skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"open source" and "free software" are two words for the exact same thing.

Both of them are pretty poor descriptors. "open source" doesn't convey the legal freedom you are granted (as you have just found out), and "free software" makes it sound like it's just about price.

If someone lets you see source code but doesn't allow you to do anything with that code it's not what people would call "open source", you could probably call it source-available or something. "open source" has a specific legal definition that means code released with a permissive license.
Col. Ray Butts.
Yeah typical of people that have more narcissism than technical acumen

The better action would be to report the user as spam
Just checked on my machine and albert with quite a few plugins uses ~109 MB memory. I think that's very much in line with what to expect. Note also it does significantly more than just filenames and app names.
> casinos do exist.

In many jurisdictions they don't. And where they do, they're often very heavily regulated.
Seeing how odor is processed in the brain
There was a study somewhere once that concluded that digital ocean is the biggest single source of spam emails. And that the are responsible for around >20% of spam emails worldwide.

I noticed that some providers completely block digital ocean IPs on their firewalls. So no way to get unblocked.
I regularly play games with gambling (gacha) mechanics and I love them. The short bursts of fun are exactly what I'm looking for in my current busy life. I have nothing against this model of monetization. Gambling is fun. Casinos are fun. I am not a big spender by any means, but I've probably spent ~$2k on these kind of games over the past two years or so. I don't regret it, and for me the fun is in figuring out how to maximize the value of my spending by doing the math for different types of purchases, sometimes even coding up simulations.

The problem starts when it's unregulated and you are tricking kids, or people who are not educated about probability, into spending their money in casinos, and use dozens of psychological tricks to do so and obfuscate purchases. Just like it's easy for kids to get addicted to social media like Instagram, it's easy and dangerous to get addicted to gambling (especially when you see your friends or popular streamers doing it). I believe all of these games should be 18+, at the very least, and come with a big warning sign.
A good example to make this question more fair, as an interviewer, would be to rapidly give the (n-1)*n/2 trick quickly if the candidate doesn't know it. And not care too much if they do know it.
>
Casinos shouldn't be regulated too. If nobody is forcing anyone to attend into something (like going to a casino or playing a pay-to-win game) nobody should have the right to change or regulate the inner dynamics.

In theory, humans are rational, and in theory, spherical cows are an excellent basis for economics.

Human brains have bugs, and these industries exploit them. It's predatory, and utterly reprehensible.
The 3% value (if I am reading data correctly) is because of the pandemic - the usual recent value would have been closer to (rounded) 10%, which received a blow in the 2020 frenzy; the "2019" study covers complete 2019 but includes 2020 data.

May I interest you in a past submission, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31360319 , "Study finds the SARS-CoV-2 virus is not viable on cash banknotes".

About the special numbers of Sweden and Norway: this is what happens when living in Sweden and Norway, you get the false idea that reality is like Sweden and Norway look.
If Parc had failed at dissemination we'd all still be using the command line.

The windows/icons/mouse/menus paradigm disseminated just fine. It wasn't necessarily completely original - see also, Mother of All Demos - but they showed it could be implemented in real systems with real usability benefits.

Laser printers and networking also disseminated just fine.

What didn't disseminate was the development environment. That's not necessarily a surprise, because an environment that delights creative people with PhDs isn't going to translate well to the general public.

Ultimately Smalltalk, MESA, etc were like concept cars. You could admire them and learn from them, but they were never going to be viable as mainstream products.

Windows and Mac filled the gap by producing dumbed-down and overcomplicated versions of the original vision, which - most importantly - happened to be much cheaper.

Xerox get a lot of criticism for missing the potential, but it's easy to forget that in the 70s word processors typically cost five figures, and minicomputers equivalent to the Dorado cost six figures.

Maybe the future would have been different if someone had said "We need to take these ideas and work out how to build them as cheaply as possible."

But realistically commodified computing in the 70s ran on Z80s and still cost five figures for a business system with a hard drive.

