skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I do think so. I think wealth disparity has enabled intellectual folks to, very quickly, propel themselves into the upper class, by essentially being part of the money machine that keeps rich people rich (hedge funds, ads, etc.). I don’t have any data to support this but I believe this was literally impossible before some decades ago. Certainly was not available to Einstein.

More evidence: people literally write songs about wanting/making money and this is acceptable in our culture. We live in a disgusting age.
Median household wealth is over $100k. Not only is it true far more than the slightest, it's true of the majority of American households.
I’ve heard from Russian sources (so take with grain of salt) that they’ve avoided the center of Ukraine to allow locals to plant food. So maybe some planting may take place.
That's interesting. A few months ago my father's credit card was charged by Home Depot in Canada, and we don't live in that country. It was certainly fraud, and the payment was reverted. Maybe their systems are compromised and that's the reason to deny foreign access?
Macros with a standard library would have saved us from many compatibility and bloat issues when they would have arrived before things like the class keyword.
You've been played by a study designed to manipulate the view of American wealth. The median household has a gigantic amount of wealth, over $100k worth. Not having $1k in a checking account doesn't mean you can't afford $1k or even a $10k expense.
RE identity & Auth tied to wallets (and therefore purchases), this is going to be a huge wild-west of privacy invasion and intrusive advertising.

It is like a persistent super cookie that exists online and off, that anyone can access, and that can never be deleted.

People think it is bad now with Google and Facebook - web3 is going to be way worse, with every shady operation under the sun doing all sorts of questionable targeting, combining, profiling, mining, and selling of your publicly accessible data openly stored on the block chain (forever) for everyone to see and use for whatever unsavoury things they can conjure up.
I typed "Ukraine war" in the 'books' filter of the Amazon UK search bar. Here are the search results for the first page of search: https://i.postimg.cc/YCF2QnWL/amazon-uk-search-for-ukraine-w...

I assumed Amazon US search would be similar, but that does not appear to be the case. I apologise for writing: "Try an Amazon book search for “Ukraine war” on Amazon UK and US and already the search results are populated with “Ukraine war” blank notebooks. This is only true of Amazon UK (see screenshot above). Thank you for posting your results and I apologise for making a wrong assumption, (I still hate Amazon search though!)
A lot of the time that pattern is written, it's because the APIs from the web and Node are different and will break if you call something that's not isomorphic. Perhaps Deno fixes that as well and the pattern isn't needed in the first place. Obviously not every case though.
Maybe sourcehut?
I check the document and the it looks great.
Even if it fails to work at least you are always brought back to an integer value of x-coordinate.
I guess if it's tasty then it's fair game.
A squadron commander doesn't get into that position by being incompetent. Fighter jets are incredibly complex and demanding and there are lots of different aircraft to pilot in the navy.
We'll see. we didn't have inflation like this during the last big downturn in 2008. I also don't think the Fed is going to be able to raise rates as high as they did back in the early 80s.
Our HD can’t get their internet to work, so we have to use our own data to look shit up. Idk how cellular data works but I’m usually some store in Chicago (despite being in Madison), it seems to vary depending on where I am in the store, though I may be making connections that aren’t there.
it isn't going to stop Putin but it could negatively impact normal people. in no universe will the handful of Russian programmers impacted by this rise up and overthrow their government. but they will be forced to work extra hours cleaning up any damage this caused to their system. This is really lame virtue signalling that only harms fellow workers because their government is terrible.
The earth being the center of the solar system was an old and ingrained idea at the time. It was so old an ingrained that the mere mention of heliocentricism prompted the exact same emotions and reactions you are seeing now towards astrology.

I personally agree with you. But I feel it is wrong to call what he says a joke or simply not give him the opportunity to prove himself. That would be a mistake that humanity has made several times resulting in delayed progress of many revolutionary ideas.

