skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Every student debtor is 7.5% less in debt in real terms than they were last year.

Many of the poor working people have made substantial gains. Dishwashers and line cooks in my area are making $30/hr in some cases now.

Nurses are a while other universe. My friends are taking a year off after one of them banked almost $400k as a visiting nurse. Our local hospital has 90% turnover in nursing and is almost exclusively agency nurses.

Professional workers are getting slower increases, but the dirty secret is that they are more productive and less needed. Even in technology roles, many areas are operated at bare minimum as hyperscale clouds absorb more and more workloads.
not trying to be difficult, but $500 seems like an odd price tier to end up in. If I was going cheap, I'd do something between a rock64/raspberry pi and an Intel Nuc. If I was going powerful, it would be north of $1,500 for sure. That decision would probably be based on what I was running on it. If it's a VPN, the rock64 would be plenty. < $50
Yea the SQL example looks like the intentionally made it way worse than it needed to be...
This is the solution I’ve been looking for, thanks for sharing it!
AFAIK, there is no such thing as an 'index fund' of startups.

But even if there was, purchasing a L1 coin is similar to investing in a wide swath of coins, because if the value of startups build on the coin increase in value, then there will be higher demand of that coin.
The original WORDLE also used minified JavaScript, but there are some resources on reverse engineering it, if all you're interested is learning how the words are picked [1].

[1]: https://reichel.dev/blog/reverse-engineering-wordle.html
Lawsuit...

https://www.scribd.com/document/558134699/California-Departm...
The cool thing about Whitslaw's work is that it focused on natural behaviors (rather than like...a rotorod test).

I don't think he released them into the wild (would be a tough experiment with 80s tech), but there are a bunch of studies of their interactions with conspecifics. They can mate[0], though less successfully than controls, but playfight a bit better than they do[1].

[0] https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1983-29790-001
[1] https://doi.org/10.1159/000114124
Well they're clearly guilty when they're repeatedly claiming to have done so much good elsewhere.
> And, I don't think there's any technical reason Apple couldn't do it, right?

Technical no; Adding a fraction of a penny to engrave the uuid on the tag is a non-starter.
I think I need help understanding this.

My understanding of data oriented systems is there's a desire to put related data physical close, in memory. It doesn't remove state, it just packs it differently.

To be honest, I'm confused by most of the comments here.
Facebook Has a Superuser-Supremacy Problem
When you scroll on the page the full screen overlay locks you out unless you sign in, just tried on the latest iOS and safari
Sounds like the distinction between successfully teaching reading strategies, and being taught unsuccessful[1] strategies. He might have learned how to read in a different manner than you.

[1] https://www.apmreports.org/episode/2019/08/22/whats-wrong-ho...
Why and how?

I'm quite familiar with gdpr, btw -- and I don't see how being able to look up a uuid or some other nonsequential identifier via a site to find the owner obviously violates it. There's a strong legitimate interest case for anyone in possession of a global tracking tag being able to find out the owner, I would think.
I think part of it is that we've just gone through about two years of nationwide, massive, consequence-free civil disobedience campaigns, watched people ignore public health mandates with impunity, and read reports of a handful of regions decriminalizing certain petty crimes. People take in this input and, somewhat accurately, determine that nobody is home at the police station and anything goes now.
What’s missing is Family Support! My wife and I share keys. Where’s that use case?
> There is a real philosophy that people's wants and behaviors are primarily influenced by environment, but that doesn't absolve us from asking questions about whether they way they're being influenced is healthy and in their best interest

Most of your argument hinges on the idea that there is an objective "best interest" that exists. Not all ethical (or religious) philosophies have this idea. There's a longstanding debate between the subjectivist (Hobbesian) view on ethics and the objectivist (Aristotelian) view on ethics, and this conflict arises often between non-Abrahamic religious ethical philosophies (which often can be varying degrees of subjectivist depending on the religion) and Abrahamic religious ethical philosophies (which are objectivist and rely on Divine Will to create the standard of goodness).

> Your desires may not be "pure", and you may legitimately enjoy everything you buy, but if that's the case and you're correct that advertising makes you actually like things, your desires were still manipulated in such a way that satisfying them required giving a company money.

This too depends on the ethical philosophy. Your arguments are from the deontological view of ethics, the idea that consequences of some actions cannot justify their means. The opposing view, consequential ethics, often argues that the desires or values behind the choices have no bearing if the effect of the action, its consequences, are positive. To sum up, your view is deontological and objectivist, often views ascribed to adherents of what scholars today call Virtue Ethics.

All this to say that there is good reason for there to be debate in this space. A lot of folks angrily shout at each other when it comes to advertising and let their emotions do the talking. In reality advertising ethics often delve deep into longstanding unresolved ethical debates that several scholars over millennia have argued positions over.
I built a library that adds a digital copyright in the LSB of a for example image.