The technology to make a cheaper version didn't exist until the 80s.

The problem since Parc is more that there has been no equivalent concentration of smart, creative, playful people. Technology culture changed from playful exploration to hustle and "engagement", there's less greenfield space to explore, and - IMO - there are very few people in the industry who have the raw IQ and the creativity to create a modern equivalent.

It's pretty much the opposite problem. Instead of exploring tech without obvious business goals, business goals are so tightly enforced it's very hard to imagine what would happen if completely open exploration was allowed again.
Data Source Concordance for Infectious Disease Epidemiology
Got a chuckle out of the author thinking this was some kind of cardinal sin.

The only person "at fault" here is his friend for telling him what interview question he received and I'd expect companies know this happens, which is one of the benefits of having further interview stages in the first place.
Investors love the monetization model and they get to decide what is just right and moral in our system of economics. The “fiduciary duty” to investors means sociopathy is the only way that businesses are allowed to conduct themselves.

If you can make money, you MUST make it.

Someday I hope we find some way as a society to give value to other things. Its not really working out.
It’s only hacking if you do something with it. Otherwise it is just hoarding.
Sold to consumers vs sold to a company would suffice as a distinction IMO.
> I would not have though to use this formula. The sum of the integers grows as the square of n so if n is anything but small you will overflow and get an erroneous answer.

As long as you can get wraparound semantics, the overflow is actually unproblematic. (n(n+1)/2 + k) mod 2^32 - (n(n+1)/2 mod 2^32) = k mod 2^32 = k.
Do we have any estimates how many emails github sends every day? 400k might be a rather unnoticable increase on a global level?

Edit: Of course if dozens or even hundreds of replies "Why am I on this list?", "Please (do what I say not what do) stop replying" go to 400k again then it gets "interesting". Could not see from the submission or discussion whether that happened. I think it should not happen by default or what kind of Reply-To: those messages have?
Those sports memorabilia are at least traded on a market, and thus hold and retain that "investment". Not that sports memorabilia make much sense to me either, but at least you get something of proven value.
To me this "ultra-wealthy" thing has always sounded like a convenient lie whale-game devs tell themselves to sleep soundly at night. These dark pattern black holes are made purely to form an addiction and turn it into profit, they don't care about who's on the receiving end.

There's an increasing number of players who expect that either a) a game will take unlimited money and feed them dopamines in return, or b) they never have to pay a dime for anything because they're fully subsidized by the addicts. I have conflicted feelings about administrative regulation of this stuff, I just hate that things are this way, especially as an independent game dev.

(I'll do the hustle - my first game Pawnbarian is a chess-flavored puzzle roguelike. On mobile it's an ad-free demo with a single $7 IAP for the whole thing. Out on Steam and Android, iOS will follow soon. j4nw.com/pawnbarian)
>it feels like they realized during covid that people will tolerate it because "everything is a mess right now", and will now take advantage of it forever.

I don't think that's fair. Amazon was among the very very few things that actually worked during the pandemic (in London). And they still have the best logistics operation by far.

What's not working is search. It feels like they're not even trying to show you what you're looking for. They're just trying to sell you something ... anything, regardless of how unsuitable or useless it may be.

It's so frustrating that I'm even resorting to Google search sometimes, which says a lot. Product search is universally broken everywhere.
Or: show ‘x users’ behind the @group in a greyish label.
The last person who made this kind of argument to me was a gambling addict who had gotten into day trading.
From that picture, what are VPP, BL and DFE?
> Now I want to make a replacement and I have to drive to their nearest warehouse

What I’ve never heard of this! Do you live in the middle of no where? The currier usually can do pickups and many retailers will front a return for Amazon.

Also Amazon will let you do planned deliveries with fewer boxes if you pick a day a few days out.
Fines may be attached to the property, not the person, so bankruptcy may not remove the claim.
> Casinos shouldn't be regulated too. If nobody is forcing anyone to attend into something (like going to a casino or playing a pay-to-win game) nobody should have the right to change or regulate the inner dynamics.