Our bias constructs a reality so believable that we cannot differentiate it from the objective truth. To escape our own bias means going against our instincts to listen to an idea that seems preposterous or "crazy,"
Guy has his real name on his github page. Googled him, he has a Wikipedia page, created by a Wikipedia user with the same username as his Github one. Well, I think that says all I need to know about his character.
Sorry to hear about this. If this is the first time you've felt this badly, I would recommend starting with your primary care doctor, they'll be able to help you coordinate the process of getting better.
The Fed Funds rate is still the reference for policy but the Fed has been using a new framework called "ample reserves" since the latter part of 2020.
See:

"How Does the Fed Influence Interest Rates Using Its New Tools?"

https://www.stlouisfed.org/open-vault/2020/august/how-does-f...
Please don't respond to bad comments by breaking the site guidelines yourself. This only makes things worse.

"Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead."

a.k.a. please don't feed the trolls

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Imagine being able to get a product reliable at that scale.
>I wasn’t suggesting any nefarious intent,

Oh, please. The only thing missing was to accuse asn007 of being a "Russian troll", although I suppose you realized that that would not be appropriate in this case.

Just own up to your apology.
> everyone is working with wildly different and often contradictory definitions

I’ve found the main MMTers to be mostly consistent amongst themselves in their theories. Now, I think some ideas are wrong, but they do seem mostly on the same page. I agree MMT does an excellent job convincing laymen of some pretty wacky ideas and that’s one of my bigger complaints with it.

Also, I find the focus on mathematical models problematic in mainstream economics. It obfuscates a lot of erroneous assumptions. Models are great for testing, but words are useful for communicating ideas too and can sometimes be a better format, especially for wider audiences. To be clear, I’m not saying models are bad or that MMT shouldn’t use them, in fact I saw one MMTer post this paper recently:
http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_992.pdf
That won't work for web3, since your identities are tied to wallets, as is any user-generated-content is tied to the wallet. So it would be like creating a new user account for HN/Facebook/Gmail/etc every day. You'd not be able to move your content away to another site, which is one of the main selling points of web3 Vs web2
A “Getting Started” Guide for Digital Health Founders
I just read the article and surprisingly, you're wrong.

Key quote: "The Office will not register works produced by a machine or mere mechanical process that operates randomly or automatically without any creative input or intervention from a human author. The crucial question is “whether the ‘work’ is basically one of human authorship, with the computer [or other device] merely being an assisting instrument, or whether the traditional elements of authorship in the work (literary, artistic, or musical expression or elements of selection, arrangement, etc.) were actually conceived and executed not by man but by a machine."

Machine generated works cannot be copyrighted.

Edit: and gee, did you get hn to rewrite the headline on the strength of your false claim? Sigh...
> "Noon should be at noon" is not coherent in a world where we have standardized time zones across broad geographic areas.

You are ignoring the entire portion of the comment that addresses this complaint: it applies equally to either position, thus, it's a non-argument.

> [less crime during DST]

Well, that's interesting, perhaps, but still one has to weight it against the alternative. It seems a quick Google says things like DST-attributed deaths alone are ~$200M/yr, an order of magnitude larger effect, not to mention the emotional toll. So while I grant that as an argument against… I'm not sure it is enough.

> rather than condemning most of the country to leave work in the pitch dark.

Instead, you condemn the country to arrive at work in the dark.

It was also tried before, and people hated it:

> Polling in November and December 1973 showed strong and in some cases overwhelming support — 57 percent in a Gallup poll, 74 percent in a Louis Harris and Associates poll, and 73 percent in a poll from the Roper Organization.

> […] In a Roper poll conducted in February and March, just 30 percent remained in favor of year-round daylight saving time, while a majority favored switching times again. Louis Harris polling in March showed just 19 percent of people said it had been a good idea, while about twice as many — 43 percent — said it was a bad one.

(https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/15/no-more-c...)
> I have spent a fair amount of time over the last several years trying to make node act like the browser, or vice versa.

