skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Others have already commented in a similar manner but I think this is worth driving home since the argument you provide is so typical when it comes to these discussions.

The money spent on the yacht has improved society.

The evidence of such is that the public officials in Rotterdam are willing to temporarily move a bridge so that construction of the yacht can continue within their municipality. They see it as a greater benefit to their society to encourage the construction of such yachts. Oceanco employs 320 people whose salaries are likely taxed at a fairly high rate. They have two shipyards in Rotterdam on which they probably pay significant property tax among other fees. They are a manufacturing business and yachts consist of a huge variety of different materials and finished goods so they will be deeply integrated with the supply chain which means there is a large outflow of cash from them to other businesses. The production of luxury goods has a significant impact on an economy, by their nature they demand the highest quality parts and workmanship. Attracting those materials and skills to a city has many knock-on effects that are beneficial. If you removed the demand for or the option to buy super yachts, Rotterdam and other cities would suffer a loss of jobs, skills, tax income, and probably several other businesses.
LiveBeats: Building a social music app with Phoenix LiveView
The persecution of Assange continued for several years under Obama.
> You have a lot of inertia to overcome. That's 15 years of muscle memory and expectations built using different UIs, different paradigms, and different ideas to achieve the same result. You need to factor the fact you're going to be thinking "But I could do that much more easily in <thing I've used for more than a decade>!" a lot. It's possible that you won't ever overcome those thoughts.

The irony being that this situation basically is baby duck syndrome, GP is complaining that a "proper" interface is whatever they were initially taught in college. It reminds me a lot of people's reactions to Vim/Emacs. "I've used tons of text editing interfaces, and none of them had this weird modal crap." Nah, you were just taught text editing in Word, and every text editor you've used since then imitates Word.

Which is actually fine, I tell people who look at Vim that they don't need to use Vim. If GP doesn't like Blender, they can just not use it. "I'm used to a different set of UX paradigms" is a completely valid consideration for what tools you use. It only becomes baby duck syndrome when they start saying that every other paradigm is objectively wrong because they don't have >10 years of muscle memory using it.
No but a kickstarter to take a ship, and drag the ocean for the pieces would be cool.
I can understand the hesitation, it's something we'll consider changing back or making opt-in.

Thanks for the grace there, and that's a problem we are solving. You might have X contacts on Circles but you're only going to see from those you have placed in a circle. So only content from people you actually want to see from.

In terms of syncing contacts, we don't store any contact book information on our servers. We pass through the contact book to see if a user exists there, we return them back as a connection. If not we return them as someone you can invite.
This paper was written by an economist, not an epidemiologist. And, if I'm looking at it correctly, a grad student at that. It's lacking some levels of detail - like it blanket says lockdowns failed, but defines lockdowns in a way that is not necessarily common use. Then admits at least one type of lockdown was successful, but states that as an aside, leaving the title and conclusion intact.
This is a really bizarre chain of comments to me. It's great that you're proud of your work, but an external module is a clearly superior product. First, not everyone has a mobile phone at all. And you can't wear it everywhere you go, especially not in 2009 when the battery might have lasted a few hours at most. You still can't take it in the shower with you. You can't "wear" it if you're not wearing clothing at all. Even newer mobile phones with longer battery life still need to be set down somewhere to charge every now and again and can't stay clipped to your hip permanently. And you inherently need a mobile phone per user. An external module can detect every person in a room falling. They don't need individual sensors. Care facilities and at-home care personnel can use this when people in their care and not themselves are the ones at risk. And this things costs 1/30 of a mobile phone.

The only claim I can agree with is an app-based fall sensor is a good option for people who already have mobile phones and don't trust external modules and would prefer to just use something they already have. You seem to have concluded this is widespread based on your users telling you they felt this way. You have to understand your users are not a random sample of all people at risk of falling. They're very obviously people who had mobile phones and thought something like this was a good enough idea to try.
Where would that somewhere else be? And would he have been as successful?
Why not lower the water under the bridge ? A 150m floating pool (mobile floodgate) where you put the boat in, from which you pump the water out to lower the boat. If the river is deep enough, that would be a reusable solution.
Obviously, but people will cherry pick evidence to rationalize what they already believe to be true and conflate this process with some kind objective falsifiable experiment in their head.
I was following "Roaring Kittys" Youtube Channel when he had less than 400 subscribers. This was never intended to be a pump and dump, he genuinely made a case for a better valuation. The mania and hype started right after the short squeeze in january and I a agree that the community that built around it is mostly a shitshow. However many of the original investors are still invested believing in a business turn-around lead by Ryan Cohen.
"The sad part is that we could actually solve some real problems by coordinating collective action on, say, starting a new city that's designed around non-motorized transit within the city limits."

