skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The Perceptron is also interesting because its classic mistake bound analysis is one of the earliest instances of modern learning theory. The mistake bound states that if the data is linearly separable (i.e. a perfect linear classifier exists), then Perceptron makes no more than (r / m)² misclassifications, where r is the radius of a ball containing the data set and m is the margin between the two classes.

The analysis is modern because 1) unlike traditional statistics, it does not make any assumptions about the distributions of each class, and 2) is a non-asymptotic guarantee. It is also an online analysis, in the sense that it only compares performance against the optimal fixed classifier for the sequence that was actually observed, rather than any notion of an underlying distribution.

More details: http://www.argmin.net/2021/11/04/perceptron/
How so? It's a black box algorithm owned by Reddit Admins. Moderators only have the ability to set the threshold, with very vague terms (low, moderate, high, or something similar)

If admins wanted to disappear a viewpoint, it would be a lot easier to just autosuspend the accounts, or shadowban without a trace.
Two words: Eternal. And September.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September

Every social space either withers, or grows until there is a preponderance of new people whose values no longer reflect the founders and old hands. Then there is a power struggle, and if the old hands don't regain or enforce the original cultural values, they typically depart and start all over again somewhere else.

This is the dynamic behind "tech" social media sites. HN was begat of Reddit, which was begat of Digg, which was begat of Slashdot, which was begat of Compuserve... Or is it some other order?

This story fits the same pattern. The sub grew, the new people don't share the same values as the ostensible founder, and now they are purging her because she doesn't speak for them.
> I always thought about MSFT as like working for the government: A somewhat boring, stable, 9-5, predictable workplace

That obviously wasn't true in the 90s (see the famous Microserfs book), but might be true today, so I would argue against the "always" for those of us around then.
The worst thing that can happen to a community is for it to become popular. Once the spotlight hits you, the normals rush in and cooptation is inevitable. Eternal September and all that.

Does Reddit have a feature to ask to not be down in the main feed?
Oh I don’t - impressions of what others think aren’t worth the trouble of overthinking.

If anything it’s just interesting that this happens.
My understanding (from friends who have interviewed at Amazon and received offers) is that they are offered a $160k base... plus a $XXX bonus (guaranteed?) every year, to get their cash comp competitive with all the other tech companies.

So while this might indeed result in pay bumps, I highly doubt the bumps will be very large. This is also a "simplify how we do offers" thing.
That's the best article I've read the whole year! I encourage you all to read it.

Regarding the topic of abolishing work, I wrote about it last time /r/antiwork came up here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30099687 What I've written is just the tip of the iceberg - hundreds of books, articles and papers have been written on the topic of humanity's relationship with work the last hundred years. After all, the phrase wage slavery from the mid 19th century and the associated idea that abolishing work is an imperative has been discussed for far longer than that. The majority has always had a hard time accepting that work freedom is possible. Probably because it is foreign similar to how someone 100 years ago would have found it completely natural that men dominated society. Don't ask me how a workfree society would work (cause you probably believe it couldn't), instead consult the literature and learn about the arguments yourself.

Regarding Doreen Ford, isn't her fate a little like Richard Stallman's? Odd and weird and now old dirt is forcing them both out of their respective communities. Does people have to be normal and non-creepy to be leaders? I think a 30-year-old dog walker working part-time is a pretty good role model for the antiwork "movement". We all work and then we all die, only some of us makes people think differently. Stallman and Ford has done just that. Also it's probably true that most online content is written by the insane ones. Like this comment!

I really like the term "sanewashing" that the author coined. But I would define it as the act of being in favor of progressive ideas but not their logical conclusion. E.g. "commitment" to < 1.5C global temperature rise but not commitment to stop using fossil fuels by 2030.
The cost of losing an entire country is more than the hypothetical revenue of a year’s sales. Even ignoring the potential lifetime value of an Apple customer, that’s an entire country of children, engineers, businesses, influencers, etc who are not exposed to your products/brand.

And Apple is not a money losing unicorn. They don’t sell anything at a loss, and they wouldn’t be selling at a loss even if they made a good faith effort to comply with these regulations.

The question is what their margins look like: reasonable, or obscene? Apple is fighting to maintain the latter. Pulling out of the country would make them less money than complying.
I am not trying to disagree at all, in fact I think we very much need to do more for the poorest among us, especially the kids. Where does that 30k come from though? For 300 million people, that's 9 trillion dollars a year, ~half of GDP. Inflation would be out of control, essentially Venezuela / Zimbabwe levels.
From a political perspective, it is easier to profit (in terms of political capital or actual capital) from a crisis than it is to prevent it. If you prevent it, then you've spent a lot of capital all for most people to say "well, nothing even happened!". It is a sad state of affairs.
Ottawa Canada did exactly this, creating a green belt in 1956. It appears to still be there. I wonder if anyone has done a benefits analysis?
Omicron Boosters and Original Antigenic Sin
I think you're being disingenuous if you believe receiving a no-shit check from the government for $30k per year is the same as scraping by through food banks, homeless shelters, and one-time medical care in the emergency room. I would say all of those things absolutely prevent people from not working. No one would willingly want to live their life that way.
https://www.yusufaytas.com
Sometimes they can and sometimes they can't. Works like that for all kinds of crossovers, and probably should happen more often than it does.

