skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Industry is not a bad idea. But most crucially, the thing you feel is an identity slipping away. Academia has priesthoods, and so does industry. When you fall out of the fold, it can be a hard crash. People who can't find a fit tend towards taking odd jobs or a van down by the river. That's the real thing driving discontent at 30 - "I'm not making it, maybe I'm all washed up." But you are most likely done with priesthoods. Your second act looks different from your first.

Studying something of genuine interest is a crucial first step. It may be apparently trivial, in which case you call it "art". It may be of obvious import, and then it is "philosophy". The thing you study and the thing that brings in money may coincide, and that will make for a contented life for a time. But there will be little public indication that you might be succeeding at the personal journey. You must create your own rubrics and principles of operation.
Past discrimination doesn't justify discrimination in the present.
What evidence is there that finding a relationship is "increasingly hard[er] and harder for men to secure" compared to any other time in history? And what evidence is there that monogomy is "thrown out the window now?"
In the US the health insurance for indigent people (Medicaid) has good coverage for psych meds although it is tough to find doctors that want to see you. Health insurance for retired people (Medicare) doesn’t pay for Benzodiazepines because they cause falls in the elderly population. Some disabled people get the later if they worked long enough to qualify for regular social security.
> I really wish rechargeable batteries had interchangeable form factors like normal batteries.

They largely do. For example, the famous 18650 which powers all kinds of devices from power banks to laptops to cars.

If what you’re referring to is their common inclusion into proprietary battery packs, there are some technical reasons for that difference, like cell balancing, safety protections, etc. While it could be possible to engineer some (but not all) of these concerns out of the equation, you’d end up with a more expensive larger and heavier product.
Neutral ground is useless if the blockchain doesn't have an oracle to know what happens in the real world.

The blockchain only knows about things on the blockchain itself. So someone has to do the actual data entry into the blockchain, and that person is the weakest link in any 'prediction' scheme.
The answers are all in it's JavaScript source code, but what's the fun in that?
Have you taken a look at Nebula [0]? Might fit your needs. It also uses the Noise Protocol Framework but adds the bells and whistles on top needed to synthesize an overlay network like you want. MIT licensed too fwiw, full self hosting. Worth a look at any rate, WireGuard is much lower level though I'm sure it could be built upon for the same purpose.

----

0: https://github.com/slackhq/nebula
There shouldn't be any meaningful reduction in security afaik. Most of the performance comes from reducing the number of rounds used because it was shown that it was unnecessary iirc.
More often than not, it's the Crunchbase DB. Especially for early companies it can be pretty out of date quickly. My current employer had its entry badly merged with a similar named company that wasn't even close to what we did, so we had the wrong description for over a year.

Also it lists two employee profiles, but a size of 1-10. This is common too, again at my current employer we've got a headcount in the 20s but only 1 or 2 employee profiles on crunchbase. $3M is also not a massive seed round by any means, I've seen plenty of early startups with 2-4 employees raise $9M+.
Ok, I found this one [1] with 100% wins on the whole 12k-word set. But it optimizes for worst-case, not average.

[1] https://www.poirrier.ca/notes/wordle/
>"I never do X, therefore..."

That's not what he said, he said rather "I never do X, what am I missing?"
There is already rigor: insurance and bond. However the insured and bonded contractor has to have a contract with the landlord so landlord can go after the insurance and bond. Thus only the landlord can order work on the property. Theoretically a renter can become an insured and bonded contractor oneself but it's much cheaper to just pay the contractor through landlord.
Nearly zero companies believe advertising is not working. That is purely an HN regurgitated opinion which is not reflected in the real world.
Some may say I "wasted" my 20s- changing majors, dropping out of school, going back, trying 3 different careers, multiple countries. When I turned 30, I was in deep debt (student loans + credit cards), a year or so into my 4th career and a few years into a marriage that I couldn't admit wasn't going to work out. Some of my friends were years into their careers, financially successful, some already had kids, I felt like I was woefully behind and would never catch up.

Fast forward and by my late 30s I'm debt free, make more money that I ever imagined, in a wonderful 2nd marriage, my 4th career turned out to be perfect for me and everything is on track. A lot can change in a few years, if things are not working now, doesn't mean they won't work in the future. Explore, learn about yourself and others, take calculated risks and keep going.
And Linus was told of this and, in typical Linus fashion, he dismissed it.
Considering all of the lovely armchair analysis and assumption from non us citizens about the US on this thread, I thought I would just state it so some random European HN reader doesn't make yet another incorrect assumption about the US from a stray comment.

