, it really is that simple.
An argument can easily be made that normalizing gun fetishism, and the prevalence of public carry leads to a society that, during tense situations is often a trigger pull away from escalating to immediately lethal violence.

It's rare for people to get shot and killed at a, say, a political protest in a society without such norms. It's rarer yet for the killer to be found to have been in the right.

You don't see teenagers in Canada think that it's a swell idea to drive across the country so that they could LARP Call of Duty at a protest with an AR-15. The two cultures' outlook on guns is different, and one very actively discourages that kind of behaviour... While the other one seems to encourage it.
LCD displays without backlight consume almost no current. Both devices likely have a fairly sizeable 3 volt lithium in them, and are highly optimized to reduce "off" leakage current to less than the self-discharge rate of the battery.

The MFA card requires knowledge of the current time, if I understand them correctly... thus there must be a very low power clock chip inside it, along with the CPU, etc.
Yes - Eclipse was the best Java IDE once upon a time and I loved it! It was far superior to its contemporaries (Netbeans!). I have fond memories of the Indigo release, which was one of the last versions I used before switching to Jetbrains
I agree with most of it except wind turbines - their size is not driven by vanity, but efficiency.

I am also not sure about blaming engineers for it, it's more of an investor thing. Engineers are often incredulous, IMHO, as it usually means more trouble.

On the other hand, things like JWST are amazing. If you resist the temptation to just make it bigger, and think outside the box, some really cool engineering can happen.
Whole Foods has a ten dollar standard charge for every delivery and a minimum $35(I think ..but at least $35) order. And delivery is within Whole Foods radius. There is also a suggested tip.($7). Earlier before Amazon, WF delivery was min $35. Free delivery and $5 suggested tip.

That’s intelligent logistics and last mile delivery. Door dash model is just Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.

Food is expensive. Gas is expensive. Labour is expensive. Make the customer pay up.(when we had farm CSAs, even with minimums, it wasn’t worth it with Bay Area traffic and gas prices and even if I deliver, I wasn’t paying for my time) DD etc are the real villains. Door dash and ilk should stop boosting their customer numbers for increasing valuations. That’s what this is all really about ..isn’t it?
Darknet Diaries is the best one at the moment. Everything is perfectly put together in the show.
And very few of those big companies contribute back…

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29524103
The concept of AGI is extraordinarily materialistic. Most humans through history believed in spiritual dimensions of reality, including many of those responsible for developing technologies we use today.

The argument for AGI goes something like, the brain is a self contained computational machine, humans do extraordinary things with it, therefore a turing machine can achieve human+ level competence.

Most humans, who are not materialistic, see the brain as an interface to both physical and spiritual realities. Computers cannot access the spiritual realities, except indirectly through human input.

I'd wager that we're more dumb terminals connecting to the mainframe than most of us would like to believe.
> I said online.

> That's not to government.

We already know that promise is empty, having witnessed numerous incidents on American college campuses where CCP loyalists were watching and reporting those deemed disloyal to the government.

> CCP represents the nation. There is no clear separation from the ruling body vs. the nation.

The CCP wants there to be no distinction because they want those who oppose the CCP to be seen as enemies of the Chinese people and Chinese culture. I do not accept that. I am not an enemy of the Chinese people. We are all humans. Furthermore, I regard those Chinese people who struggle against CCP oppression as called upon by our times to exhibit greater courage than I will ever display in my life, and I have the greatest admiration and respect for them.
You know there is no I in team. I couldnt give a shit for team work or working with others even effectively I behave marginally and do enough to get along. I show up on time at meetings say the correct and currently fashionable buzz words but I focus on my own personal education and profitless side projects.
It's a spectrum like autism.

I am farther along that spectrum than you, and can't even get myself to get through (or started on) projects that I'm excited about most of the time.

And that's what makes it a disorder. The threshold may be vague, but it's not something we can just rule out as inconvenient but manageable under ideal circumstances.
why does the author presume that governments (or at least the interested bodies within them) aren't fully appraised of the status and utility of each of these projects?

i don't think anybody's close to "agi", and anyways it's far more profitable/effective to just use more specific tools to accelerate the structures and processes that already exist.

if anyone was "close" i don't think they would be very public about it, but i would expect intelligence agencies to be aware. in that case, if some particular project was perceived as an existential danger, you could expect them to act appropriately.

everything the author seems to fear is not coming out of "agi" but instead much more mundane tools that are already proliferate. i think we're going to see the benefits and destruction from the technology we already have surpass anything any of us can predict before anything like "agi" nears completion.
> There's a reason why in scientific discussion anecdotal evidence is dismissed.

