skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
this reeks of American-style "those are the rules, and some people made those rules, so people need to follow the rules, because the rules are meant to be followed." reasoning. as far as i can tell, your claim is that you are perfectly justified in running over cyclists committing minor traffic violations, and in fact your list makes your "emotional trauma" equal to or in fact even more important than "death or serious injury for the cyclist", simply "Because the cyclist was in the wrong". nowhere in this comment or even further down the replies do you actually explain why they're wrong, merely more circular logic that they're wrong because they're wrong.
In Tokyo, zoning is controlled by the national government.
I took a job once because they were honest about the fact that the code was a complete shit show, and that’d I’d have to clean it up. I’m sure this is naive on some level, but I’d say you don’t have to lie to people. Just help them imagine doing the job and let them decide if that’s how they want to spend their time.
I’d be super interested to see what AFL does to this :)
If you made that land I would agree with you, but you didn't so I can't.

Imagine if somebody purchased half of the existing radio spectrum and then decided to just leave it unused for decades. We wouldn't allow it. Perhaps if they compensated society by paying a tax for the exclusive use (or non-use) of it then we could justify it.
Just to pile on here, Facebook was founded six months after MySpace.

Pop culture places MySpace somewhere contemporary with the rotary phone, but there were undoubtedly people who heard of and used The Facebook first.
Twitter has around 8,000 employees. I fully understand and respect the high level of technical skills needed to operate and manage such a highly available service, BUT I still can't for the life of me figure what the other 7,950 employees do.
> Companies moderate haphazardly and improvise and they care about their bottom-line and to extinguish shitstorms.

Yes, after they've helped create the shitstorms in the first place with their escalatory like and recommendation models.
It really doesn't matter what the citizenry thinks as the Nazi propaganda person said at Nuremburg. In the case of this happening, most of us will be dead if it ever comes down to this.

From a historical look, strong parallels can be made for role reversal of the geopolitics of this event in our history

https://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/cuban-missile-crisis

A missile is a missile and when its within range of a nation's capital its not unexpected that any nation will be forced take action. Not that they've said this as far as I've seen.

Its worse, because you have the idiots who are coordinating the media being blatantly stupid. Everyone should be legitimately concerned and the media should not be mouthing off on TV blatant propaganda that makes it harder to de-escalate.

As far as it is publicly known, no one has a real idea which individual member/euro-state conditions might kick off NATO provisions (each one is different from what I've heard) and one wrong move can drag everyone into a conflict where there is the real possibility that no one survives.

Chaos is profitable and distracting, so of course you'll get dumb opportunists potentially making things worse gambling at the risk of all of our lives.

You know what they say about those that ignore the lessons of the past.
No, it isn't impossible at all. However, it would be very subjective- like that Freenet overlay software that eliminates SPAM and child pornography with ease, such a system would be more based on subjective webs of trust and optional lists people could subscribe to, used to determine what you see.

The sender anonymity part could just be having every node act as part of a mixnet- wait until you receive X messages and/or Y time has elapsed, shuffle messages, send them out to randomly chosen nodes, repeat this for 3 hops and then your message is propagated.

I've wanted to make something like this for ages since 4chan has gone so downhill. Perhaps it should happen then. It would probably be easier to adopt than something as complex as Freenet FMS for sure.
You shouldn't derive whether or not something is exciting to yourself by its exclusivity. I can't even begin to state how wrong that feels.
> the service of managing the land and property

That's being a property manager, not a landlord. Landlords provide no services. One can be a landlord AND a property manager, but the role of landlord is distinguished simply by owning something that others want.
Of course malloc is implemented in C. Look at the glibc source code.
Twitter has never been a knockoff experience, it was as different from the social media that succeeded before it as TikTok is from YouTube.

Meanwhile any number of near-exact replicas of it exist with a different flavor: freer speech, paid service, decentralized, specifically for particular political affiliations to name a few. None of them have made a dent.
That doesn’t break my vision. It’s not the whole Internet, it’s just one bulletin board. People can not go there at all if they don’t want to. If Twitter’s moderation was chosen by each user, for themselves, we wouldn’t have this conversation (though no doubt we’d be having a different one). People filtering for themselves doesn’t touch on what I’m getting at with this thought experiment.
Bad code + time allowed to clean it up = perfectly well-defined business requirements + a license to think about code craftsmanship. That's a lot of people's dream job.
Which may be entirely justified, we don't know. But it also may be true that despite taking the class, she just wasn't good at being a web developer. We also don't know how many interviews she went on, or tried to, before giving up. A school with a 98% placement rate still concedes that 2% of it's graduates don't get hired.
This is a clever idea. First, every team has tons of code that a new-hire would see on day one. Might as well see how they perform! Second, this truly is an important skill. I've read hundreds of libraries, if not thousands, and being able to accept not just a coding style, but a thought style, and internalize it is essential. Yeah, the more I think about this, the more I wish I had thought of it when I was hiring!

