skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Remark #2 on the same:

look, rightly, you do not need to memorize them tables by recitation¹: but consistently, then, you should (as a learner) actually perform all of them multiplications for as many times as needed to make you know them results as if you memorized them even in a less "experienceful" manner.

¹Which is not at all necessary, by the way - on the opposite. When you go, "5x6=30", you are not supposed to keep that in a mental veneer while you think of some random else: you are supposed to keep that thought rooted to its foundations made of structures built on (six and five) sets of five and six, and internally see it as evident. You can recite with presence and awareness.
The Commodore 64 has a similar "feature". It has a separate 4-bit per address * 1k "nibble" ram chip for the screen color attributes. The processor and data bus are 8 bits wide. When the processor reads from color ram the low 4 bits come from the color ram chip but the hi 4 bits are disconnected. The returned results look a bit random but are actually whatever data was put on the bus the previous clock cycle.
> This whole thing seems like continuum fallacy [1]. Just like everything we must all agree on a cutoff because the real world doesn't have neat black and white thresholds

No we don't. This assumes moral obligations are decided by an evaluation of their consequences, aka consequentialism. This is far from the only type of ethics, and permits problematic inferences (see the "Repugnant conclusion").

For instance, a Kantian would reject entirely the notion that such a cutoff is coherent. People who are trying to compel vaccines are merely using other people for their own ends (herd immunity to get back to normal), rather than treating them as ends in themselves. We should strongly encourage and persuade vaccination, but never compel them by coercive means under this ethics. Universalizing "no vaccination" does not result in a paradox, therefore it is not a moral duty under Kantianism.

There are equally compelling formulations of deontology and virtue ethics under which your sort of consequentialist argument also fails, so I'm just not convinced that it's some kind of inevitability.
The ageism in tech story is overblown, and self-reinforcing.

That said, if your goal is to work at only trendy, high prestige employers, you will be competing against a large pool of applicants who will often be younger. Your chances of getting hired are lower. You may blame it on ageism and tell your friends.

On the other hand, there are so many places that need skilled developers. If you actually have skills and can behave like a professional, you will be able to make a living.

Don't let ghost stories scare you away from doing the work to improve and stay current. There are plenty of people who work in tech well into their 50s.
> Tiny output binaries are also very quick to transfer and spin up in serverless as well

This is a big deal when using servers too.

If you have a single server deploy that could be the difference of 1 second of downtime with Go vs 5-15 seconds for an app in a different language to start up.

For multi-server deploys this could also drastically impact how long it takes to do a rolling update. Having a 10 second delay across N servers adds up.

For me it hasn't been enough to seriously consider switching away from Python and Ruby to build web apps because I like the web frameworks that these languages have available for productivity but it has for sure made me wish I could live in a world where it takes any app 1 second to start up. I know Docker helps with being able to ship around essentially a single binary but it can't change how long it takes a process to start.
Beijing 2022 NFT collection from Chinese dissident artist Badiucao
> What problem does that solve? For people to want to switch to this type of bank there has to be a net benefit.

Again, in my argument there are two choices at play. One of the choice allows the other, whereas the other doesn't. You can still have centralization if you want, on top of decentralization. But if you chose centralization for the core, you cannot have decentralization on top of that, even if you'd really want it.
I think the index is skewed by the fact that the offers work differently in different countries.

In France the sandwich isn't much cheaper than the meal. The last time I was in Russia (lowest price on the chart) as I recall there's not as much of a saving for buying the meal.
This one has the correct colors as well.
First results posted from a SARS-CoV-2 human challenge trial
I think the move to events makes sense once you want to start decoupling systems, so there is a scale/complexity aspect to it. Situations where you would steer clear of events, would be those where you don't care to have the benefit of decoupling.

As an example, imagine a small system where a user changes their email address. In the beginning you might only have one action "update database". As the system grows, maybe new teams start to add new features triggered from that event, say "send confirmation email", "calculate fraud score", "send new email to marketing vendor". You could just go and call all those APIs, but at some point you want to emit a "change email event" and just let the other systems do with it what they will.
It's not a step backwards, it's a tradeoff. Crypto is a tool, just like a bank is a tool. It has different pros, it has different cons. Personally I greatly enjoy sending any amount to any country without the possibility of a hold or embargo because "MuH TeRrOrIsM, tHiNk Of ThE cHiLdReN and WaR oN DrUgZ" which is in reality just about governments always wanting more power since all three of those are routinely found to be enabled by and participated in by big banks anyways.

At the end of the day, you relinquish control for a false sense of security. Everyone storing their money in banks in Venezuela found this lesson out the hard way: you don't have any money. The government allows you to store and pass around notes for debt, which are commonly agreed upon as valuable and so our economy spins onward. You know what they say about those willing to give up freedom for security.