“Did you know that in the United States ambulances will not take you to the hospital unless you have insurance if you have an accident? OMG, yes! I read it on HN!”
Depending on where you're from, being aware of your local intellectual property laws and the like should not take too much effort in my opinion. Whenever I receive an offer/a contract/etc I take a lot of red pen to it and send it back with my comments. Most companies have no problem with this, the ones that do are good to avoid anyway.
Had this. It was telling me to try again 'later'. Ok, i did 'try later' every day for three weeks, and they didn't let me in. Using the very same IP address as I used to always access it, no less.

Then, I gave up, moved all my services to another email account, and after 2 or 3 months tried logging in, and it suddenly allowed me to log in.

Needless to say, I will never again use gmail for critically important things.
It is relative to other tools in the same space and beyond a point it is meaningless.

I.e. I would be happy to find a library with 100 stars in say elixir and similar threshold would be say few thousands in JavaScript.

Beyond 10-20k it is just popularity. It is meaningless whether vue or react is more popular.

Also it is only one indicator between choosing libraries, how many active contributors, how many closed and open issues , when was the last release also matters as well.

Bottom line is you try to avoid something very few people use or only one guy is developing
Or just use `JSON.parse(localStorage.gameState).solution` but that's not the point.
Freedom comes from within. Sure, external forces can take it away. But even if you're not externally constrained, you can be internally so.

The military, I've heard, tries to instill in you a sense of duty. Perhaps you need to let go of that. Handle your legitimate responsibilities, of course, but don't let other people dump duties on you -- including your parents and others in your past. Get in touch with what you want in life.
So? If 2+2=4 in 1989, then it's no longer true in 2022?
Isn't that just #2, but changing the definition of losing to be the least number of rounds where you can always win (which for Wordle is 5)? These small changes to the definition don't seem to change ev (or the code needed to generate it) that much.

If you don't care about optimizing the EV at all, the greedy tree already has the property you're interested in.
It's IF statements all the way down, baby.
It's definitely not "a casual question." What OP is suggesting is heresy in many places. In many people's view, it is discriminatory not to "compensate" for uneven starting points by advantaging based on privilege. The logic goes that if you aren't actively working/supporting changing things, then you are against them.

Also worth noting is that HR managers are overwhelmingly female[1], and in my experience they tend to be some of the more die-hard believers in DEI. If you're concerned that a policy may be discriminating against a male, you're taking a huge gamble by talking to them. It's quite likely that it was their idea in the first place.

[1]: https://www.hrdive.com/news/the-hr-professions-big-diversity...
Web3 and Open Protocols
I think the strongest claim (one I've also arrived at independently) is that NFTs (aka digital collectibles on the blockchain) are mainly popular because they provide a thing for people who already own cryptocurrencies to spend their digital cash on, without feeling like they're "cashing out" (which has negative connotations in crypto).

Instead NFTs are seen as an investment vehicle — they will appreciate in price over time, just look at BAYC.

One of the other claims is that cryptocurrency largely favours existing pools of wealth and capital. Anecdotally this matches my experience — the people I know who have done really well from crypto investments are those who were already incredibly well-off in the early 2010s, and were looking for interesting places to invest.

The last claim (that I've also heard first-hand) is it's really easy to raise VC money if your startup centres around "decentralisation", which means a ton of entrepreneurs have a strong vested interest in believing that all this stuff is the future. The big irony there is a lot of the companies in this space (e.g. Coinbase) are de facto advertising themselves as the centralised hub for decentralised systems, creating big points of failure that contradict the entire ethos of the blockchain.
I just accepted I can't get to that account anymore...
The problem with reading the results of broad statical analyses like these is that it primes you to think about cohorts in a homogenous way, whereas the individual differences, which are often far greater, are underemphasized by the paper that's motivated to establish its relevance
I really do think React itself is complex, and its complexity keeps growing. There is a very simple subset, for sure, but all of these are challenging for mere mortals, either to learn or to use effectively:

- Hook rules in general

- Hook semantics for basically everything except useState

- Suspense

- Portals

- Server Components (I know it’s still considered “experimental”, but it’s already in use by large projects/meta-frameworks)

- Even the “new JSX transform” has a couple footguns

Of course you don’t have to use any of those, but for most real world front end projects that would likely mean reaching for ecosystem tools which, as you said, come with their own complexity and choice on a paralyzing scale.
This, 100%. Think about it another way: IBM et al. sales only lose by talking to lower-title folks.

Best case, they lose control of the narrative as it's reported up internally, and someone higher up still has to approve it.