I'm kinda jealous, I'd love to do code interviews again, but I haven't been a junior dev in ... /* checks notes / ... over three decades?!? cries in yaml*
Well, you're technically right in that pointing out obvious trolls is discouraged here; instead, let's be charitable and take your comment at face value then.

> Every billionaire is supposedly an "asshole"

I don't know if this is true; I think some have a pretty strong image in the public eye. Gates for a long time hit that mark, though the COVID vaccine era allegations work against him now. Musk himself - case in point - is polarizing, but beloved by many. Buffet AFAICT is seen as a kindly, humble market guru with a penchant for helping those who need it. The Kardashians' (specifically Kylie Jenner's) wealth is admired and lauded by many. Tony Khan is ranked highly in sentiment across billionaires, and even the polarizing Vince McMahon is well beloved by an adoring group. Donald Trump, who is maybe a billionaire?, is the actual locus of much attention, merchandise, and adoration, of a large portion of the USA. Mukesh Ambani is a respected and admired figure in India. I don't know what the burden of proof to countermand this is.

> the only reason is because they have the money to do all of the things that regular people would also do but pretend they don't because they don't have the power to do anything.

This seems wildly, unsupportably reductive. Could you back this up with anything? I've engaged with the thought for a bit and am now more genuinely curious that I was before, so - W there for the HN zeitgeist, probably.

> I do understand though that your comment adds no value and should supposedly be downvoted according to the community standards of this site.

Maybe, maybe not. I'd rather call out a troll and help others see it if it'd otherwise fly under the radar and scum up conversation.

> My point is not a troll, it is always the case that people who have no power pretend that <if you just give me the power> I will be the <really good person>. They just want power like everybody else.

This is completely unfounded, and - to me, very subjectively - sounds like projection. I vehemently do not want unilateral power, but I also don't want others to have it. Where do I fall on your political compass graph?
https://h1bdata.info/
> I still can't for the life of me figure what the other 7,950 employees do.

Management. Hey, it's important. They're people-persons.
The fact that nature places constraints on ordinary humans’ worst instincts is probably a good thing. We’re all fundamentally egomaniacal idiots who would do stupid things if granted absolute power. The fact that our society has granted a few PayPal co-founders something akin to such power is not a strong argument that such power is a good idea.
Pump and dump is as old as the stock market. What is more impressive is the they got involved at the corporate level, getting private companies to merge into OTC shells as well as issuing official SEC filings in target industries (probably blockchain or crypto in recent years).

Press release says they made $100m since 2015.
I'm guessing the answer to this question is predominantly determined by the price of your lawyer.
Proponents of LVT generally want it to replace all other taxes.
.win and gab will absolutely censor people. I know people who have had their accounts banned. The wrong think there is just anything not right wing.

4chan is more an example of what happens when you don't censor.
They have their lives, I have mine.
Sometimes you don't understand each other's behavior, but at some point in life everyone has to know for themselves what is right and wrong for them.
We have never tried to impose our different views of the world on each other.

As a father, I have made it clear to my children that at some point they are responsible for themselves and of course they will get support if they get into trouble, but not for every mischief they get into.

They know I have had to learn my lessons in life the hard way and place a high value on freedom and self-sufficiency, and am willing to pay the price.

Just like my parents, I don't need power plays out of character mediocrity to bolster a weak ego.
I've long advocated a land value tax. I would suggest that any reform of this nature, that eliminates private capture of economic rent, accompany one-time compensation to the parties that lose that economic rent, so in this case, compensation to make up for the loss in property value that a LVT would incur.

The same should apply to any other repeal of rent-seeking institutions: anti-labor-competitive laws privileging labor unions, licensure barriers privileging taxi medallion holders, etc.

The British used this method to end slavery throughout their empire, which meant: 1. much more rapid end to slavery, due to less political opposition to its abolition, 2. no costly civil war and enduring sociopolitical grievances that emanated from it.

Economic analyses indicate that compensating rent-seekers at an amount equal to the expected loss of economic utility over their lifetime from the elimination of their rent-seeking opportunity, as part of a reformation to end the institutions that enable their rent-seeking, leads to net economic gains, because the economic efficiency gains from expedited abolition of the rent-seeking far outweighs the cost of the compensation.
> Why would Apple, with all their money, need to hire H-1B generalist Software Engineers and Project Managers when they can out-compete literally any other company on earth?

Honestly?

