skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is why people should be issued a work phone (or children a school laptop in the case of the OP) if the IT department is going to request control of it.

A while ago my company eventually decided to enable security settings for Microsoft Outlook, Teams etc on all mobile devices (the wipe phone on demand option). All that happened was everyone without a company phone uninstalled Teams and used WhatsApp instead.
I am making these Type-C hubs for a living, and indeed RTL8153 is the most trouble free, and cheap chip on the market.

Though, I myself had misfortune buying broken RTL8153 based ethernet NICs. Mismatched coupling capacitors, PCB shorts, possibly broken firmwares.

40%-30% people who do EE in China are just above the Arduino level.

Chinese engineering companies can make good hardware if you pay them, and give time to fix self induced issues coming from rushed development schedules, but in that case, they are not really that ahead from any other EE companies around the world.
> It's especially galling that you're accusing me of trying to turn it into a competition when the comment I was replying to jumped in entirely out of the blue to argue that girls have it worse

Why would you assume my words were "accusing" you of anything, rather than just a general observation as part of a conversation that people are having? Presumably the OP you were responding to would potentially also read my reply to you and also see what I am saying.

Or maybe I was just trying to head off people replying to my own post accusing me of making it into a competition, by making it clear that I have already considered that and agree with it, but still felt the rest of my post was a contribution to the discussion.
This is apparently a problem on Reddit too. I got some follow spam over the weekend which was just trying to get me to click porn links. No way to report.
"#6 get a rent control lease and hope for the long-term savings"

This is what worked for us though it wasn't a specific plan other than we couldn't afford non-rent controlled housing at the time. We lived in a small but decent rent controlled 1br apartment for about the first 7 years here at which point the housing market dropped enough and we were able to buy. I wouldn't count on another housing crash of the same degree, but with two incomes and no kids, rent control definitely helps in building that cash reserve in case it does or in case you decide to move elsewhere or lose your job.
>The interactions of possibly cancelling things?

Yes. Precisely because it causes one to actively communicate why. That’s what builds trust. As other commenters have noted, just agreeing to cancel still leaves one wondering why. Is it because they have social anxiety and I invited them to a black tie dinner? Or is it because they think I’m pompous because I enjoy formal gatherings? Did I agree because I think they are socially inept or because I think the party would be lame? You’ll never know and that uncertainty breeds distrust. Trust and certainty are intertwined when it comes to human social interactions.

>the desire isn’t specifically for an app

I mean, the OP literally said there was a want for an app. Now maybe they really meant there is a “want for reduced friction in canceling social interactions” but I’m saying psychological trust is a better way of reducing that friction, not off-loading it to faceless technology. To my original point, there are some things tech is great for. I’m not sure managing social interactions that have evolved over eons and are one of a few species-defining traits is one of them.

Imagine a different scenario like communicating what projects you want to lead at work. One organization just matches your requests with your bosses through an intermediary. When you don’t get the projects you want, you’re left wondering…is it because the boss thinks you’re not competent? Is it because someone else has a unique skill set to lead instead? Is it nepotism? Bribery? The other org institutes an open dialogue where your boss explains the exact rationale behind each assignment. Which do you think is managing their relationships more effectively?
Apple said in one of their WWDC keynotes somewhere that because use of personal devices for work was so common, Apple was going to sandbox and limit access to personal data after signing in to a work account - so the most work could do is erase their part of the device and not erase or touch the entire device. The idea being that if you bought the device and it wasn’t provisioned from work, then signing in with a work email should only ever affect your work accounts and apps that access them. But I might have the details wrong, haven’t looked into it in detail yet. The iOS feature is called “Account-Driven User Enrollment”, there’s a WWDC video on it from last year.
And he flies around in $50M private jets and absolutely revels in the attention, influence and soft power his wealth affords him.

But sure, he's one of us because one of the many places he stays at is a prefab house that's right next to his work.
That makes sense, I'll see if I can find a very large dataset I'm interested in to try it, thank you!
I use target _blank all the time because otherwise my users “lose” their tab and don’t know to back button to it.

Target _blank keeps the title of your page on the screen and clickable.
OP you got to realize that what ever device you child logs into with his school issued google account will log all sorts of fun stuff.
It might explain some mass delusions though
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30906984
Maybe this temporary houses would serve better to fleeing millions of Ucranians that, unlike Russians, had their homes destroyed
If the software were removable at all then students, who are more technologically literate than their parents would simply remove the spy software.