I can think of plenty of times CS has benefitted from psychology too, or is reinventing the wheel.
Political Party Matters More than Science, when it comes to Covid anxiety
I don’t believe your premise that such a large share of the available jobs are low skill that there is no room for people to move on to something better. If you look at fast food for example I’m seeing there are about 2.5 million workers which is a tiny percentage of the overall workforce. Looking at the age distribution of the US work force you could staff every fast food restaurant with only 16-19 year olds and still only be employing about half of that age groups work force.

https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11b.htm
Show HN: Wire 2.0
I think this is just because we misuse the word monopoly.

Monopolies in tech are pretty rare I think, especially things like online services -- it is pretty hard to completely dominate a market when there are other big tech companies out there and they all dabble in everything. However, tech companies engage in anti-competitive behavior all the time. Unfortunately people want to say "monopoly" when they see anti-competitive behavior, because it sounds cooler. This is quite unfortunate because it leads to the whole "technically not a monopoly" debate, which really misses the point.
Full stack engineer | Otta.com | Redefining candidate search | Partial remote (London & UK) | Full time | £55-90K negotiable | Equity

Here at Otta, we consider ourselves the worlds career champions. We’re building the only job search that consolidates the most exciting, innovative and fast-moving companies. We hope to replace traditional job platforms because we think that finding a job should be empowering, not anxiety-inducing. We've just raised a $20M Series A after launching our platform in USA in October.

Our tech stack is React, Typescript, GraphQL on the FE and Elixir on the backend.

You can find the full job spec is here: https://app.otta.com/jobs/eExaeU1s

Feel free to reach out to me on LI if you want to chat about the role at all or email me: billy [at] otta.com
So the "where the money comes from" part is a separate discussion (maybe another thread?), but I'll try to answer "how it (could) work".

So, let's say there's some amount X that is enough for a person to afford housing, food, reasonable transport etc. It's as simple as saying "everyone gets this amount now, rich or poor".

For a rich person, it'll be a drop in the bucket, but for a poor person it could mean the economic freedom to quit a bad job. A few quick points around this:

* inflation. People keep worrying about this. Wages have stagnated since the 70s, and whenever raising minimum wage is mentioned, people say it will cause inflation. My counter-question is, how have we stagnated wages and still have inflation as high as it is now? It kinda feels like inflation isn't a result of growing wages but tied to economic growth in general. If inflation will just happen as part of economic growth, why not cut poor people in on the pie a little bit? (I know why, I'm asking rhetorically)

* welfare. People think we're doing something like this already with welfare, except welfare comes with all kinds of random classist baggage. Should the person get welfare if they, say, try to buy some 'luxury' item that's not strictly needed to live but might give them a small hint of joy in an otherwise tough situation? This version just takes away the restrictions and qualifying conditions by saying everyone just qualifies.

* no one working. Of course people would still work. It's just they wouldn't be forced to do so under pain of homelessness or starvation. Imagine saying "I quit" and still getting your base needs met. What kind of working conditions would people have to give you to keep you wanting to work? What kind of job satisfaction would need to become the norm?

I realize many of these don't apply to many of the people in this forum, but it can make a huge difference in industries like food service, where working conditions and perks are... a bit different from tech.
Whatever your views might be on TED talks, this article is incredibly well written and thoughtful. Great read.
The yacht has to be at least.... three times bigger than this!
People who work bullshit jobs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs) are already unintentional leeches. UBI would disincentivize that inefficiency. Then those who want to sit on their asses with their $1200 could do so guilt-free, and, in my rosy vision for the world, the fraction who want to do something more fulfilling than making money for "the host" (e.g., FAMAG, Wall Street, I dunno) would be empowered to focus on things that are important to them, and probably to humanity as well.
I'm pretty sure a non-trivial amount of that is talk more than average reality. Which isn't to say that there aren't a bunch of people making a half million or more in total comp at a FAANG company, but there are almost certainly a whole lot more quiet people making 100-200K who aren't going to brag on HN about it.
I worked with Nick a few times in a previous job and he was a reviewer on a paper I wrote; he was really nice and professional, and his feedback was constructive and incisive.