And the right thing to resist doing either. It's to think about what "services" your program actually needs to be able to function and then to isolate those parts from the rest of your application by putting it behind a well-defined interface. In other words, the best way to fix the incompatibility problem caused by API mismatches is to never make the mistake of coding directly against the host platform's APIs to begin with. Trying to do it with compatibility shims to make one platform look like the other is a fool's errand. You end up running around trying to achieve parity with a mammoth API surface area (which might never have been especially well-designed to begin with...).

Let's say you're implementing a program similar in scope to UNIX's file(1). For our example, though, suppose you're really only concerned with text files and specifically whether a given text file is using DOS-style CRLF line separators or UNIX-style LF terminators. You really only need two capabilities: a `read` operation to get the contents of a file and a `print` operation to show the output to the user. Does your program care whether that `read` is happening with a Web standards-backed FileReader or NodeJS's proprietary `fs` module? There's no reason it should. Design the best "system" layer that makes the most sense for your application's needs.

You can see this implementation strategy in the way the TypeScript team wrote the code for the TypeScript compiler itself when it was made public. Even in the early days, it could run on multiple platforms—including NodeJS, JScript/Windows Script Host, and various browsers (old or new)—because it didn't overly concern itself with anything except its real job of lexing, parsing, and type-checking its inputs—wherever they came from—and then writing the output in a platform-agnostic way.
> it's not an ideology or set of policies or even policy goals

That might be true in the academic sense.

But in reality, the only people who talk about MMT are people who just want to spend money infinitely and claim that there is no negative consequences to doing so.

Which of course, doesn't make any sense if you know anything about MMT in the academic sense, which absolutely admits that there is negative consequences to spending/money printing.

Mainstream economists don't really think MMT has much to say, TBH, and few professionals care about it.
I love the idea of deno over Node. Is it getting traction though?
Even if we imagine MMT working perfectly — whatever that means — it represents a stealthy redistributing of wealth. The idea behind it is for the government to acquire and then redistribute goods and services from those in the private sector who would otherwise command that wealth, and do something else with it: in other words, give these goods and services to others.

And no one is going to notice this? The people who are used to enjoying some quantity of goods and services are not going to notice that they now enjoy less, because someone else is enjoying them?

Or, is this somehow supposed to "stimulate" the economy, so that more goods and services are actually produced, because of the extra money?

This is alchemy. Production comes before consumption.
Sure if you define 'household' as home owners, of course their assets are well above $100k because of the hyper inflated housing market in the country.

I would _love_ to see how someone renting an apartment and working minimum wage with less than $1k in their checking account can get a $10k loan. What are they going to do, go to the check cashing place around the corner and walk out with 10 grand? (that's saracasm btw)
Unfortunately I share this sentiment…

Do you have any links to Russian videos showing plans for invading other countries? Thanks.
But this is pretty much the exact logic sanctions work by. Putin and his cronies might lose some super yachts but the main aim is to crash the Russian economy, which will hurt everyday Russians far more than any leader. Not that I have any better ideas, but you could argue this move is in a similar vein.
I really don't see what the back and forth is. Types are not inherently a fad - but there can be people who promote them with fanaticism as a cure-all or for problems they can't solve. There were people skeptical and critical of OOP when it was popular. I don't believe that OOP is inherently a fad either - it has its place. Different paradigms just get caught in the windstorm of fad interest.

> [why] are we writing all these verbose types for this dumb web app for?

You can take anything to the extreme, but types are a zero risk, low effort investment that has a quick return. If someone over-types something it's hardly a problem compared to an over engineered OOP codebase.
The Fed (not FED, BTW) doesn't "set" the rates, but has policies (including IORB, or what you call the federal reserve rate) which guide the markets to arrive at their target. Maybe that's a small distinction, but I think it helps OP, because I labored under the same confusion for a while.
Sorry for the late reply here:

> Do you mean difficult-to-detect but "obviously" bugs that can lead to UB [...]? Or do you mean difficult to detect [...] UB that is non-obvious to most programmers and/or not well-known?

