skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think the reason this isn't done more often is that most decisions making is political in nature. Explicitly stating downsides provides opponents of "the plan" a greater opportunity to continue arguing for their side in bad-faith.

Presenting only the upside gives enough context to helps the team execute the plan.

Another aspect is management trying to hide the distasteful aspects of decision making (e.g. choosing an "inferior" technology because it requires the company to invest more in training its staff)

I wish this wasn't the case and I dream of being part of an org where upsides/downsides are always explicitly stated but I am yet to find one (outside of very small teams within larger orgs) where complex politics doesn't have an oversized influence on decision making.
While Philosophy is often split along analytic/continental lines, another way to split it is along the lines of whether the philosophers feel it is important to use precise language that tries to improve mental clarity and shared understanding and those who feel that there are certain ineffable qualities to ideas that are lost when you attempt to make that level of precision, both because of laziness in readers and because of inherent qualities to the ideas. Situationalists are very much in the latter camp and have said that at times they were deliberately obtuse so as to avoid being misunderstood.
Kansas population, almost 3 million. Small nations in Scandinavia have some of the best healthcare, social security, internet, wages, etc. so if what you say is true (I have no idea) then it is a problem with America at large and not Kansas per se since Kansas have everything needed to be at the top if allowed by the systems in place.
I worked at a small arcade machine maker in the late 80's. We had an option in our arcade machines to adjust the violence slightly for the German market.
Not to defend their methodology, but your attempt to equate the GOP baseball shooting with an attempted coup says a lot more about your biases than the study authors'.
Is breaking up companies the only way to stop antitrust or monopolies?
I am curious what the next thing up is that is more "legit". At this time I've used Arduino/ESP/Teensy. I bought an STM32 and Beaglebone but wondering what does something like a Boston Dynamics dog use? Probably a full on processor like i7.

Edit: oh it uses i5 with Ubuntu ha, plus separate graphics for the AI part
I also notice someone mentioned iCloud+ as an alternative. I have an apple ecosystem at home so this would make the most sense for me.
I don't believe it. I think it's woo. There's no reason for my health to be harmed just because someone has more than me.

I'm open to being proven wrong, but I think this is another social science fad, another victim of academia's ideological blinkers and confirmation bias avalanche.

It'll be in and out, just like how eggs and wine and chocolate are good for you on Tuesday and bad for you again by Thursday.

EDIT: Yes, I'm sure envious people can tie themselves in knots over inequality, but I don't see this as a social problem. It's a personal psychological problem for those people. And I am skeptical that it is so common as to be my problem.
No the license cost is fairly marginal in overall development costs. Rather it's an embedded system of numerous (hundreds) networked devices so it limits what kind of development and tests you can do on your laptop†. In the end you have to attach to remote images for debug sessions.

CCL happened to have threading support on Arm32 target we use so that's how the development historically started. LW license was procured later: we gave it a run and turned out the tree-shaked binaries it produces use much less memory. We're comfortable running it on a 128Mb RAM (single core) SoM as a part of embedded Linux build.

† That said we do have a simulator for the product running on a 64c/128t server. It however mostly tests deployment/procurement/networking part of the thing rather than physical component it operates on.
> "We hope to become an internet-scale Library of Alexandria, a place where hundreds of millions of people go to learn about anything and share everything they know."

> be me

> be in Library of Alexandria

> row upon row of books as far as the eye can see

> any topic, any subject, all the collected information in the world available just because it's humanly possible to enable that

> you can practically see the titles on the book spines

> one of them looks familiar... could it be...?

> take a single step forward

> hologram stutters and flickers out

> "Phis service requires authorisation to perpetually access your Realtime User Feed in order to continue. Process authorisation?"

> (you later learn the book title that looked familiar was algorithmically constructed by a model that keyed off of the Realtime User Feeds of your public friends list.)
Another thing came to mind.

Let's say you know I'm the kind of person to easily give people money. I just got my paycheck, and you knowing this, you ask me to give you the money. I'll give you the money because that's the kind of person I am. But then I'm left with no money for the month, and all of its consequences.

Who do you think would carry the blame in this situation?
In the spirit of being charitable, I would say that the article is highlighting a place where the guarantees are incompletely documented. And not having a solid specification and clear documentation is absolutely one of the things that makes unsafe Rust hard.

I'd actually like to qualify that a bit. Doing unsafe is not especially hard, just use pointers everywhere instead of references. That's exactly like C (which doesn't even have references), but the syntax is clunkier, you have to use function calls instead of concise operators like * and ->. What is hard is finely interleaving safe and unsafe Rust, as the author is trying to do. That's difficult because the unsafe code has to upload all the safety invariants of safe Rust, and those are indeed complicated.
Actually in Japan I believe the arcades also have curfews for kids under 18.
The point is that it can happen if enough influential individuals in the eth community want it to happen, it is a social software not "immutable", and this will be further enshrined if PoS ever becomes a reality.