Student removal would defeat the purpose of the spy software.
The point is that gender still plays a far larger role in the structure of suicide demographics than either race or being LGBT, and it's odd to exclude any mention of that. The fact that boys commit suicide at 4x the rate of girls while girls attempt suicide at 3x the rate of boys is both interesting and more powerful in understanding the epidemiology of suicide than less elevated rates in smaller demographics.
Mastodon: A free, open-source, and decentralized Twitter not owned by anybody
The damage done to children due to masks and lockdowns will be reckoned with for a generation.
I think it works similarly on Android phones. Google policy for the Android Corp devices requires you to set it up using corp account, then add secondary personal accounts(if needed).
You see this in adults because men choose more effective methods of suicide like guns.
It's very clever, but solves the wrong problem. It's basically doing what a revision control system like Git does, but for a different reason. Everything is pay per view in Xanadu. It's micropayments to the max. Everybody who contributed to the article gets a cut, in proportion to how much content they contributed. So there's all that tracking.

Also, pictures? What are those? Audio and video? Don't even think about it.

It's an elaborately optimized design that optimizes for the wrong thing. It belongs to the world in which Mead Data Systems and MEDLINE and NEXIS and LEXIS, all pay to search and read systems, dominated information access. If Elsevier had designed the Web, it would work like this.

I knew that crowd back when they were doing this. Great people, but too many were of the "everything should be a market" persuasion.
> it's a data source for HR to identify problems emerging as patterns

It's 100% CYA and nothing more. A performative act so the personnel department looks like it's serving the business and complying with labor laws.
Since modern browsers are capable of rendering pdfs, it's downright infuriating when a site forces me to download a pdf and take more steps to view it. For being a user agent, this feature certainly removes agency from the user. Afaik there is no way to tell Firefox or Chrome to ignore the Content-Disposition header for files it should already know how to render.
>Executives != smart people

You are saying Elon hired a bunch of dumb people to be executives for his companies.

Not sure that's what you want to imply.
No, they don't accomplish the same thing. One accomplishes something better than the other.

To your points, all-female organizations would not be criminalized:

1) First of all, these should be civil laws, not criminal laws. Having this be a criminal law would be insane.

2) Second of all, these are about corporate boards for publicly-traded corporations. All-female associations are permitted. Even all-female publicly-traded corporations would be permitted, although I'm unaware of any. Board members are independent individuals who provide oversight. Most aren't insiders. It's fine to have a female board member for an all-male organization, or vice-versa. To your nursing example, if there were a publicly-traded nursing corporation, it's even helpful since half of patients are males.

3) Third of all, LA Times is not all-female; I'm not sure where that comes from. LA County is a government, not a publicly-traded corporation, and the law doesn't apply.

The right idea which should be behind the law -- which is sensible -- is that corporate oversight should understand the impact on everyone, and should represent the workforce, customers, etc. It's sensible. I suspect it's good for shareholder value too.
Pretty shameful for the programmers who implemented this.
Actually...

While the death rate was low, it was way, way, way higher than usual cause of death at this age.

Also think about it in another way: a disease which impairs 1 out of 5000 people is not considered "rare" by any health authorities. For people 20 to 40, the death rate of covid was between 1/500 and 1/1000.

And i have another point for more economically-minded people: people from age 0 to 25 cost money to society. People 25 to 55 are net positives, as they contribute much to the economy: they consume a lot, they build a lot, they have energy for associative tasks and for child rearing. They are perhaps the most productive members of society on an island. Then consider people 55+. They are less productive, on an island, but sometime they have so much experience that loosing one without warning can set a company or some research back a couple of year. Also, they consume a lot, so loosing a lot of this population suddenly would destroy any economy riding on internal consumption.

The last argument is probably why policymakers of countries not know to care much about their workers still reacted quite fast (maybe overreacted: i don't think so, but i understand pleople saying that).
> I think there is certainly some overlap between WINE and ReactOS devs as well.
This is my understanding.

But you're likely correct that my response is mostly suited to speaking about dll's created from the wine project.

Although I think some code and implementation ideas are shared between projects, as you allude with your comment about sharing developers.
Honest, maybe, but not transparent.

"I've got a pretty busy day that day and am not sure I can make it" - transparent
"I don't know if I'll be up to going to that that day" - transparent.
"Hey, maybe; if I find nothing better to do" - transparent.

"50/50 chance I'll be there" - all the charm of the last of those, without the transparency.
Helium tank and a plastic bag is the easiest according to Final Exit.
Multicasting on ephemeral groups in large clusters
First, a riddle

The King of a small country invites the entire city to his annual party - 500,000, diverse men, women, & children. As a tradition, each citizen brings the King a bottle of wine. Soon after, the Queen discovers that one of the citizens is trying to assassinate the King by giving him a bottle of poisoned wine. Unfortunately, they do not know which citizen, nor which bottle of wine is poisoned. The poison is completely indiscernible. However, the King has 24 prisoners he plans to execute. He decides to use them as taste testers to determine which bottle of wine contains the poison. The poison when taken has no effect on the prisoner until exactly 24 hours later when the infected prisoner suddenly dies. The King needs to determine which bottle of wine is poisoned by tomorrow so that the festivities can continue as planned. Hence he only has time for one round of testing. How can the King administer the wine to the prisoners to ensure that 24 hours from now he is guaranteed to have found the poisoned wine bottle?