It is resistant to cropping and other such edits.

I don't care if it is successful because I was originally just having fun with steganography and stumbled on to this use case.
https://bookworm.club - tell us what books you're reading, we'll find people around the world reading the same book so that you all can meet and discuss
Copy of the lawsuit...

https://www.scribd.com/document/558134699/California-Departm...
Yes. And those accusations were true. And, quite possibly, these Australian accusations are also true. It may or may not be a convenient truth, or a truth withheld until a convenient time, or a similar truth about the other party might also be known to be true but not released. Or maybe Labour really is the more corrupt party and ASIO are earnestly working to protect Australian interests. All of these hypothesis are congruent with the evidence.

There's a difference between being skeptical of politically convenient press releases versus being a contrarian that just assumes anything politically convenient must be a lie.
The point of simple vs easy is they exist on completely different dimensions. There's simple/complex, and there's easy/hard. Something can be simple+easy, simple+hard, complex+easy, or complex+hard. Obviously there's a sliding scale in each dimension.

Simplicity in a vacuum isn't a good thing. Ideally your solution targets the exact level of simplicity vs complexity required for your problem. Obviously you won't always hit or know the target.

The value in simplicity is greater composability. It's especially important for the building blocks of our systems - of which programming languages make a huge portion. It doesn't sound too controversial to say that it's easier to take multiple simple things and make a more complex thing, than it is to take a complex thing and distill it down to the simpler thing you need. I say this because regardless of what programming paradigm you adhere to, the "kitchen sink" unit of code is universally derided, be it god modules or god classes that does shit you don't need.

It's not that Clojure is all simple, all the time. There is mutable state in Clojure - atoms, refs, etc. They also have interfaces. And multimethods. And so on.

But the simplicity floor is lower in Clojure than most other languages I've used. More than those other languages, you can target the level of simplicity you need. And it provides for more complex elements if you need them. And in my experience, a lot of the time, you don't need those more complex elements.
A static site that is 100% free and open-source, competing with several businesses operating scammy subscription models.
I made https://distilledjs.com/, it's a Javascript testing library with no dependencies, the entire API is only 3 methods (only 1 of which is really necessary to learn), and it very deliberately doesn't ship with a lot of standard features.

Distilled is based on an evolution in my personal philosophy about how effective testing works and about how good APIs are designed in general. My goal building it was to have something that is extremely flexible, but that is also so simple that I can start using it within about a minute of setting up a new project. When I start writing Javascript, I don't add a testing framework immediately. Instead, I import Distilled and write my tests in the same file that I'm writing my code in. Later on, as the project evolves I start to separate things out and build a more complicated testing setup.

I have obviously put some work into documenting it and making it available to other people, but I don't need anyone else to use it. The project is already mature enough that I am using it in every single personal project I maintain. It doesn't need a big ecosystem, it doesn't need a big community. I haven't touched the API in probably close to 2 years.

I will likely use Distilled for the majority of all of my personal projects in Node for all of the foreseeable future in my development career. I've used a lot of testing frameworks, and for my particular needs I think that Distilled is the best testing library available for me to use. It has saved me an enormous amount of time, and it makes it easier for me to do complicated things with my testing suites, which has made developing other personal projects much easier. If nobody other than me ever picks it up or uses it, it doesn't matter. It's already paid for its own development costs in personal time savings on other projects by an order of magnitude, and I think it will continue to do so in the future.

I think it's one of the most personally useful pieces of software I've ever written in terms of pure benefit to my own development processes, and (while I'd be happy to see more people use it) I don't think that having a community around Distilled would change anything or introduce any giant benefits. I'm not going to add a bunch of extra features or methods to the API. It's really stable and extensively tested; I've been using it for years and I'm not aware of any bugs that need to be hunted down that a community could help with. So if other people want to use Distilled, great, but them using it or ignoring it changes nothing about how useful it is to me.
So Apples response is the equivalent of a cookie popup? Throw a bunch of warnings in?
So does any hardware.
So right. It is VERY difficult to query a hand-rolled EAV structure. Kinda like editing a binary image with a text editor, lol.
Please check out some of the demo queries. Hope you think it's as slick as we do.
I can't stand most http libraries (full of mutable state!) and I spend a lot of time making http calls. So I built a functional/immutable http request library which has been dramatically improving my personal quality of life for about 7 years now. No idea if anyone else uses it, but it doesn't really matter.

Java version: https://github.com/stickfigure/hattery

Typescript version: https://github.com/stickfigure/hatteryjs
I think fission has very good technical merits but the unfortunate reality is it's politically untenable.
The question is, do you see rail as a cost or profit center? Do you use it as a tool for achieving other goals?