Realistically, use your head please. Full tradfi and full defi are equally unwise. It's risk management 101. And yes, some very unsavory things going down in any country are always a risk if you are planning a resilient infrastructure for your estate spanning generations. Usually this has taken the form of multinational diversification, but now we have the extra option to secure long-term wealth without all the legal expenses. Don't dismiss it.

A non-material agreed upon medium of value transfer completely outside of control of governments is unprecedented. You can go to any country, and get someone to give you their paper currency, for a digital one you possess - without ANY restrictions or moratoriums. I'm not sure how that can possibly be called a step backwards. It's a valuable tool even if most of HNs audience has no use for it. Control comes with risks and responsibilities. This is true for being your own bank, running your own infrastructure, and everything else. Literally nothing about this tradeoff is new or shocking, except that it's now available for currency as well.
In a time where you installed Slackware on a floppy to dial up via AOL I'd say the chance that 2 9 year olds meet online on IRC is negligible.

And I'm saying that as someone who barely missed the 90s on IRC as a teenager. (Although I went online with Linux in 98)
A technical solution could be implemented by a bank as well, but I'm not sure it is even legal in most jurisdictions. Same goes for any solution on the block chain.
I mean that notion right there sums up everything about it: the "price" of crypto - as related to USD. That's what people care about. No one's treating it as a currency.
"The sales guy might have been in serious trouble after it and who knows, could not close some deals he was about to make and maybe was maybe never allowed to be at a trade show again."

Yes, and that's a much scarier prospect for the sales guy today than it was 40 years ago.
This seems like post-hoc confirmation of "I knew it! I told you guys so!" like
people who claim a catastrophic recession is around the corner, quarter after next. If you have some special insight that the wider market doesn't and hasn't price in, then the odds and prices are asymmetrically tipped in your favor.

As an example, I spent $13,580 shorting Facebook on Wednesday, which I haven't sold but will probably later today. Yesterday, those short contracts were worth north of $200k. I did it within a Roth IRA, too, which makes it even higher conviction.

Truth is, it was a gamble. No one really knows. If you can truly predict where Facebook will be in 5 years, 2 years, even next quarter, you can be really rich.
The NATO countries are quite happy to be dependent on the U.S. because military capability is hella expensive. NATO can't even get their own military spending target to be taken seriously, and that's an order of magnitude lower than what the U.S. spends. If by "hegemony" you mean "the U.S. pays for everyone else's defense, and gets some amount of reciprocation (most likely worth a lot less than 20% of GDP, so hardly a fair trade!) in the form of favorable foreign policy from the countries it's paying for" then the U.S. is obviously a hegemon and no one among its "clients" is seeking to change that in the slightest.
There is a good DOT map showing average transit bus occupancy by US state that confirms your observation. The lowest average occupancy is in Wyoming at 3.9, the highest is in New Jersey at 15.6. It's a PDF so you need to scroll down page 12 to see the map:

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/tables/occupancyf...

So yeah, we can see why mass transit is overwhelminly less efficient than private car when on average a bus with 90 seats is only hauling around 7 people.
>Yes, that one. Rogan never really corrects himself. He starts pushing back on the data source and then they just transition on to something else. I did see that later on Twitter he did seemingly admit to being fact checked. And blames it on it being a long form show where the topics aren't disclosed up front.

Ya that's fair. He does seem surprised when they fact-checked the data during the conversation.

>In those cases why do you submit a thesis, rather than simply stating, "I don't really know the facts here"? That's what reasonable people do all the time. Rather he is counting on you to not know the facts or be able to fact check him in real time. He just steam rolls you.

I don't think that's fair. They fact check real-time constantly. There is a guy in the room who's job it is to fact check real time. They would start a conversation then discuss aspects of it, and the person would look up what they are discussing and show the results. This fact checker was the person who brought up refuting evidence to the myocarditis claim.

His show reminds me of the old Dick Cavett or Phil Donahue type long form shows, except it's 3 hours long. A conversational show like that is different from a show where you have a set agenda with strict talking points you don't deviate from, like a newscast would have.

Also to be fair, he has a lot of people on who are professionals in their relevant fields. One of the guys the media is currently lambasting as a covid "misinformationalist" is an MD that helped create the technology used by the covid vaccine.

>With Trump in particular I felt that the "mainstream" media largely gave him a pass on most of his speeches unless they were nationally televised. Some of his worst comments were stump speeches that never were aired nationally, but could be found on YouTube and other sites. I think he was much worse than most America believes.