Because it doesn't feed the research machine!

One anecdote is dismissed. Ten anecdotes are collected to start grifting for grants. And one hundred anecdotes gives you Empiricism (TM)!

I've come to value anecdotes as a marker of "something is there." To throw them away completely is foolish. Have you read most research papers being pumped out? The methodologies are always flawed (dare I say, biased; ha!) towards favorable results (or atleast I hope. Some of the methodologies I've seen for biological research are so stupid, I refuse to believe someone came up with them in good faith).
>Shelter in place as deadly

Similarly, the standard instruction for earthquakes is "stop drop and hold", since the advice has to be fully general, covering all people in all circumstances, including highrises where evacuation is not possible. But I live in the ground floor of a not particularly well-built four story apartment building; my desk is eight feet away from an outside door. If there's an earthquake, I'm leaving!
Are those still microservices?
> Incredible seeing democracies like Australia

This one always get a chuckle out of me. Australia is the most facist Western power. It barely has a free media because some rich dude bought it all. They wanted an egregious law forcibly drafting their citizens into being spies if they worked for tech companies. They extensively spy on the internet. They censor video games. The list goes on and on.
>> It means you work with constraints, for example dataflow constraints.

> I'm not sure anyone else would call that anything but an interface

I am sure that nobody calls that an "interface". First, a dataflow constraint is nothing like an interface (for one it is an implementation). It's also a standard term of art.

https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~amulet/papers/toplas-constraint-expe...

https://arxiv.org/abs/1104.2293

http://web.eecs.utk.edu/~bvanderz/quickplan.html

http://www.hosobe.org/wp-content/uploads/iccae2020.pdf

...

> This is obvious and not adhering to that is unmaintainable, due to confounding variables

It's actually not obvious, as shown in the paper. And it is not intrinsically necessary. It is necessitated by the architectural mismatch.

> Messaging requires synchronization, which requires something akin to a render().

Exactly. Messaging pretty much requires this, or more generally "call/return" requires this as a user-visible and user-defined construct, due to to the mismatched architectures.

Dataflow constraints, as shown in the paper, do not require anything like this at all. A more appropriate architectural style makes the requirement vanish into nothingness.

> An underlying dataflow constraint is still fundamentally a system that has to transfer the same information.

Exactly, but it allows us to structure those transfers in a vastly more straightforward and obvious manner, as demonstrated in the paper.
If some random website has a ToS that said by using this service you sign over the deed to your house and add our company to your will, no court would enforce that. Pretty much anything unusual outside of the standard terms is hard to get a court to enforce in a b2c ToS setting.
It would be a lot cheaper if you created mid rise buildings and turning homes into an investment
> “Everyone in the industry uses it” is always the argument for some legacy tool before it’s replaced by something better

I guess the MacBook Pro's days are numbered, then?
> Windows it'll use CoreAudio if installed, but you need to install an old MSI pulled from an old version of iTunes to get that on Windows... so the vast majority of streamers on Windows are stuck with ffmpeg-AAC.

I think windows might have a built in AAC encoder in media foundation? Wonder if that's true and if it's any good.
Or just use a client that does not have a JavaScript engine.

From the perspective of this text-only browser user, there is no "paywall" there are just complaints from people who are using browsers that run JavaScript.

From where I sit, it looks like JavaScript is the problem, not "paywalls". Specifically, browsers that run it automatically and web developers that use it irresponsibly. It seems the JS interpreter is not in the browser for the user to write and run her own scripts to improve her UX but for website operators to run their own scripts, without any prior selection or approval from users, in order to benefit their own interests.