Of course, the answer is to apply binary numbers - assign each prisoner a bit in the vector [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, ...], assign each bottle a number from 0 -> 499,999, & then walk through bottle by bottle having each prisoner sip the corresponding binary number. In 24 hours, the combination of prisoners dead yields the bottle number poisoned.

In a similar fashion, a cluster of 100,000 machines has a combinatorial explosion of nCk possible multicasting addresses. To deduplicate data flow to N towers, I'm curious whether one can multicast/listen to arbitrary groups on a single address with the following (or similar) approach.

Take a clutser of 100,000 towers [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, ...], assign each tower a single bit in the vector, disseminated over the network through a gossip protocol. When the network desires to multicast to a set of N nodes, send a single data stream to the address corresponding to the combination of N. Routers do not listen on a classical ipv6 address for the multicast, but rather check in the destination header if their unique bit exists.

We're currently trying to deduplicate CPU socket writes in a computer vision / broadcast network. This would weaponize bandwidth to shrink the # of redundant writes.

Thanks!
The amount of ephemeral content (stories, expiring content) being created/shared has a larger impact on capacity and provisioning than you might expect.
Wind turbines, the big ones, regulate themselves to turn in sync with the grid. The adjust thier blades as needed to keep pace/power. That's why huge fields of them all turn in perfect lockstep.
While that is noble, what isn't is their arrogance and stubborn belief in their own correctness -- and sometimes -- that everyone else is a bumbling idiot.
Before blaming parents for a child's qualities, have a couple kids yourself. See how incredibly different they are in personality, in strengths and weaknesses, in resiliences and fragilities. Then, if your kids are normal and healthy, think about how lucky you are that your children aren't physically or mentally ill.
I agree, but it often takes a lot of training and experience to truly know the difference when both both fear and anxiety feel the same physiologically.
(It was a Ferris Bueller's Day Off reference. Blame Ben Stein.)
I was talking in wider terms of not using a framework at all and not specifically about Redwoodjs.

I can't speak to whether RedwoodJS will lead you down a path of working around it.
It is super frustrating that it’s basically impossible to find good tech (in some categories). How is the author surprised about this though? Surely they knew about white-label alibaba tech, right? It is almost impossible to avoid it. It’s been this way for at least 5 years. I can pick a ‘white-label’ product by sight now. I suggest everyone develops the same intuition and avoids these disappointments.
That's not really accurate based on my 20+ year experience living here.
Because pleasure is the word we use to describe positive feelings, ie feelings that people intrinsically want. Suffering is its inverse, something people intrinsically don't want. A utilitarian identifies the good with giving people what they want. You can define 'good' in other ways if you don't agree that giving people what they want is good, but then I think you'd have to justify a superior definition.

I realise what you mean now though; just asking "yeah but why" can be used to constantly question anything because it assumes that axioms can be questioned - any model must be grounded in axioms that cannot themselves be justified within that model. We could get into social constructivism if you really want, but that's an area in which I'm quite well-versed; "yeah but why"-ability is not a sign of weakness of a model.

The point of utilitarianism is to align the model of morality with things that people want.
Can't speak for OP, but generally this is mentioned during the sign in process, so it should be laid out. It is effectively all or nothing.
I’ve had a similar approach, so I can give my take. You can read the advice cynically or genuinely, and either could be true. It depends on the organization. If you’re working somewhere that this can be taken at face value, you’ve got a good gig.

For me, I make sure I work in an industry that benefits society, and I make sure I work for a company that fits the spirit of bettering society. After that, a lot of the rest takes care of itself. Does that limit opportunities? Sure - it eliminates a number of government agencies and most publicly held companies. That still leaves a huge amount of space. By making sure I’m working somewhere with a clear mission I agree with, what makes the boss happy is likely to line up really well with what I’d want to do anyway.

Billing mistakes default to benefitting the customer, production incidents are as transparent as possible, consistent long term views on how to build a product and business (yes, you still cut corners when it makes sense, but you build a strong foundation to let yourself move really fast at the right times), etc.

Another benefit of consistently getting things done without drama - you end up with a lot of autonomy. When you see something that needs to get done, or a project you’d like to be involved in, things just seem to line up.
>Lowered birth rates is actually a good thing, if we're going to be honest about our way of life and its sustainability problem. As a species, we are going to have to make some hard decisions about what quality of life we want to have, as the answer to that question will determine how many people should exist at one time.