Bitcoin has the same problem, and cryptocoin enthusiasts are fooling themselves if they think that miners won't raise the 21m cap when the end of Bitcoin rewards start looming.
There may of course be rare cases where having it uninitialized helps, but I would wager that even than the compiler could optimize it more often than not.
In my country (Germany) afaik if you transfer money, the bank is not guaranteed to be able to get it back (if it has already processed it). There are other forms, for example other people can withdraw from your account and you can contest it within a certain time frame.
They know users activity hours better that way. At scale that is valuable data.
> If you want to write unsafe code, I think that's perfectly fine, but Rust is not going to cater to your desires. C and C++ will give you the tools you need with the conveniences you want.

This is a bit of a odd suggestion to me, honestly, you're basically saying Rust is not intended to be a C/C++ replacement. There is definitely a reality that not everything can be written in completely safe Rust, and a lot of the places that Rust could be the most beneficial (Ex. Linux Kernel) are going to require using it.
Seems pretty obvious to me that we are going backwards.

I always worried about this stage of my life as a non-software engineer that I would get lapped by the younger generation who had been immersed in technology since birth.

Smart phone immersion though not only seems useless but counter productive. No computer skills or attention span. At least I got a ton of computer skills while my attention span was shortened.

Is this going to change with Generation Covid? That seems like an easy bet no.
I still shoot a _lot_ of film. But Digital Cameras today have more dynamic range than any film I can buy. That's the "art" with Analog film: figuring out how to best represent the scene with the limitations of the medium.

I shoot film simply because I'm an old geezer who grew up with it and still have access to a color darkroom.
Switching to LIFO adaptively is a cool idea, thanks for sharing that Facebook is using that at scale, I didn't know that.

Thinking about eliminating bufferbloat was the original line of thinking that made me think of LIFO queues, since the latency properties of a drop-oldest LIFO queue are (I think) only related to the burstiness of the traffic flow, not the volume, and so steady flow cannot ever cause any intermediate node to hold a persistently large queue of messages that will ever be transmitted.

From the perspective of an application transmitting over the network, a steady flow through a saturated link results in packet loss but not latency, while a bursty flow results in small burst-sized latencies to random packets, and some reordering as a result. Because the _downstream_ traffic from one saturated link is typically not very bursty when it hits the next saturated link, negative effects won't accumulate in the same way that latency does in bufferbloat.
Nah this is my my bad.

Revamping the API Key permission logic to be aware that the person who created the project might not be the same person accessing it via API now that we have public sharing was a known “todo” that I deprioritized until users started running into it!

Prioritizing now that there’s actually some traffic discovering it.
Aren't all the `(*role)` in their code "mutable references" too?

(*role).name = "basic";
It's not just personal anecdotes — you have conspicuously ignored all of the links you've been given to major business and mass media showing adoption. I've tried to assume good faith but to be honest this is reminding me a lot of when a creationist tries the “god of the gaps” technique trying to ignore the overwhelming evidence that their claim was wrong and instead tries to pick away at whatever small detail they think is easiest to attack.

> I'm sure plenty of people have awesome anecdotes using crypto.

Oddly, you have been unable to provide those examples. Odd that, especially since your “big companies” list includes some like Microsoft who backed away due to volatility and others who immediately convert it into hard currency as part of the payment process. There is nothing world-changing about something like VISA except with higher transaction fees, and none of those businesses would care if Bitcoin disappeared because it's just one of the many options their customers have available for payment. They'd remove a button on their website which a tiny fraction of people use and that'd be it.

> In Dubai houses are getting bought using crypto.

Same deal: they're treating those as cash payments because the cryptocurrency is liquidated before the deal closes, because it's not legally approved in the UAE.

https://www.zawya.com/mena/en/business/story/Can_you_buy_pro...
I used AirBnB to spend a week at a time in different areas of the city I was targeting. I looked for places near things to do, walkable, parks, waterfront, where people congregate. After 8 weeks of bouncing around I narrowed it down and spoke to the locals I'd met along the way on which spots in the area I'd chosen were solid. I chose a small, two story complex with a pool in the center, near a popular stretch of bars, adjacent to great waterfront and healthy activities. My playbook won't work for everyone, especially folks who might not be outgoing.
Unless the founder of the company builds a culture that is designed to survive without them at the center, the company will eventually fail without them there.