In the matter of public transport, the idea that it needs to pay for itself or be profitable is very much a matter of where you draw the line of which costs you in- and externalise.

People need to go places, space and climate impact are limited, public transport the only sane option. It therefore should be priced such. It /is/ is cheaper than all other options, evidently.
Don't worry, until a week ago people got a silly t-shirt for reporting a bug to Cloudflare! So clearly this is an improvement.
There wasn't 1.9 Trillion dollars in additional Federal spending at the second inflection point in the graph of the money supply?

The Fed certainly expected at least some inflation from that much spending, although they seem to have missed the size of the increase.

>President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan is contributing to elevated inflation but it isn't expected to overheat the economy, a new research paper from the San Francisco Federal Reserve concludes.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/19/economy/inflation-biden-stimu...
Just wanted this to die down because this is like meta-meta discourse at this point.

I love this tactic because it gets people to earnestly say what they believe. More people in debates should say what they believe.

The problem is when people don't want to reveal what they believe. These people know their assumptions and conclusions are socially unacceptable. Socially unacceptable beliefs make people feel socially isolated. This isolation creates a pressure in them so great that when someone asks them to continue speaking, they cannot stop. They are so used to being told to stop that they don't know how to handle someone asking them to speak.

By now it's clear that the trap has been set. When they reveal their true beliefs, they temporarily forget that they are in front of an audience. They have unwittingly been made part of a performance they didn't want to be in, but at this point it is too late. The audience here is the true judge, and the audience is a harsh critic. The audience enjoys the theatrics of the villain performing their grand reveal and they enjoy the justice in seeing them make this critical error.

So many subversives couch their true beliefs in meta-irony. finger on nose "Am I joking about these reprehensible beliefs or do I really believe them? We'll never know but we're making it ok to say them. uwu." The end results are the same. Either they will learn not to say them - eventually eradicating the belief, or they will say them and the audience will learn from them not to believe them. As you are well aware, I'm ok with both.
> is it still just [dang] and sctb?

As far as I can tell, Scott left in 2019, so it's just dang.
Just in case anyone was in doubt of how despicably dishonest this particular source is, you should definitely go ahead and read this.

Edit: wow, and at the end they even try to imply that anti-vaxers are involved with the Russians (with carefully chosen weasel words of course).
Yes fully agree but step one on that path is to stop dumping carbon into the air and oceans.
I want to help people aged 18-34 get better with their finances and economic thinking. By doing so, they can emancipate themselves and stop giving their soul to the boomercracy in exchange for financial security they don't need. I started a newsletter, I use twitter for R&D, and I expect to start an instagram with videos and infographics soon.

Eventually I could develop a neat budgeting app which help people realize that the point of money is to finance their needs, from physiological to spiritual.
So far out of all the forms I've filled out, Square is the only one who actually responded via the forms. It led to an offer which I turned down for other reasons but it did work that one time.

Except for that offer, I get all of my jobs through boutique recruiting firms and some larger recruiting firms or connections.
i'm not getting a 3xx redirect (i assume that's what you mean?), I'm still looking at wordle at https://www.powerlanguage.co.uk/wordle/

If I do it in an incognito window... I get the redirect, yup.

I guess my cookies for existin game history keep me at the original site?
Every iPhone has a unique IMEI that can be provided to law enforcement based on a valid request. And everyone carries one in their pocket!

They've never advertised this information. Are you also up in arms about that?
Now if only I had sand paper around.

In theory I think you just need to get it closer to an iPhone, no print needed.
I think the parent is referring to something else, given the part about personal care products.
I would agree.

Twitter has massive data on your interests but collects only minimal information about you vs, say, Facebook which has your name, birthday etc etc. I would also argue that Twitter has BETTER interest data than Facebook b/c you are constantly interacting with thousands of tweets a day across multiple dimensions. Facebook tends to be your family and a couple pages you happened to like.

If they get your phone number, they get all of the available "data in the cloud" about you e.g. income, purchasing preferences etc. Cross reference the interests with that cloud data and you have a very precise target profile to sell to advertisers.
Wait, what’s wrong with NoSQL? It’s not good for shoving relational paradigms into, but it’s basically infinitely horizontally scalable, which, as far as I’m aware, isn’t possible with relational DBs, not at the same performance at massive scale, anyways.

A bit annoying when people shove a relational DB into a NoSQL schema though.
They were still over budget and late, but that chart (which was created to try to claim all the overhead can largely be explained by regulatory changes) strongly argues against

> When the United States built nuclear plants at scale, in serial production, plant costs were also much lower.
As someone who recently found out that the new grad hire that I was training was also making more than me, I really can't fathom myself giving any sort of sympathetic shit about the employer's perspective. You are absolutely correct. Sickeningly so.