So, I actually agree with you here. I'm also not advocating for eugenics, but I'm approaching the "problem" from a slightly different angle. Re: "As a species, we are going to have to make some hard decisions about the quality of life we want to have" - this is where I disagree. I think we're fundamentally uncapable of doing that at the scale necessary to get back to a sustainable world as such a decision essentially equates to eugenics which no one will go for.

Most people simply aren't intellectually honest about sustainability problems. My mental model of it all is "it isn't sustainable and hence it will not be sustained" which leads me to the conclusion that "at some point this ends". The question is when / how? You mentioned the lowered birth rates being a good thing and I said I agreed in part because it's the only way you can get to a lower population in a gentle manner without die offs from mass starvation or worse genocide.

Where I'm very, very bearish about all of this is that I don't see a gentle transition to a more sustainable world taking place. Your take was we're going to have to make some hard choices, my take is we're going to continue to make the unsustainable choices for long enough that our hand will likely be forced.

I just can't help but think that there is a critical mass of people required to maintain the infrastructure of our society below which the behavior of the system becomes non-linear and essentially the whole thing crashes. The scale of infrastructure and the complexity that underpins it was build and based on the assumptions of society as large as we have now. Now, we may be able to scale some of that back and reduce the complexity to match, and that's probably a best case scenario, but I think our need for optimism leads us to don the rose-colored glasses here and adopt hope as a strategy. I don't have a crystal ball and can't tell which particular way it's going to go, but I'm at least prepared for it to go the way of the worst case scenario in which things end up like the end of the bronze age.

TL;DR - hope for the best, plan for the worst.
Looks like they hope to be back in stock late this month. They've got some availability notes on their website: https://www.caldigit.com/an-update-on-ts4-availability/

I imagine they're being hit by the chip shortage that impacted so many other companies. I'm still waiting on a Raspberry Pi, myself.
I can't picture the specific phenomenon you're referring to, even abstractly, when you say things like "an aggressive societal push towards taking an apathetic stance towards the mental health among boys" and "Certain groups ... seem especially threatened by the notion that we pay any attention to this issue and aggressivly push back", and use the tiki-torch demonstrators as an example. It sounds like you're talking about the unrest and hate surrounding social politics, but are inserting male children who kill themselves in the place where the alt-right (or related terms) would normally appear.

The sarcastic "happy?" is maybe an indicator that this is not laid out in exactly the least emotional way, which is maybe part of the problem of clarity - do you have anything more specific in mind when you refer to this seemingly crazy movement against the very idea of helping suicidal young boys? That's a very broad, seemingly non-political thing to be "against".
It might not scale for washing machines, but at least for home electronics.
> > In a cock-up more than one party can have cocked up.

> That point was that only the US gets blamed.

Well, I didn’t do that, so I have no idea why you are attacking this strawman.

All I initially claimed was that soft power wasn’t tried properly. For some reason you seem to interpret this as an attack on the US which is why you’ve brought in the US-EU question, when it wasn’t relevant at all initially. I have no idea why you take any smug European remarks about our being maximally competent seriously, because nobody else would, and they hardly excuse failures in other countries’ planning.

It is also only your comments which apportion blame to one party only:

> I put this all on the Euros.

—

> The possible reasons are soft-power doesn't actually prevent those things, the implementation was flawed, inadequate resources, something/someone interfered, and no one bothered.

I’ve repeatedly said I agree that the implementation was flawed because nobody bothered with Russia in the same way that we did with other parts of Europe.

> Do you want to go with "the US stopped the EU from using soft-power"?

No, and your comments seem to assume that I did.

> And the fact that a failed Russia is a problem for the US also misses the point. (The ex-DDR is Germany's responsibility even though a failed DDR is a problem for the US.)

Well, yes, and if American policymakers spot that that someone else isn’t doing their job and they’re capable of doing it for them, it’s silly for them not to do so (and vice versa). It’s not like Americans or Europeans meaningfully attempt to avoid encroaching on others’ domains.

> This was the perfect opportunity to show that Europe really is superior

We’re talking about geopolitical strategy, not culture or food. Europe lost any claim to being any good at this sort of thing after WWII—we all know that.

> You don't have to throw us out - just don't invite us. We're stupid and you're rich. You don't need us and we only screw things up.

I hope you enjoy rebutting the imaginary Eurocrat you’re talking to on HN; of course Americans are stupid (compare the British occupation of Iraq a century ago to that tried most recently), but so are Europeans (see French mismanagement of Françafrique)—I am hardly claiming that we are any good at this, or even necessarily better than you.