One of my former employers was like this - the founder was a brilliant engineer, who installed good financial controls, and was himself decent at the business end.

But, he was a micromanger, and he never sought to create replacements for himself inside the company, he tended to penalize people who stepped out of line too. So once he was out of the picture (he sold out), we didnt really have the right person to run the company, or the right culture to just install a generic manager with industry expertise, it instead was a company that had been formed for the founders personal needs.

That company was purchased by a multinational, and is now being systemically dismantled.
It does good when your bank accounts get shut down, as happened to Wikileaks for example.
In practice the USSR was an extremely unequal society in terms of wealth distribution. Growing awareness of the enormous gulf in the standard of living and political power between the nomenklatura and the quasi-enslaved contributed substantially to its collapse.
> He said that Spotify could "have either Joe Rogan or Neil Young, but not both".

Why it has to be mutually exclusive like an XOR operation? In a civilized discourse it is OK to have both points of view present at the same time, so that a listener can listen to one or both or none. By insisting on just one (in whatever context) we diminish our intellectual pursuits. Is it now all about cheap publicity stunts?
Of course not, but in most cases, especially vertically integrated monopolies like Amazon or Apple or, classically, Standard Oil, it's the only remedy.

I left off Microsoft because that's already been litigated.
Unless “the serfs” are hate and fear other “serfs” more than they hate and fear “the lords.”

This is very much a real dynamic.
Bitcoin has been working pretty well for years now.
Your claim is self-refuting. If one doesn't have freedom of association, one doesn't get a choice in whether one must associate with bigots or not.
Americans stupidly invade countries literally out of the goodness of their hearts and naïveté of their minds. Proof of this is the type of propaganda needed to prod the naturally isolationist American people to war.

(Americans mind you. not their leaders. The leaders are cutthroat internationalists)

Germans invade their neighbors out of a feeling of superiority, or needing their “living space”. Again, look at the propaganda. (Not all! The German opposition to Hitler was heroic. But outnumbered)

What drives Germans to war should be suppressed. What drives Americans to war is fundamentally good and should be augmented with proper history lessons in the hope they’ll learn to stop believing their leaders.

And as disgusting as American wars are… you really want to compare American wars to the Germans’?
There is only one true god, an 800MB beast - Total Commander Ultima Prime[0]

[0]https://www.tcup.pl/forum/showthread.php?tid=3125
It's not that they have more. It's that you know they have more, that it's not fair they have more because they are not better than you, and the path to get more is blocked / unfairly policed. And that eats you up inside. And that eating up is constantly firing stress hormones and heardening your heart.

In short, anger leads to hate, hate leads to the dark side.
Identifiability for IP addresses uses an even lower standard. The GDPR says that for something to be truly anonymous, there must not be any “reasonably likely” means for identification, even with the help of third parties, even when relying on additional information. There has of course been litigation about this, in the form of the Breyer v Bundesrepublik Deutschland case. It was based on the GDPR's predecessor law, but it used virtually identical phrasing so the conclusion still holds.

The European Court of Justice constructed a hypothetical scenario to show that identification can reasonably be likely. Let's say the website was attacked by a hacker. In a logfile, you find the attacker's IP address and want to prosecute them. So you report the incident to whatever authority is responsible for such incidents, which then gets a court order so that the attacker's ISP discloses information about the IP address. As long as the ISP knows to whom that IP was allocated at the time, there is now a reasonably likely chain of events that leads to identification of the person behind the IP address.

In this case about Google Fonts, the court says that it's sufficient if the website operator or Google have the “abstract means” for identification, not whether they actually did this for this plaintiff's specific IP address.

A solution would be if the EU forbids ISPs from keeping such logs, but given repeated attempts at mass data retention laws for national security purposes and pressure from the IP industry^W^W film and music industry for copyright infringement prosecution purposes, that doesn't seem likely.
it would be really useful to add release dates to this page...
Improve home screen logic, always associate Home screen with an actual tab
LiveCode is great. I have half a dozen LiveCode apps (some originally in HyperCard!) that I use every day.

Disclaimer: Just a happy customer.
Why is Harvard astrophysicist Avi Loeb working with ardent UFO believers?
> There are so many deep dives into the failures at VC Summer now, and not a single one of them says there's some regulatory switch that could be flipped.

Just last week the NRC shot down a VC funded reactor project citing inadequate documentation. I believe it was coverd here on HN. The issue isn't a magic switch, the issue is the whole regimen is impossible even for some of the world's largest companies, foreign or domestic, let alone a well funded startup. If you can't even get the NRC to certify an existing design for construction, how would you ever get a new one off the ground?
Yeah, I guess it has hardly changed, right?
How dare those consumers not have enough wealth to shop based on anything but lowest price
How is it at all the same? The banking system is not immutable, the chargeback for example is available to all the "plebs" and we make regular use of it when transactions go awry.
This is correct. The Article 22 rights are the most narrowly-restricted of any data subject rights granted by GDPR. It only applies to things that are a Very Big Deal, like prison sentences, voting rights, or eligibility for government services.