Someone at a FAANG I won’t name explained it to me: They don’t check for employment eligibility/citizenship status before interviewing. If they like the person, legal is given the task of getting them a work visa. If they can’t, they’ll park the foreign worker at a satellite office until they can secure one. H1s and O1 are rather cheap in terms of legal fees. Especially when you operate at scale.
>So your thought is to slow down hundreds of thousands of cars which the road was made for... in order for cyclists not to be inconvenienced?

Roads are made for wheeled vehicles, many of which are cars and many of which are bikes. Demanding they stick to the side street ghetto seems suboptimal, considering car drivers are just as lethal with respect to motorcycle riders, are they not?
It might or might not be a good idea in general to not have a centralized copyright holder entity, but at least it cuts down on the humongous license flame wars, which, incidentally, is what you would get if you actually wanted to go through with an endeavor such as you describe.

Anyway, what Linux developers might be afraid of can not be mitigated by simply switching to an MIT license. What would happen is basically some modern variant of this:

https://lwn.net/Articles/162686/
One of Yishan's bigger points is how managing a social media company can make you eat shit on a constant basis, which is exceptionally hard for CEOs entering that space.

Elon eats shit on a daily basis, from everyone, from multiple angles.

Wouldn't this actually make him a decent fit for the job?
We used to have an interview process that had a take-home project.

The project was:

- you have two files: listings.json and products.json

- listings.json lists ~20,000 Amazon listings for electronics with fields like title, brand and price

- products.json lists ~1,000 digital cameras, with fields like brand, family, model

- your job is to write a script that, for each entry in listings.json, emits the best match (or no match!) from products.json

Your solution could be as naive or as fancy as you wanted. The main point was to have something for the next stage.

We'd run your submission, and use that to show you some false positives and false negatives. Then we'd ask you to debug why each false positive or false negative happen, explain it to us, propose how you'd fix it, and identify any trade-offs in your proposed fix.

Eventually, we wanted to offer a non-take-home-project interview. We already had a bunch of existing solutions from employees, so we used those to run a stripped down version of the interview that just focused on the code reading/debugging/proposing fixes part.

I think both of these interview approaches were pretty effective at giving candidates a natural environment to demonstrate skills that they'd actually use on the job -- debugging, collaboration, predicting downstream implications of changes, etc.
I pity that MPX is gone as well, this makes x86/x64 lose to ARM in hardware memory tagging.

While it was buggy, Intel doesn't seem keen in bringing in a replacement.
By doing that you will be selecting for the "cracker" type. That is people who are able to get into any code, even under adversity, and do anything they want. It is a great skill to have even if you job doesn't involve removing copy protection, for example, he may be the only person who will be able to fix a bug in that old code base written in an obscure language when the last person to work on it left the company 10 years ago.

What you won't be testing is higher level skills. It may be easy to hack into a known codebase, and even do it cleanly, you just have to mimic the surrounding code. Getting the big idea and making long term choices is another set of skills, not exclusive with being a cracker, but not something you can see in 10 lines of code.
This article goes onto being biased on unproven allegation of bias, not exploring other possibilities
I keep seeing this sentiment, and it seems like wishful thinking.. The paper is out there on how to defeat the poison pill: trigger the pill, let the stock tank, offer at a lower price per share but at the same market value plus what was put into the company to acquire the new stock by the diluters. Full market price is full market price. Look at Musk's investment in automation at Tesla he knows how to play the long game. ttps://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1102&context=law_faculty_scholarship
Yeah, we sometimes say stuff like "we don't expect you to know the arguments to sigaction just like that, you can ask us anything[1] or just put what you think could be reasonable", to make clear we're not looking to hire an encyclopedia.

[1] And if they do, we probably end up pulling up the man page for them because we don't remember either. It's just not the relevant part of any coding interview, the reading or the writing kind.
I'm not a C expert and I'm stumped but curious. What does malloc(0) return and why is that important?
> You can advocate for copyright reform all you want but you misunderstand who you have to please when you do that. It's all those lobbying groups.

Or we can simply acknowledge that the whole system is rigged and continue to ignore the laws and get as many people to understand that piracy is the only reasonably moral alternative?
Basically everything you’ve posted is wrong, and I completely disagree with.

Elon would do an infinitely better job than the current leadership, and I struggle to understand the mindset of those who say otherwise. I suspect they’re either ignorant or acting in bad faith.
> Rule of thumb, never start a sentence with "There are people", it's very vague and almost meaningless. Always refer to specific groups of people.

This from the person who claims the supporters of our current copyright system are by necessity "Writers, researchers, artists, architects, musicians, composers, filmmakers, actors, podcasters, even a lot of software developers"

Not a terribly specific list there either, but examples of folks fed up with system abound and I'm prepared to offer some to get you started:

musicians:
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna7287785
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/lady-gaga-jack-white-norah-jo...
https://news.slashdot.org/story/09/05/16/0257212/danger-mous...
see also : every artist that defends the use of samples in their works

Writers:
http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2010/05/piracy-again.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Doctorow
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond
https://www.brandonsanderson.com/warbreaker-rights-explanati...

filmmakers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Paley
Luke Thompson (Decay 2012)
Michela Ledwidge (sanctuary 2005)

Programmers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Eldred
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Abelson
See also: huge swaths of the FOSS movement

Podcasters:
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/open-minds-from-creati...