I meant both, as I wasn't drawing this distinction.

> I haven't read that many horror stories where this actually happened

You may be right that most of the problematic instances of UB are doing something that's clearly not right even to inexperienced programmers, but again I don't see much value in making the distinction. I mentioned the Chromium stats earlier. Those security issues are real. Many of those issues presumably wouldn't happen in a language that prevented UB.

(It's not necessarily the case that all the issues would have been avoided, as it's possible a bug might still have manifested, but in a well-defined way. A UB-invoking memory-management bug might correspond to a failure to reset a data-structure, in a safe language. Only the former invokes UB, but both could have security consequences.)

> For better or worse, I'm not angry with the compiler if I code a logic bug and corruption happens. That's just what I expect.

You expect it because you know the C and C++ languages don't offer robust means to avoid undefined behaviour. This doesn't generalise to other languages.

In C and C++, silent data-corruption can occur if you try to write into an array but go out-of-bounds. That doesn't happen in many other modern languages. Unlike Ada, C doesn't even let you enable robust runtime bounds-checks for your debug builds. (To my knowledge no C compiler is able to offer this feature.)

> Maybe if you're indeed saying the latter is a "major cause of security vulnerabilities", could you provide a few examples where it's the language's or compiler's "fault"?

I wasn't drawing the distinction at all. I'll use an example from the plainly erroneous category.

Use-after-free and double-free errors are both undefined behaviour, in C and in C++. In Safe Rust, they cannot ever arise because of the way the language is defined, so the door is closed on those forms of runtime error. We don't need to talk about blame.

Memory-management issues of this sort are precisely the kinds of issues that affect Chromium. Not even Google can keep undefined behaviour out of their most high-profile C++ codebase. (In fairness though, the codebase would likely be quite different if written from scratch today in modern C++.)

On the not plainly erroneous side: a subtlety that can result in security consequences is the elision of a memset call by an optimising compiler which can result in sensitive data not getting zeroed out before deallocation. This isn't actually UB, but it's a good example of 'language lawyer' trouble with C/C++. [0]

As an aside: I once spotted a competent C++ programmer (vastly more experienced than myself) writing code which applied memcpy to an array of non-POD objects. If you'll forgive a painful mix of metaphors: C++ is large enough that even experienced programmers can have blind spots to its dark corners.

[0] https://stackoverflow.com/a/56565637/
Yeah, I was hosting a zoom call once and everyone got kicked off immediately when my flatmate used the microwave to heat up his lunch.
RISC-V requires less hardware complexity, and I think GigaDevice's GD32VF microcontrollers have gotten lower energy usage out of that (compared to the otherwise identical GD32F microcontrollers with an ARM Cortex-M core). I don't think it's especially easy to write compiler backends for, though I haven't tried yet; the instruction set is nice and small and orthogonal, yes, but most of the time the subset of instructions a compiler backend actually uses on amd64 or whatever is also nice and small and orthogonal. It's much easier to write emulators for, both because the instruction set is small and because, like the MIPS, it has no condition-code flags, a property that has caused consternation among GMP developers. And there is of course a much wider range of logic designs available for RISC-V than for any other architecture, because it's the first open-source architecture that's become popular.

For me one of the biggest draws is that the privileged spec is enormously simpler than the corresponding morass for most other architectures, especially i386 and amd64. Writing a toy, but working, virtual-memory operating-system kernel for RISC-V seems like the kind of thing you could do in a weekend rather than a semester. And that's enormously freeing.

Trouble is, almost all the actual physical RISC-V hardware I've seen so far seems to be microcontroller-oriented, so it doesn't have an MMU, so it doesn't support this stuff. SiFive has sold some boards called HiFive Unmatched and HiFive Unleashed with multi-core RISC-V CPUs they built that I'm pretty sure did have MMUs (since you could run Linux on them), but they're gone now (https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/SiFive/HF105-000?qs=zW3...).