The movement he's part of is fundamentally disagreeable (in the 'big five' sense [0]), and some of its prominent characters, as you might expect, have reputations for being interpersonally difficult [1]. Collectively they've been labeled "data thugs" [2] and accused of "methodological terrorism" [3], which is why I think Nick's fundamental goodness is an especially valuable asset. We'd gain a ton of social value from certain reforms to the scientific research apparatus, and, IMO, being kind when delivering pointed critiques helps a difficult pill go down. That's different than pulling your punches; it just means staying focused on the thing you actually want to change.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

[1] https://medium.com/@OmnesRes/the-dumbest-fucking-thing-ive-e...

[2] https://www.science.org/content/article/meet-data-thugs-out-...

[3] https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2016/09/21/what-has-h...
That's a tad bit insane - disabled people won't be able to find jobs, whether you want it or not. You are pushing them deeper in poverty by giving them the same amount of money as you give to someone who chooses not to work.
Are the right really in defense mode? They managed to instill a majority in the supreme court, they have veto power in the senate and after 2022 will likely hold the majority in the house. They are successfully chipping away at the gains of the FDR era.

At the same time the left is fractured into two major camps. One camp is the leadership that seems to end up controlling major movements like Black Lives Matter and subduing it into nothing. This group chooses to not fight. They are benefiting from the status quo.

The other is the "progressive" left that is aiming for European style systems and policies. All they have as a weapon is Twitter and they are not really achieving their goals. What power do "Twitter People" really have if their efforts only translate into gestures from the higher ups(eg. BLM painted on the street in front of the capitol)?
from what I've seen, there's a lot of "obscurity" to this; there are many seemingly arbitrary choices all over the place.

In the end most encryption algorithms boil down to doing 'random' (arbitrary, hard to justify why) things to data and then undoing them exactly in order to decrypt.

the math is all incredibly abstract but not all that complex, the high level of abstraction does make it quite difficult to grasp.

What's worse is that I fear there are incentives (mostly political/security interests) to keep the field small and to keep many people far away from this very practical use for all these beautiful, elegant, simple (but extremely abstract) mathematics (refering to the entire cryptography field).
How We Write GitHub Actions in Go
I think they should have sent in their paper somewhere other than APA. Don't expect courtesy in consequential confrontations. I think similar about responsible disclosure sometimes. If a company played dirty in the past why bother with accomodating them.
are they actually gated (as in controlled restricted entry) or they are simply high-value real-estate type of place?
> Do you have any examples?

A lot of stuff in the Stellar ecosystem is pretty OK. Quite a few companies operating under out of e.g. Germany or other countries doing e.g. remittance networks using simple stable coins. Not that glamorous but looks real enough. In general, that ecosystem seems to be generally designed to be fintech friendly. Meaning people are working with financial authorities and generally are trying to do the right thing. E.g. Bitbond is a German company doing an investment products on top of Stellar. They've been working with the German financial authorities (Bafin) and are also partnering with a few big banks.

There are also plenty of traditional enterprise consultancy companies that have been working with various customers to implement e.g. blockchain based schemes for carbon trading, or solutions related to logistics or sourcing materials. Not all of that might succeed but it seems that trading/inventing some new crypto currency is not a goal with these projects.

During the dot com era, it all looked like a bunch of hippies going on about digital highways and crazy stuff like that.
My wife also left elementary school teaching shortly after the pandemic. She had a child throw a sizable textbook at her, only missing her head by an inch or so. Felt the air as it wizzed by. She sent the kid to the vice-principal for their grade level. Thirty minutes later the kid was right back in her class, and once again causing disruptions.

They lack any ability or willpower to meaningfully hold students accountable. My wife felt physically unsafe with this student in her room, yet apparently nothing could be done.
Isn't the main point of the user preference flag to allow the website developer to serve a reduced-motion version of the site?
Yes, either this one or in my case, I'm just using Tailscale to get into one network with my NAS without having my NAS to be exposed to the internet.

So instead of opening ports and stuff like that, I can just securely go to https://mynas:12345/ (port of my paperless instance) and I'm in there.
Emphasis on the sort of part; universal means universal—everyone gets it. It's not Universal Guaranteed Income, it's Universal Basic Income. My wife and I worked the whole time and we made too much to ever get any stimulus. So we worked while we saw many people our age goofing off and seeing just how long they could ride the unemployment wave—yes, they really were proud of this.

Meanwhile another half our peers want their college debt forgiven because they can't cut it in the real world with their liberal arts degree. Mark my words: if they ever do get around to slashing college debt, those who did what they were supposed to will be left there with their bill in hand while everyone else who made every ill-advised decision gets off for free.
I see this as an argument for adding more STEM to every degree plan. There's unavoidable crossover, and people need intuition to properly question unfounded claims.
Coqui: Speaking in Tongues
I can understand that, but that's kind of the opposite problem. You invested time and practice, now you want to benefit from it, versus you are currently not investing in the same skill, which degrades it over time. The latter seems overblown to me personally. Sure, to get warm again with some specific tech takes some effort, but it doesn't get lost.
I think it's a generational thing: in the last 10 years we all became old and grumpy.