The incentives are different. The people trying to get rich quick are not likely to do hard work to make/grow a city. Hell, it's hard enough to get people to do the simple act of voting (especially in primaries) or going to municipal or school board meetings.
True, but the months ahead of GDR directive coming in was one of those potential moments.

Google kept promising us their own framework and consent system. They kept pushing the date to unveil it and as we ran out of time I had to build my own, and many others jumped into the IAB framework because of so few options (and it came down to the wire there too despite knowing for years this was in the works).

>> they cannot start with company-destroying fines on day one

I think they can - and the GDPR fines are linked to revenue - and I think they have no choice. Companies need to take this seriously.

>> Slowly, but still

I'll take slowly over backwards.
It would be nice if we could do both.
I imagine that there is a nontrivial amount of nobody channels with suddenly popular videos that are part of fraudulent ad revenue streams (if you can drive views at less $ per view than the ads earn you it's a net positive).

This is not to say that all suddenly popular channels are ad fraud. And it seems in character for YouTube to put a blanket constriction instead of doing the trickier job of dealing with separating genuine viral hits from fraudsters.

Or maybe they're working on something more nuanced but rolled out a rough measure to stem an aggressive wave of ad fraud. We'll never know because companies are tight lipped about that sort of thing.
For many journeymen developers, the choice of programming language is important. There are many, many companies out there that do look for people with N years of experience with language X and not every developer out there is in a place or at a skill level where they can afford to be picky (the average HN developer isn't representative of this population).
The local police were running a traffic light camera scam. Once it was made public, it was immediately stopped. https://padailypost.com/2019/07/12/city-ends-red-light-camer...
There's not much available information on this one
> because I don't believe the problem underlying the current chip shortage is due to the fabs voluntarily reducing their output in order to screw their customers

Same here.

The issue, I think, is that fabs are very frequently re-tooled in order to remain in geometries that have high demand and profit margins.

When I think about it, the issue is probably similar to the pharmaceuticals industry. Inexpensive / generic drugs have lower profit margins because they are largely figured out. Companies consequently opt to produce something else, despite there still being a market for the generic.
This only applies to new live streams, likely due to moderation and copyright concerns! Many platforms will have systems like this to prevent spam.
Remember you have MEPs representing you as well. European elections too often play a distant second fiddle to domestic ones but this really should not be the case.
With 50% YoY growth, next year number will be close to 18000.
Maybe it isn‘t even a better place for the majority? Just a utopia for a few? Take into account that e.g. 20-30% of the population are smokers
From what I've read, no. Once you're U=U, it seems like no treatment can rid the virus completely.

I would love to be corrected though.
> (from what he discloses) millions on them. If you pay something like $250/mo, you can get early access to his buys and get notified when he sells.

If actually can pump stocks and make millions, why does he need to sell early access subscription?
I don't really understand your point.
While HN complains that we want cars without chips to begin with.
Done to prevent live-streaming of terrorist activities/suicides etc?
Reintroduced January 31st 2022, set for markup tomorrow (February 3rd 2022), has 3 more co-sponsors than last time, election year, both sides want to kill CDA 230 and want censorship. Far as I know only Wyden ever speaks out against these bills, I never hear about any other politician vs this bs.

That to me sounds like it's going to pass this time and they're fast tracking it. If I'm wrong please counter me, I'd love to be proven wrong. I'm so tired of this shit.
> That was an extremely high risk change on GCP's part, reminds me of the App Engine days when you'd wake up to find a totally healthy program spamming 500s because they'd make a breaking change without any announcement. It's shocking they're still pulling stuff like this in 2022
reply

Lay with the dogs, wake up with the fleas.

Google is a shitty company producing shitty products. When you select to do business with Google you select to do business with a shitty company producing shitty products and treating its customers like shit. Hence I fail to understand the Surprised Pikachu face when something like this happens.
Yes, I saw this installing 7.3.0.3 this morning: I started the computer, opened Firefox, then downloaded and installed LibreOffice. I have an aversion to closing my browser (and all of its tabs) unnecessarily, so I looked this up and found the Reddit post.
The data being collected is a random identifier and a consent opt-in for tracking/cookies. These businesses use this framework as their source-of-truth declaring whether an internet user consented to cookies or tracking, and their ad systems behave according to the user's preferences.

So now they're being asked to delete their records of who opted in or out, because that data was illegitimately acquired.