Allow me to explain. A true access control would require an approved source IP, a password or something similar. Thus, this so-called "paywall" is not an access control to exclude non-subscribers. It is more like some sort of deliberate annoyance, forced hassle as a weasel-like form of "marketing". It is implemented using JavaScript. The question to ask is whether NYT could and would carry out the same sort of intentional annoyance without the use of JavaScript. They probably could, yet the fact is they don't. And so we are left to wonder, perhaps they wouldn't, even if they could. JavaScript clearly enables, and seems to me may actually inspire, shenanigans like this "paywall". (Why annoy non-subscribers. "Because we can. It's easy.") Take JavaScript away from web developers and what would happen. Would they reimplement this "paywall" in another way, without using JavaScript. How easy would that be, compared to using JavaScript.

What we have now is NYT 1. collecting data on non-subscribers, 2. showing them ads (thus potentially producing revenue from non-subscribers) and 3. annoying non-subscribers (after collecting data on them and showing ads) to try to get them to subscribe. #3 is a new low.

Turn off JavaScript and this does not work. Or use a client that does not support JavaScript and one never even knows this is happening to other users. I only know about a NYT "paywall" because I read about it. I have never experienced myself. I can read the entire online edition fast, in one go. Apparently the only reason is because I am not using a browser released by an entity that collects data on users, a browser that runs other peoples' code, more or less indiscriminantly, by default. This leads me to have a different perspective than the users of popular browsers. The popular browsers and JavaScript seem like they are the problem, or at least a fundamental part.
He hasn’t sent anybody to prison.

He’s referred some requests to law enforcement, who’ve than taken whatever action they deem necessary. (Admittedly in some jurisdictions for some demographics, there might not be much distinction there.)

If your angry 13 year old brother or cognitively impaired cousin that you didn’t get a PS5 for xmas emailed this guy, it’s spectacularly unlikely the cops would send him to prison.
Terra (YC W21) Is Hiring for a Founder Associate in London
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/30200112-secondhand-time
Free Rice
> The programmers are in a position of power over the delivery drivers, through the power of their code

I've never worked in a place where programmers decide what to build. At best they decide how to build what they are "asked" (told) to build.

If they try and dispute what to build, they are often told to hit the bricks.
are you saying ffmpeg is the next log4j ?
It is also fitting to mention that Kandinsky very likely has synesthesia, where he could hear/taste/etc colors and shapes.

Kandinksy’s works looks the way they do partly due to the “sound” or other qualities —- that most (all?) viewers cannot understand —- that the images triggered in his brain.
As someone born in ussr ans still living in Vilnius I can tell you there was no much happyness back then. Obviously there are happy moments in life, no matter how poor you are, but we know it is a bit better when you have something to eat. I am not a fan of consumerism, but I take western culture for having a choice what you do. The soviet erra didn't do that. Orwell's Animal Farm describes well the reality in soviet time...
And all the java classes for debugging, profiling, breakpoints, watch vars, etc.
I've used both, for with else more often. It avoided some booleans and if's that would have been much less clear/easy to get wrong.

I'd like a different name for for "for's" else.

I've been using method/function redefinition in place of conditionals related to initialization.
But once we can spin up 1000 container images of your brain…
> Her brother had become an entrepreneur and then had to work on Saturdays.

In the second part of the 1980s (or maybe since the early 1980s? I can't remember exactly, I was just a kid) Ceausescu's regime imposed work on Saturdays, and for some domains even once every two Sundays (like it happened to my dad, who worked in constructions).

One of the first decisions taken in 1990 by the new democratic regime once Ceausescu fell was to eliminate working Saturdays, i.e. to give a full weekend to working people. It's funny cause the newly formed opposition to that new regime (the forerunners of today's centre-right political, liberal forces) were pretty critical of that decision, saying things like "as bad as the Romania's economy left to us by Ceausescu is we need to work more, not less!".
1. Is that text before or after the first link to the website?

2. Is it a reasonable expectation for a website to be self-sufficient for a visitor, or should they have to read about it somewhere else?
Yes. On Windows actually :)

Debian is not the best maintained distro.
> But we're talking about salaried employees being asked to put themselves in the shoes of their users once a month. Let's keep some perspective

My perspective is "I did that job in college and I remember well how shit it is, I don't need to be told by my boss to go experience it again"
>The visa scheme seems to be an enormous benefit to NZ.

This scheme was once touted as a way to jump start the NZ tech sector but it doesn't appear to be having any impact. Those getting the visa might only be in the country a few weeks in a year and their investments are going into companies which haven't done anything innovative in decades. The most scathing part of all is that New Zealand's still a terrible place to build a startup.