Worst case, some engineer who actually knows their shit very quickly outlines why this can never work for the given problem.

Once you're into the VP level, there's (usually) less technical knowledge, because folks at that level have full days crammed with higher-level decisions. So it's more plausible for sales to pitch {insert whatever buzzwordy, batshit crazy idea} and have it fly.
Fastmail's UI is just faster too.
So in theory if someone was to ever accidentally or intentionally reset the location info for where all gmail accounts have logged in from, then effectively everyone would be unable to access their gmail account?
Just out of curiosity, do you have two-factor authentication set up? Or the Gmail app on a mobile device? Or do you really just have the recovery account?
For a technology that is supposedly comes from a privacy and security philosophy, blockchain evangelists and devs DO suffer from a lack of adversarial thinking. It has cornered the market in fraud and manipulation, just look at all of the pump and dump and phishing scams that are perfectly tailored to its design.

Blockchain is built from the ground up to prevent exactly one type of security vulnerability: man in the middle attacks. It is absolutely abysmal at protecting against any other form of attack. Anything that involves, say: social engineering, is fair game. After all it is YOUR fault if YOU leak personal information that can be used to destroy YOUR life. If that ends up in the blockchain its not MY fault, I cant do anything... what do you want me to do? change it? punish someone? oops sorry I cant!

Ultimately this form of thinking is the logical conclusion of "personal responsibility" arguments. Why criticize the system when you can instead pretend the problem is the individual? Crypto doesnt have philosophical issues, you are using the wrong wallet. It isnt MY fault that someone made an NFT containing your home address and bitcoin wallet ID, YOU trusted your information with the wrong service.

The ultimate scapegoat is blaming the end-user. At some point you need to take the L and at least admit these are oversights. Blockchain tech has been around for over a decade and it's had plenty of time to solve these problems but instead it has dug its heels in and said "no all of this is by design and good actually"
28 year old male here, and I totally agree (although I’ve had far less problems with female friendships than you). I have some male friends, but far fewer, and I think it’s because I’m looking for this “emotional support, intimacy, and useful social information” , and not that many men are open to that.
Previously on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29801850
Shameless plug: I’ve also made a solver, written in Rust. Main goal was to learn the language, 2nd the trie structure behind the search: https://github.com/jutaz/wordle-search
That’s a fair point, though are you sure about most? And are you saying most code only comes in minified form, or are you referring to libraries that come with a pre-minified option in addition to readable source? I’ve used NPM a bunch and rarely seen minified code only, and usually minification happens on my end as part of my site’s build, not to obscure JS library source code.

It’s true that use of NPM requires trust. At least NPM projects have a name attached to them and some accountability. It is by no means foolproof, but malicious projects lose their accounts along with the reputation that takes time to earn. The world does seem to be okay with a certain amount of trust.

This is really true of any software distribution system, even and including all distros of Linux. The point at the top of the thread is that we don’t have a way to know what happens when we download any software, or when we give our data to an application. We can protect our computers by auditing software and sandboxing systems, but the system still requires trust. Open source and auditing is still just a narrative that I have to trust from my point of view, unless I’m the person doing the auditing myself.

It might help to clarify the threat model. The poster I replied to confused a security model with a privacy model. The thread above it was about privacy, not about security. There is no software distribution model anywhere that addresses what happens with my data on somebody’s backend once sent, nor whether they can share data that I enter into an application over the internet, right?
From 3 days ago: https://merveilles.town/@akkartik/107656797631193281

One less risk to worry about.
I use them as a bookmark in Github.
I always use the 2FA and whatever happens it seems to allow me back in. I would think this happens with a phone number too.
All the rules say is you should not submit your own blog posts yourself. But if someone else submits it, you are welcome to link to it, and perhaps even embed (I think there is an API to access HN data?)

I can imagine a "smart" blog which periodcally checks HN if the post has been submitted (or maybe verifiers visitors' Refere headers?) If no submission is found, the "comments" link points to HN submission page. If yes, the "comments" link points to existing discussion.
The entire premise of the article is flawed. Blockchains aren't at all as "take it or leave it" as it's being portrayed as. In fact, the exact opposite compared to traditional web services.

Yes you can send a token or NFT to anyone on the chain, yes as far as the data layer is concerned that is "immutable". That however does not prevent you as a user to forgo your access/freedom to an entity that knows best for you, just like we do everyday in traditional web services, social media, banking institutions etc.