[edit] This could also have implications regarding data collected through other systems based on the assumption that an opt-in was valid.
Chips? We need more crisps
Ah yes, the 'ol "need 10 years of experience in a 5 year old technology"...
>I will try Blender 3 but I doubt massive strides have been made to improve the UI/UX since 2.8

Well the left mouse button is now select rather than the right mouse button, for starters.
Well, AMC was a similar story.
Tesla new feature will disable seat controls if you keep messing with them
You could argue that today's circumstance is why you DON'T need explicit laws prohibiting workplace monitoring.

Anyone with the desire could set up such systems today. But they don't. Because they're expensive, inaccurate, and ultimately not all that useful in the social context. There are places that do employ such monitoring, but they're a corner case.

Trust is a core commodity in the workplace. It's usually more profitable to establish a trustworthy workgroup to accomplish some goal than it is to accomplish some goal WHILE monitoring the workgroup's every move for infractions.
What change? Vaccines have never been said to be 100% effective on an individual basis.
You're comment is so obvious propaganda it's actually funny. Give our best to whoever's paying you for this low quality BS and tell them to try harder.
The alternative isn't that the money sits in a bank account. The better alternative would be that those 500M went to Amazon employees instead of the CEO. The employees could have used it to buy nice winter boots for their kids. Probably a lot more useful than yet another boat dumping tons of toxic waste into the ocean.
That's because the point of this article is "Don't trust these scam artists!" because collective action motivated by hatred of elite rigging the system... is dangerous to those elite.
This was a big thing in the early days of the blogging boom. I forget who, but one major blogger made a point out of treating posts as living documents that changed as stories developed.
Early Google set themselves apart with the user experience. For example, Google Search's homepage's simplicity was astonishing at the time; a direct inverse of the bloated pages most of their competitors at the time favored (Yahoo, Alta Vista, AOL, and Dogpile were pretty bad if I remember correctly, and Ask Jeeves was somewhere in the middle. The others I don't remember as well). GMail may have not been the best technically speaking (I don't know), but from a user standpoint it was cleaner than the alternatives, who would include things like links to news stories in their inboxes.

I recommended people use Google in part because there was, at the time, less risk of them clicking on something and being confused by it. (Why is there news in my email? Where's my email? How do I search?)
DFV owns my heart but ruined my favourite subreddit, i have mixed feelings.....
Suppose there are two products on the market.

One, a children’s toy that sells for $9.99. The other a very similar children’s toy that uses lead paint, instead of a safer paint, but is otherwise very similar. It is not clearly labeled as having lead paint. The lead paint toy sells for $4.99.

If people buy the cheaper toy, does that mean people are “choosing” lead paint over the more expensive toy? No! It means people are unaware of the lead paint, or are unaware of the dangers of lead to children.
Plenty of affordable housing in depressed areas (Appalachia). The problem is the lack of jobs, or safety, or some other thing people want.

People don't want affordable housing. They want affordable housing in the existing cities where they (and everyone else) want to be.
If you keep data about a person in the EU that data is protected by GDPR regardless where or how you got it, having an intermediary doesn't matter.

> how will the Council know if the end-tracking companies deleted their data?

That doesn't matter, all they need is to ask the companies and the companies to say that they deleted the data. That is how everything else works with GDPR. When you ask a company to delete your data you don't know the company deleted it, they could still store it but keep it hidden etc. The government asking this is exactly the same.

If it later comes up that companies has a lot of data about users that they can't explain how they got, or that traces back to this case where they said they deleted it, then those companies will get huge fines. Open violations of laws where there is no question that the company knew they were breaking it are a very different case from companies toeing the line, the fines would get much higher.
Is it blurry? It seems to me like the difference comes about when you move from something which is reasonably plausible or justifiable but can be shown evidentially to be incorrect, versus something that's just well, random.

"I don't trust vaccines because pharmaceutical companies have a financial incentive for me to take them/my government is forcing me/etc" are reasonable viewpoints to hold. The reasoning is based on correct information and true premises, it's sensible to be skeptical of something that suddenly comes out of nowhere and is being pushed from all angles.

You can even hold that viewpoint and take the vaccine anyway because you figure, sure, they want to push them, but that doesn't mean they're not also actually useful and beneficial for the recipients.

I'm struggling to explain here, but basically, the right side of the equation "X is happening" is correct, but the left side "therefore Y" is problematic.

"I don't trust vaccines because they have 5g microchips in" is wrong on both sides. They don't have 5g microchips in, we can show that. Even if they had an incentive to do so, they can't.

That's the line in my view, whether something is even possible.
I think the point is that megacorps' business structure is way too complex for anyone to actually understand. Why is Gmail free? It makes money for Google, that part is clear, but I have no idea how exactly. I'm not even sure they can measure it exactly.