For all I know, there's might be a perfect HN replacement on TikTok which is incomprehensible enough that Zoomers get to participate.
This is newsworthy, but among some of the news that shouldn't really be on Hacker News.

It's quite clear that Spotify is trying hard to improve public relations as that directly affects their bottom line.

And what better way to do it than making an example with Joe Rogan.

But as mentioned, this news is better suited for Reddit.
I've been trying to find an article I read as a kid (late 70s) about a guy who made custom LEGO models, by putting bricks together incompletely. Like, you can make a cylinder with slightly-out-of-perfect snap-together pieces. I think he made a 747 out of regular pieces. At the time I don't think I was even aware of model kits.
>For me antiwork is just anti forced wage labour. If we had a universal basic income, then that would be accomplished and people would be free to work on whatever they want

What type of living conditions are we looking to guarantee? If your baseline is "prehistoric living conditions", I'm sure it's quite affordable. If it's "21st century middle class america" it will be ruinously expensive. Incremental improvements in technology can eventually bring us to a point where we can afford to give arbitrary fixed standard of living to everyone, but not if that standard of living is constantly increasing.
When the average tenure is 1.8 years, it certainly is working. That's nearly 50% of their tenure resulting in less than 20% of their equity vesting.

The way Amazon does vesting is a scam for any engineer willing to work there, IMO. Big shiny number that they can dangle in front of engineers, and everybody thinks "Oh, sure I can do 4 years for that..."
I'm 31, have a well-paying job, and enough assets to be able to retire in a third world country if I wanted to (I'm nomadic so that's not as far-fetched as it sounds), yet I still support a universal basic income. I have friends way richer than me who definitely don't need to work who also support a UBI. I guess we're not as selfish as the last generation?

Even if one were to not go as far as to support a universal basic income, I don't see why it's not a goal worth striving towards if we can afford it, or at least finding a happy medium. For example I envy that higher education in Europe is free, and in countries like Denmark the government will even pay college students a "basic income" to cover their living expenses (was listening to a podcast the other day where a famous Danish entrepreneur said he used that to help bootstrap his first businesses). Also in countries like Denmark and Germany it's normal for high school graduates to take a year off and travel the world, something extremely rare in the U.S.

UBI for me is the equivalent of VC funding for all. Maybe most won't give much back, but all it takes for 1% building the next innovations for that to be a worthy investment (not that I think the humans should be reduced to profit calculators, and value goes beyond profit)

I've traveled to 43+ countries including living in third world ones. Honestly I don't think life in the west is that much different from the western ones to the point where they're disgruntled at the west or really missing out. Not everyone cares about the rat race and hedonist treadmill.
It's more like ensuring an opportunity to leverage the information that's already being gathered. As it stands, PMs have to construct concrete portfolios because they need to send the trading desk specific instructions on what to buy and sell. The portfolio they ship out for execution is effectively a low dimensional projection of a high dimensional decision process. That process has extensive substitutability (sizing and substitutability if something is going to be more or less expensive to execute than transaction cost models predicted), but there's no way to communicate that in today's trading workflows. That results in the market missing out on Pareto outcomes.

We've already seen this in sourcing markets [1]. Capturing more information at the time of bidding resulted in massive (40-60%) efficiency gains for both sides of the market.

[1]: https://kilthub.cmu.edu/articles/journal_contribution/Very-L...
> So Uber was actually subsidizing every other platform's drivers

My understanding is that with the exception of some very specific niche programs, all of those expenses are paid from the driver's pockets (since, as you recall, they're currently classified as independent contractors).

Uber does have a few competitive advantages that IMHO haven't fully materialized yet: they're pretty much the only company in the space with wide global presence, while simultaneously being a big player in more than one vertical. From a driver perspective, it's kind of a no brainer to be on Uber and Lyft simultaneously if they want to maximize the rate at which they get rider requests, but there's no other platform currently where they can get riders and food deliveries and grocery deliveries. Similarly, no other company can tap into motorcyclists and truckers and who knows what other type of workers Uber can reach these days.

The way I see Uber these days is similar to how I see McDonalds. McD is certainly not the only game in town when it comes to food (and it objectively isn't the best at it, by any measure), but its brand is recognizable worldwide and they're diversified in ways that you probably don't even realize (e.g. breakfast menus compete w/ Timmies in Canada and did you know Doraemon toy collectibles are popular in China?)
TL;DR
(1) Cross-compile platform-specific static binaries
(2) Use JS shim to determine platform and exec to prebuilt binary
(3) No build step: prebuilt binaries allow "just run"