So something like the Allwinner D1 seems really appealing. Just, not saddled with a keyboard that's both too big to fit in my pocket and too small to actually type on. The Clockwork Pi would be a good fit — but 64 MiB is pretty small for running modern Linux.
Yes and yes. Ruby got it right, no question :)
"Technical Perfectionism", The other extreme on the spectrum.
Yes but as a consequence there are more cars in operation so total energy consumption increases.

https://wolfstreet.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/US-auto-sa...
There's a presumption either way. You can make the presumption JS did for [] (and there's probably no turning back), you can even argue explicit is better than implicit (vs the value of context-sensitive concision).

But it's also not consistent with the ways that other empty but typed cups are treated ("" for the empty string, 0 for empty count / quantity, both of which are false-y). Different presumptions for different types of cups carries its own implicit hazards from context sensitivity.
Putin: “A Natural and Necessary Self-Purification of Society”
Krita, the drawing program, has been great (in limited experience).
Many people have alaready made sense of web3. The problem with web3? People involved in the space don't care. They are either gullible or know exactly what they are doing (scamming and claiming something that has nothing to do blockchains).

One of the earliest articles that already made sense is 5 years old this year:

- Ten years in, nobody has come up with a use for blockchain, https://medium.com/@kaistinchcombe/ten-years-in-nobody-has-c...

- And the follow up, Blockchain is not only crappy technology but a bad vision for the future, https://medium.com/@kaistinchcombe/decentralized-and-trustle...

We've yet to see a single "making sense" cryptobro engage with any of the points in the article. I'm not even talking about the more recent ones like Moxie Marlinspike's My first impressions of web3, https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html, or Molly White's collection of posts on blockchains and web3, https://blog.mollywhite.net/

There are more, of course. But they are all dismissed by crypto people because they don't care as long as crypto is useful for getting rich quick schemes. It's not here to save the world, or help the disadvantaged, or whatever other bullshit they sling your way.
There is input from a human in the form of algorithmic programming and choice of training data
Yep or a single HD wallet that automatically generates keys with each new interaction.
I would recommend reading TFA to you, because its contents are pertinent and also describe this interaction. Specifically, the polarization of the topic such that a neutral and high level description is being knee-jerked as an approval.
I beat you to that a long time ago: https://www.gwern.net/GPT-3#stanislaw-lems-cyberiad :)
There is no way to watch this video and come away with the understanding that there was no object at all. It spends a tedious several minutes demonstrating the connection between glare and objects emitting light, and multiple long, tedious disclaimers that it is not arguing that there is no object at all in the video. You have to want it to be saying something else to take away a different message.
>Sure if you define 'household' as home owners

I don't. All households. Majority of households have > 100k wealth. Your claim is patently wrong, when taken against your citation which shows nearly everyone found _some_ way to pay the expense. Personally I would just pay with a credit card so I can let inflation shred away ~0.5% of the real cost, but I'd be tossed away with those who 'cant afford' it by your interpretation of the study.

I usually keep less than $1k in fiat accounts and I could easily have tens of thousands tomorrow if I like, and my household is far poorer than the median household. It's called selling (or borrowing against) assets. The median household can do the same thing. Only an idiot holds fiat in a savings account when inflation is raging.
No. Because you have to consider:

1. Current or future means of intercepting hypersonic missiles.

2. The ability to disable or reduce the enemy’s ability of launching hypersonic missiles, or of pinpointing and accurately tracking the exact location of aircraft carriers.
file

strings

hexdump (look for headers like ELF RIFF etc)

identify (spots image files)

sox (see if its audio)

gnuplot - try plotting it as floats or ints (sometime you can see some order and
make a guess)

scanelf, dumpelf etc