There are few people who would say we should abolish copyright entirely, I wouldn't myself, but our current system is broken and creative people in all areas are starting to see that and find workarounds and hope for changes.

> My point is that basically all the lobbying that I've seen representing those groups has been in favor of the copyright system

Those lobbyists aren't representing the artists they are representing the corporations who own the copyrights to the artists' work. Yes, the vast majority of works are still published traditionally under the typical licensees, but the system is designed to keep people doing so under the threat of lawsuits. Having the MPA or the RIAA and their teams of lawyers at your back can give you freedom to create in an environment where it's increasingly risky because of those same organizations and people are just starting to become wise to that.
The important question is this -- why does he believe those things?

This is the same man that at one point tried to say that he was the founder of Tesla.

Saying things that I agree with doesn't mean that I should inherently be in favor of said person doing X, Y, or Z.
"For nothing ought to be posited without a reason given, unless it is self-evident (literally, known through itself) or known by experience or proved by the authority of Sacred Scripture."

So I guess you're going with interpreting the scripture as "render unto Caesar that [data] which belongs to Caesar"?
At least Kotlin (probably Scala too) requires you to explicitly import the corresponding method though.

In Ruby, however, there is no concept of an import. You can require other files but this is transitive. So if something anywhere in your chain of dependencies is defining a new method on String, or Object, it's available everywhere. Plus, in Rails usually you don't even have to require anything, as the framework magic does that for you.

The fact that there is no proper import/module system is easily one of my most disliked features about Ruby, it makes it incredibly hard to understand where things come from.

Also, Ruby doesn't only allow you to add new behaviour to existing classes. It also allows overriding existing methods. And that suffers from the exact same problems, i.e. it could be in some transitive dependency, and suddenly your strings will be doing things you didn't expect them to do...
... wouldn't that imply the ETF was 15% of the market or market segment overall?
Bytebase author here. We have a web service at hub.bytebase.com to deal with license purchasing and is also backed by PostgreSQL. And we also plan to offer a SaaS service in the future.

One thing the article doesn't mention is database unification. PostgreSQL is such a ubiquitous database, which enables us to keep a single database system for a long time.
First of all, most privacy regulations are surprisingly toothless and rarely enforced, so in practice, you get away with anything until you somehow do draw the ire of a regulator, and then they'll enforce their random favorite pet rules that don't make much sense, and may also change arbitrarily. (Think "must use fax, can't use e-mail unless it's PGP-encrypted" followed by "can't use fax either".)

German regulators that I spoke with acknowledge the need for backup, but require you to keep a separate "deletion log", so that when data is restored from backup, you can replay the deletions and keep supposed-to-be-deleted data from entering live systems. You also can't keep the backups forever, but if you have a reasonable plan, you're most likely going to be OK (even if they disagree, they'll probably just tell you to change your retention periods).

This applies to privacy in general - as long as you show a minimum of genuine care, and deal with a few formal requirements, you're probably going to be OK. GDPR is most scary for people who a) think it will be enforced to the fullest extent that a pessimistic reading of the law might allow, or b) are actively doing privacy-hostile things that they know they shouldn't be doing but want to keep doing.

For example, storing the data for backup purposes, then going back in and using it to build ML models because the backups have more data than the live system would (rightfully) have a decent chance of getting you in trouble. You can keep data for backup purposes, but if you're allowed to store data for purpose A, that doesn't mean "I'm allowed to store it so now I can use it for any purpose" as some people seem to think.
You say “free speech” mockingly in quotes as if it’s not the one right that literally all your other rights depend on.
I disagree with your blanket statement on fraud. Pink sheets are a portion of what trades OTC. There are other types of securities like F-shares (foreign listings that trade in USD) and other trusts.

GBTC: the only bitcoin fund in the US trades OTC. (NB: trades at a massive premium so you're better off trading the underlying)
While not a NATO issue, in the "Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances" Ukraine agreed to give up their nuclear weapons in exchange for a guarantee of UN Security Council assistance if they were threatened or attacked with nuclear weapons. Russia specifically signed this agreement promising not to threaten or attack Ukraine with nuclear weapons.
Not the OP but do you believe every oneway road has infinite visibility?

No bends, turns, hills/humps, or other obstructions?

And what happens when a car and cyclist both go at a 20 mph pace? How much time does the driver have to react, if the cyclist doesn’t?