Those companies have transformed the internet, and its users, by offering services for free, in exchange for user data. We have raised an entire generation (two, maybe?) of people taking that model for granted, nicely illustrated by completely ad-dependent YouTube superstars.

Of course, we cannot simply ban all advertising and start charging for everything. But I'm of the firm opinion that, in order to go forward, we have to leave this business model behind, as humanity. The only way to achieve this is by making it unattractive via legislation.
Appreciate the comment! We do this to see if there is an existing user for a connection (like any chat app). We don't store the contact book on a server nor process anything other than that.
There were states involved. But there has not been for more than 30 years now!

Yet the current Israeli government wants his population to believe that they are still at war, still threatened but an outnumbering army of Arab people on the verge of slaughtering them all. It was the case for a good 40 years after the creation of Israel, but now it isn't.

But the military-industrial complex and the far-right extremists won too much from the situation to let it go. No wonder Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated…

The war is no more, but they want the citizens to feel as if it was still ongoing, as it is a great way to keep people under control, and to push their supremacist agenda. And leaving Hamas doing a bit of terror from time to time is a really efficient way to do so.
I'm a self-taught programmer and I can think of several ways that my hard work was enabled by my privilege. And that's the key for me, is that you're focusing on the "here's what you were given" aspect of privilege and not the "here's what you were denied" aspect. Cheap computers abound now, but it wasn't long ago that having a personal computer at all implied a minimum income level.

I can't speak for you, but I went to a school with a computer lab and had a computer at home from a young age. Learning programming was hard, but it would have been a lot harder without those things. That's privilege. I was an advanced reader because my parents had time to teach me and filled our house with books. That's privilege. I had hobbies in my teen years instead of having to work to help support my family (privilege).

There are lots of people who could be brilliant programmers or engineers had they had the same opportunities as me. Instead of resenting the term, I acknowledge and am grateful for whatever advantages I was provided, because without them getting to the same place would have required exponentially more work, or maybe even been impossible.
> but I can blame them for so often going for the easy stories that they are fed

It's hard for me to blame anyone who needs to put food on the table. Journalism isn't a benevolent profession, people need to get paid. Until money gets disconnected from this profession, I don't think it's ever going to be fair to say "why can't these people be ethical?".
Location: Dominican Republic
Remote: yes
Willing to relocate: yes
Technologies: JavaScript, HTML/CSS, Javascript, T-SQL, Python, SQL, Git, GNU/Linux CLI, Postgres DB, Pygame, React, Django, Django Rest Framework, Docker, Ruby, Ruby on Rails, Asana, Slack, Heroku, Sentry
Résumé/CV:https://www.linkedin.com/in/cferreira-7159b8110/
Email: cferreirasuazo@gmail.com
I talked to someone last year. I can't say I know him.
Tabliss – FOSS New Tab extension with hundreds of cutomization options
Tech’s rise in the advertising market is the result of a fast-moving shift from traditional media to digital – a shift that has largely played out the past several years. Nearly two-thirds of US advertising is now digital (led by search advertising), 25% is television, and less than 10% is all other types of advertising – print, radio, out-of-home, video games, music streaming, etc.

If you'd like to know one of the reasons why traditional media doesn't waste time lashing out at Big Tech, here it is.
They answer it fairly clearly

It is off if the related setting is currently off if you're a non paid user. However if you're a paid user it is currently on.
They badly need to run another paper trading challenge... The new userbase needs a pruning.
A lot of content on the internet isn't worth paying for. Taking your YT Premium example, I'd say over half the content on there is garbage clickbait that is only viable because of ads - it doesn't actually provide enough value to the viewer (and often completely wastes their time) but the current system rewards that because by the time the viewer realizes that it's already too late and they've been paid for their ad impression.

The problem with YT Premium specifically is that it still requires a Google account, agreeing to their "privacy" policy and provides no guarantee that Google isn't still going to stalk you.
The one issue I have always had with the 'observer' problem is that everything is 'seen' by something. But then I am a dullard on this junk and probably have it wildly wrong :)
Show HN: GPT-2 from scratch in PyTorch – Video tutorial
Countless articles and media pieces over the years on the plethora of unethical ways our data gets sold, resold and abused and still you ask what's wrong...
Yes, the Citizens United decision was a clear move towards plutocracy. And while congress could pass a law to correct it, it's unclear if they have any inclination to do so, and if the court would let it stand if they did. I agree the health of the US system is poor, but hope that we can still revive it.
We were on the advertiser side of the equation - we just wouldn't bid on european IPs with ads that hadn't yet been audited or failed the audit.
Free private cities should be a solution in this case. Finding a better optimum by optimizing the city towards the specific population living in it not taking the mean, where everyone is unhappy to some degree