While not tested by the courts, there is a plausible argument that "similarly significantly affects him or her" might apply to bans that impact your ability to earn a living. So streamers getting banned from YouTube, or AdWords bans for businesses where that's their main source of revenue. Bans that are lower-stakes than that get harder to justify under Article 22.
How about those who appointed or elected those people into positions with the authority to do such things? At the end of the day, The People must take responsibility for the actions of their democratically-elected government; real accountability will never happen for that reason.
I always bring up this paper when I read a post criticizing OOP. It's a bit old but still very relevant and practical. In it the concept of information hiding, closely related to encapsulation, was first described. This concept plays a central role in the strategy for effective system modularization and is IMHO the basis of OOP.

Shameless plug: A couple of years ago I wrote a post about this paper trying to expand it based on my personal experience and providing a more simpler example to elucidate the concepts presented in it [1]

[1] https://thomasvilhena.com/2020/03/a-strategy-for-effective-s...
I think both your and the parent's comments can both be accurate at the same time.
Hypercard is absolute layout, I think. A large part of UI complexity is handling all the aspect ratios.
That doesn't seem to make sense. Don't people usually borrow money to spend it (for example to buy a house or finance their startup)? So in most cases the borrowed money is also gone and at most you can confiscate the collateral (for example the house). That is still possible with crypto.
What if all estimated remaining fossil fuels on the planet were burned simultaneously?
Normally you do not have to actually directly interact with the legal system to reverse a fraudulent bank transaction. The banks have internal policies to comply with the legal system, because the other outcome is more expensive for them.
Yep, but IP doesn't provide an ordering guarantee at the link level anyway, and higher-level protocols have sequence numbers so they can reassemble things correctly. If those higher-level mechanisms aren't up for the task of handling lots of small reorderings, that would obviously be an issue.
Thanks man! Looks interesting. actually there's been a lack of spreading ruby's knowledge.
That's not what the article was all about. "Majority of Americans want Biden to consider all possible Supreme Court Nominees". Trump did it off a very limited, very ideological list, we didn't hear cries of dismay from the media about that. Trump got special treatment from the media, Biden catches hell.
Then you start running into differing motivations. How often would you see employers "forget to" synch new hires with the unemployment system, figuring that will reduce their claim rate later? Or check in new hires as "verified citizen, eligible to work" when their proof consisted of a McLovin driver's license and a birth certificate still warm from the Kinko's across the street?

It feels like it would turn into every other abused aspect of employment law: widely exploited both because of technical incompetence and the knowledge most will get away with it.
I wasn't sure. Intuitively rail would seem to be cheaper, it looks like it should be a lot easier to lay a rail line than build a road. But rail lines need a lot more fill or bridging over low areas since heavy freight trains cannot climb grades of more than a few percent. On the other hand, rail switches and diamonds have got to be way less expensive than highway interchanges.
Some of the earliest efforts to abolish slavery came from Catholicism, especially Catholic Spain and Portugal. Not really sure how the left can take credit for that, but whatever floats your boat
Kind of, a Python REPL is nothing more than a live Python environment. You type some Python code and you immediately see the result. The main idea behind a REPL is to speed up the feedback loop of write code -> execute code -> verify results -> modify code -> repeat.

The simplest REPL you're probably familiar with is a separate window where you can execute some Python code which you can then copy paste into your editor where you can polish it. This is helpful, but a REPL (even the Python REPL) can do more.

For example a nice IDE for python or lisp lets you execute selected pieces of code with a single keypress. You immediately know whether it works, and you can try out your snippet with different inputs to quickly test it etc.

You'll often make a modification or two after checking your code in a REPL, and good IDEs will let you replace the original snippet with your modified snippet with one or two key presses.

REPLs tend to be a little bit nicer if they're well integrated into your program, for instance you can load parts of your program, or start a REPL with a breakpoint in the middle of a program to debug your code from within a REPL. Again, intelligent IDE integration makes this really cool!

In the case of many Lisps, REPLs have even deeper functionality. You get features like automatically being thrown into a REPL when an error happens, so you can rewrite the code and pretend the error never happened and run it with the updated version. This is even possible in live code! (I believe some lisp code running in a space device at some point was updated from within a REPL in this way? While it was in space!)

I believe there is even more to it than that, but I've never gone deeper than this.