It seems to me the news blew things he said out of proportion that they didn't need to. As someone who looked at some of the source material, what the news said he said and what he actually said didn't match up. It definitely hurt their credibility, IMO. Perhaps they ignored the more egregious things you are mentioning in stump speeches, which seems like an odd tactic.
It tastes the same as in US
That's an option we were considering, we wouldn't mind paying someone to work for us part-time if it gets us to someone who actually cares on building a relationship with us and the company, understanding what are our needs.

Do you have any recommendation on where to look for such profiles?

I'd really appreciate your feedback.
Thank you!
This is also why I don't believe in "Smart Contracts" and the term "code is law", ultimately people want people to be answerable to people. We have courts specifically to address contract and financial disputes, they are essential and provide a level of insurance over business and financial operations.

With smart contracts you have none of this as well as the risk of a bug or backdoor in the code. No one is going to be auditing all smart contracts. They want to be able to use the legal system to address a problem after the fact if it goes wrong.

Admittedly I am no expert, but those concerns have kept me away from ever considering exploring them.
Distributing Dating Apps in the Netherlands
Their stock and earnings would suggest they’re more popular than ever. Every time I drive past the one near me there’s a line of cars wrapped around it.
Don't be depressed. In due time, our kids will complain about their kids zombie-ing out in the metaverse all day, whereas back in their days, they were actively creating memes and dance videos, modding minecraft worlds, and occasionally even had to read entire paragraphs of text.
The whole premise behind crypto isn't gone. You can build centralized custody wallets on the blockchain and you still get programmable money, no middle-men for transactions and lower barrier to entry for innovation in financial services (and of course self-managed wallets for powerusers)
I read something once that when you come across a link, your mind subconsciously hesitates whether or not to open it and that these thoughts detract from your focus on the material at hand.

I often wonder if it would be more beneficial for websites to transition to footnotes with all pertinent links at the bottom of the page.
Snide comment, but still a good point.

I assume that Macdonald's prices based on perceived value. If you go to Asia, McD’s has a much higher perceived value - and McD’s knows this and does multiple product launches every year, often catering to local tastes.

So I’d assume that consumers in the US or Europe don’t value a Big Mac the same was they do in Asia and as such the pricing differ (i.e. they can price higher in Asia).
Author here. I broadly agree with you. I run my own power generation. They're solar panels on my roof and require zero maintenance.

People don't want to run generators. They want stable electricity. There are a variety of ways we can give it to them.

Similarly, people in a hyper-inflation environment don't want crypto - they want stability.

But there's nothing inherent in crypto which prevents hyperinflation. Yes, I've read the original bitcoin paper. That talks about monetary supply - it doesn't do anything if a cartel decides to raise prices.
> Do you actually believe those are real, other worlds?

Logically this depends of how do you define a world. Even if you imagine them as parallel universes with physics similar or mindboggingly dissimilar to that of our world, you can still say there is just one world in which all these sub-worlds exist. So, talking seriously I wouldn't say there are other worlds or there are not. I would just say "observable world" and assume there are many things beyond what we can comprehend or imagine. Even if we agree, just for the sake of argument, that the very consciousness itself is not a product of the material brain, our abilities to perceive, memorize and reason surely are and this way have limitations. Believing these limitations don't render us futile in trying to understand all the phenomena of existing universe and their nature seems absurdly naïve to me.

Practically I just mean I have no idea (or even question) about the world or anything the moment I wake up. As soon as I wake up I feel like "I am" but not "I am in this world". The idea of where I am comes after a variable non-zero delay.
While I agree with what you're saying, that's not the GP's point. They're talking about backwards compatibility, i.e. old code running on new versions. Java has been extraordinarilly good at that (maybe too much so), with the possible exception of Java 9. Try running Java 1.0 code on JDK 17 and it'll probably run fine. Try running Python 2 code on Python 3 and you're generally going to be in for a very rocky ride.
This is by far the dumbest ever HN post that has made it to #1. Too many fallacies to bother taking apart but the worst one must be "banks are free that means they're preferable".
Amitp only has 2 comments on his blog
Yeah what was the deal with that dotcom correction in the early 2000s? Did banks invest differently after GLBA said that they can gamble against peoples' savings deposits (because they created a 'sociallist' $100b credit line, called it FDIC, and things like that don't happen anymore)

Decline of the Glass-Steagall Act:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_the_Glass%E2%80%93S...

Dot-com bubble:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot-com_bubble
It would be the top range (if at all possible) for a developer working as a permanent employee. Usually the only way to make this kind of money is to go self-employed
My gosh, I think COVID distancing has been bad for all our mental health.

Or maybe this kind of trash is the output of professional RIA trolls. This article is an anti-science, anti-government fever dream masquerading as a critique of federal funding of science, and I’m not sure why it gets upvotes. It has nothing to do with federal funding and everything to do with the author’s inability to imagine that his fellow citizens might be trying to act in good faith. Substitute any public good for the word “science”, and the article is the same. Should society really be burned down, because, uh, military-industrial complex?