I applaud the people that can game the system. Because it's not made to reward you. You are a cost center to someone else's wealth. You have good employers and bad employers, but either way your relationship isn't built on equivalent standing. You provide a paid service valued by your employer's benevolence towards your hard work and dedication, and its not in their best interest to reward you with a fair wage.
this isn't just 'jerbs' rhetoric. Having French data on French soil guarantees that if push comes to shove French authorities are in control of their citizens' data. It's a matter of national sovereignty. If companies have billions of dollars worth of physical infrastructure located in the countries they operate you can be sure compliance with local laws will actually happen.
Hinkley Point doesn't look so expensive now (Electricity forwards have been greater than the rate the reactor is supposed to cost since august)
Always excited for a Racket release. A consistently updated Scheme with a built in pkg manager, easily downloadable binaries that run on M1 silicon, and phenomenal documentation. Not many lisps can say that!
I've been working on a clean-room reimplementation that uses the original word list and is visually similar to the original, but also allows for playing unlimited puzzles each day: https://wrd.li

(The order of the solutions is different than the original, and is randomized each day.)
> So progressives literally support polices that require racial preferences/prejudice.

Racial preferences/prejudice != eugenics. They're different concepts. You can say that both are forms of racism, but this thread was original about eugenics.

You are describing affirmative action, which I have not said is a conservative idea (because it isn't).

> Now watch that progressive either a)change the subject and evade answering the question.. or b)Justify their reasoning for why they think people should be treated differently based on their skin color.

While I don't agree with affirmative action, you're intentionally misconstruing the actual argument for it.

The argument is: we can observe racial bias in society, and we can use institutions to compensate for it.

> As to conservatives, they support equal treatment under the law regardless of race. At worst you could accuse some of supporting polices that could potentially have disparate impact.

I could accuse conservative leaders of intentionally creating policies that have disparate impact[1]. I don't think most conservative voters are on board with it, but it's a massive problem with conservative leadership in the US.

> But progressives support actual racial discrimination. Which is worse, in your mind?

This is completely, utterly off-topic, but I'll respond anyway:

Both are bad and unacceptable. Conservative policies are, in effect, worse. The racism wasn't always open or public, but that doesn't mean it wasn't there. It was explicitly stated behind closed doors and in documents[1][2].

Conservative policies that criminalized behaviors associated with black people -- like using marijuana, loitering, tinting car windows, etc. -- have destroyed the lives of tens of millions of people. Affirmative action hasn't done that.

And what about the black people who weren't put in jail for being poor? Conservative policies openly discriminated against black people on the basis of race until 1968[3], and they have had a deep effect on generational wealth (and well-being) of Americans in the decades since then.

Conservatives were pro-slavery, pro-segregation, and pro-war on drugs. The KKK was a conservative organization, not a progressive one -- and modern conservatives are still using their slogan today[4]. Conservatives give harsher sentences to black people than to white people for the same crimes[5].

There is no reasonable argument based on historical evidence that a few decades of affirmative action can outweigh hundreds of years of grinding people into the dirt, including chattel slavery and mass incarceration for victimless crime. It's why black people overwhelming vote against Republicans, even though many of them are fiscally and socially conservative[6].

1. https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-secret-files-of...

2. https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/the-shocking-and-sickening-st...

3. https://www.bostonfairhousing.org/timeline/1934-1968-FHA-Red...

4. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/ku-klux-klan-s...

5. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2021/08/10/courts-in-more-...

6. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/02/27/5-facts-abo...
They are absolutely on different categories.

One is a device made by a company with a minimal ethical standard, which is not willing to sacrifice those for profits.

The other is a trillion-dollar company that manages to convince billions of people world-wide that their products will make them smarter/more creative/just like the good guy on TV shows. This image and feel-good ads also gets them to convince people that is totally fine to pay hundreds/thousands of dollars to upgrade their devices while talking about "social good", "climate-conscious" and every fucking talking point of the "progressive/anti-capitalist" millenials. IOW, all the feel-good talk about issues gives them enough cover to get to exploit mass-scale consumerism.

I wonder how they do that? Perhaps it's this thing called "marketing"?
The game has two word lists -- a "possible solution" set and an "allowed guess" set. They removed:

* some words with negative connotations from the solution set

* slurs from the allowed guess set

As such, I believe there already weren't any slurs in the possible solution set. Or at least they weren't in the group of words which were mentioned as removed here. So, your scenario was already not possible.

I think removing the words with negative connotations from the solution set was a great move because, while they aren't slurs, there's no need to give people that negative experience.