What does that look like? The underlying data layer (the blockchain) is public and open source. A "moderation" company can build their own middleware that filters data, throws out spam/harassment etc. Then, your node or wallet consumes and interacts with this middleware instead of the base layer. Now you have successfully incorporated abuse/harassment moderation without having to worry about the blockchain at all. If someone sends you something undesirable, you never see or interact with it.

At the end of the day, blockchains give you *the option* to have your freedom, they do not force it upon you. The same can't be said about the traditional tech.
This doesn't work for me FYI; I get the same paywalled page. Fresh browsing session, logged in to Google account.
I’m not saying it’s not working at all. But there’s only so much advertising you can put in front of people and people have only so much disposable income to spend on the advertised products.

Infinite growth is not possible and I believe we’re way past the peak and are now seeing a readjustment of the market.
Some of the videos are impressive. This guys are really small and filmed at very high velocity:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXeSnWY6DNc
Looks like a ПАЗ with bells and whistles.

https://i.artfile.ru/1920x1320_1507055_[www.ArtFile.ru].jpg
The internet is an interconnected series of "someone's service". Your definition is so broad as to be a meaningless tautology.

I host my blog on web space that I pay for. If they stop hosting me, I move. This takes literally one line in a post commit hook to effect.
> Animals and humans prefer sugar over artificial sweeteners in experiments, and that could be because a specific gut sensor cell…

I have an alternative hypothesis: It is because sugar tastes better. In your mouth, on your tongue. Evolutionarily, this could be explained by sugar not being a calorically worthless synthetic compound that happens to taste sweet and may act as a laxative.
That doesn't help OP now, but I found it helpful to enable 2FA with Google Authenticator, and keep emergency backup codes in a safe place. It's slightly more hassle, but there are less 'soft AI' barriers between you and your successful login.

I'd also suggest not to rely on a phone number as 2nd factor, it's not that super safe.
I would struggle greatly to portray myself as non-romantically interested and still have the level of intimacy many women have with their close friends. They're real touchy and huggy. Resting heads on laps or shoulders.

My current partner regularly has sleep overs with her best friend where they rug up on the couch and watch movies late at night. They share the bed when my partner hosts. And its not exactly something strange I haven't seen before.

Physical touch is huge to me when it comes to feeling close to someone so when I think of women's more emotionally supportive and intimate relationships these are all the the things I think of. Maybe it's different for you. But I've seen lesbians express frustration at how it can be difficult to tell if someones interested because of it, with some relationship origin stories being that they were both having late night movie dates with their 'straight' friend, wishing the other was gay too.
Easiest today would be to use the project this project uses. I don't think it existed at the time I was trying, though. And, yes, that would be easier, but not in the vein of "doing it myself" that I was aiming for. :D
I'm having a hard time getting my head wrapped around the idea of relying on Gmail (or any other online identity provider) without enabling 2-factor authentication. The best way to avoid this kind of "AI hell" is just to take control of your own account security and set up some additional factors.
Not necessarily. You should use a different account (preferably one with 0 transaction history, if no on-chain txes are needed) than your main financial account (and really, anyone not living paycheck to paycheck should have more than one of those in the first place. Cold/hot, have a separate one for any defi activities, use a new one for each L2, etc)

Just like you may not have the same email for job applications and dodgy e-commerce, or bring all your cash and cards with you in a purse to the nightclub.

(GP did say “shared across sites”, which should be a very deliberate decision and not the default. UX needs to improve to have better privacy by default. I could imagine Metamask defaulting to generating and connecting a unique address for each domain, requiring manually selecting accounts to have them shared)
For the price you'd want them to be.
Years ago we had a customer working on the automated control system for the Vienna main train station. They only used two computers, but one was a SPARC and the other x86. One ran using a procedural language (CHILL) from the telecom world. The other implementation was written in a production language, perhaps Prolog. they were very concerned that an identical bug could be implemented in both implementations, hence the RISC and CISC architecture and the extremely different programming paradigms.

WRONG: I believe the space shuttles started our with all the computers being LSI-11s. Presumably that was upgraded as the STS program continued!

Hmm, I looked it up and actually they were older: standard IBM avionics computers designed in the mid 1960s. They were all the same design and as far as I can tell from a little DDG searching, they were never upgraded.

I was so wrong I decided not to delete my mistaken observation.
Oh god, have you had the M.C. Escher-esque experience of trying to sign in to an email account, and it hits you with a two-factor-auth prompt that sent the code to another email address?

Imagine the insanity if the email account that received the code in turn asks for a code sent a code to the first one.
You probably shouldn't get a PhD