Someday after people like the author have decimated all of modern civilization, historians will look back at the era of Big Science in the 20+21st century U.S. as one of humanity’s great achievements. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science_policy

Living in America we take for granted the internet, materials science, agriculture, meteorology, geography, as well as all the eye-catching astronomical telescopes etc. As a country we have been big believers in the value of uncovering the truth. And it has worked. Consider that the entire field of modern biology is a product of big government science. It was a freshly-minted postdoc who got a government job at the NIH who actually cracked the genetic code, (yes it was a lowly government employee who did it, years after fancy famous academics theorized about it without actually doing the gruntwork of setting up the decisive experiments to decode the actual code). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Warren_Nirenberg . Maybe the problem is that government science is not promoted by big marketing machines. The nature of public science is that the work is left to speak for itself. So scientists like Nirenberg are not as celebrated as some startup founders or even university professors. But a huge amount of modern science and modern society rests on these everyday government-funded science efforts.

It is disgusting that the public servants who have long been doing good, hard, thankless work, are now being vilified.

Please don’t burn it all down.
I figure it's a loss aversion thing.

Coronavirus is new and therefore feels like a loss we can revert, whereas solving diarrhea or other issues would feel like a gain.

It's irrational but then, we be meat bags innit.
Why wouldn't the USPS just be a bank, with accounts with the Fed and FDIC insurance though? The USPS not providing banking services is because Congress won't let it.
Yeah, it's tedious.
You always have to make yourself aware about the time members of the Frankfurt School lived through and how it influenced their views on western civilization. But it is a cynicism that may not be adequate. Embracing that for a second can still be helpful to become aware of many problems though.

Marxism did not supply people with more freedom than capitalism. Capitalism is an expression of human greed and a method how we can deal with it constructively. Marxism just denies negative but human traits. There still is room for criticism on capitalism, plenty of it, there are excesses that are not excusable. But people that prefer the totalitarian model of society to liberal democracies should never be called intellectuals. Maybe intellectuals with a death wish, but I guess those are an exception.
RT dosen't have a valid permit. They should have asked for one in Germany:
https://apnews.com/article/business-europe-russia-media-germ...
[Hiring] Skalar - Oslo, Norway. On site - With visa. Full-time

Want to live and work in Norway?

We build digital product thru our own startups and with established companies in long term partnerships. We work in beautiful Norway with a trust-based flat structure. Skalar is an equal opportunity employer and encourages all people to apply to our openings
We are looking for talented developers to continue growing our digital products.

Read more about Skalar in our handbook: https://www.skalar.no/handbook

Salary 60k$-100$k+

Senior full stack developer: https://jobs.skalar.no/senior-software-engineer/en

Full stack developer: https://jobs.skalar.no/full-stack-developer/en

Full stack Ruby on Rails developer: https://jobs.skalar.no/ruby-on-rails-developer/en
I still have a Slackware install that runs some really old stuff I have. I remember working at AN ISP in the 90s and slack was are secure distro. All the important stuff (authentication, configs, etc.) were stored and served from our 'slack pool'.

Funny part is now I do a very basic Slackware install that setup pkgsrc (https://pkgsrc.org) on it so I can really experience the best and worst of times!
Especially if they were contacted directly and not having to pay an additional cut to a recruiter/agency
Having a small amount of money on-chain can work as a hedge in many scenarios. Risk of losing, sure it is high, but the failure mode is very different from anything else you own, so the overall risk is lowered.
Ask HN: What makes a good 1-on-1
In the past I have had managers whose 1:1 meetings were worse than useless. But a couple managers I've had over my career ran excellent 1:1s. What makes a good 1:1?

The best one stayed in the room after and took notes, so it always seemed like he had a god-like big picture view. But I can't recall what else made it good, and what we covered.
A well-informed user may decide to switch to a competitor. Users who turn off tracking and data collection are less profitable. It doesn't matter how terrible and interface is, as long as people stay on the site and remain engaged as they are fed ads disguised as content.

I agree there is a UX crisis happening now, but fixing these pathologies requires changing the incentive structures around commercial software. I think the best we can do realistically is get people into open source.
Is your contention that there are no uncritical consumers of Fox News? If so, I have a huge swath of family in Mississippi I should introduce you to.
> What is the thing that is not provable but constructible?

Just look at the grandparent message for an example: "An actual practical statement that is unprovable in Peano arithmetic is Goodstein's theorem"

Or proving the Collatz Conjecture. You need only basic algebra to build it, but something much more complex to prove it (if it is provable)