This is, of course, a position that is yours to hold. But I do hope that you recognize that it's quite a small, fringe one. It's a bit strange to use a fringe opinion about casino regulation as the stepping stone for an implication that loot boxes shouldn't be regulated.
Most gas stove tops in the US are not great for cooking with a wok anyway as they are underpowered and the flame comes out the edges of the "sealed burner".

I use an Iwatani 35FW tabletop butane burner for wok cooking which works much better than my gas stove. It claims 15,000 Btu vs my stoves 7,000. I suspect both claims are inflated, but the Iwatani will boil a pint of water in 1/4th the time of the stove. The wok is acceptably stable on it and the flame pattern is usable if not ideal. The butane cans are well under $2 and will make several meals per can. It's a bit pricey ($100-ish now) but mine has lasted six years of frequent use.
Preparing is not cheating. You learned and used your knowledge in an appropriate setting. That is the skill set companies are looking for, also the colleague I would like to work with
Heroin is fun too, at least at first.

The problem with gambling is that it taps into the dopamine system in ways that people are not aware of, even if they know about probabilities.

The effect is cumulative, and the more the person gambles, the more they will gamble, take risks, create unbalance and spend money.

Now, just like with anything related to dopamine, many people will only have a mild effect. E.G: I've played dota for a while, and never went into full spending mode.

Like you, I think it's ok to gamble once in a while, to pay for the game. After all, it's fun, and the game provides pleasurable moments, but does cost a lot of resources to develop. It's fair to give money to the company making it: after all, other games may be paid up to $60, DLC not included, while free to play are always up to date.

Yet, it's very difficult to evaluate if the tactics used by the game for gambling are twisted or not, and if the game target is going to be abused or not.

For this reason, I do think they should be heavily regulated, not just about the age, but about the nature, and intensity, or the gambling mechanism in place.
Yes, it's a question with a silly trick. Completely useless if one knows the answer, hard to spot if the person feigns struggle.

Although, n•(n+1)/2 formula is not necessary. One can start with an xor sum and find the duplicate by xor adding elements again. This is another silly trick.
> I’ve found by reading papers about it that 1 bit error per 4 GB RAM per 3 days is guaranteed to happen.

That is very, very dubious indeed. I can't believe there's no ECC between ram and cpu, it's not credible for anything but a cheap home machine. Any sources?
I talked to a real estate friend today. He said the high prices are cracking and falling away as:

1. interest rates rise

2. peoples' stock porfolios have tanked
Apple/Google revenue will see a big decline if those games are regulated. Most if not all the top grossing games on mobile follow the same spending pattern, and a big chunk of app stores' revenue come from those games.
I would say the only person “at fault” is the interviewer for using such an awful question. This is precisely the kind of question that gives programming puzzle interviews a bad name. If you’ve heard it before, it’s trivial and proves nothing. If you haven’t, you have to have a clever a-ha moment in order to do anything but brute-force it. “Have you heard this one story about Karl Gauss as a child” is a really terrible hiring criterion.
Make Your Own Virtual Set
They don't gain that value. They gain a savings yes, but they can't turn around and sell that thing for 1000 to make a profit.
What do you do about jury duty notifications? (If you live in the US)
> invalidate the patent without a lawyer

IMO today the patent system favors companies with deep pockets, because they can financially strangle competitors with less resources.

In addition existing prior art does not mean much as the US law favors the first to file, not the first to invent [0].

I think an easier exercise would be to invent an alternative mechanism and to patent it, and be ready to be taken to court by competitors.

[0] https://www.justia.com/intellectual-property/patents/first-t...
This guy is one of those LinkedIn thought leader types prone to oversharing for attention.
Wood lasts longer in saltwater than on land. This is why all those old stories about wooden ships have them “swabbing the decks” with seawater; when it rains the freshwater can cause the boat to rot so they wash it again with salt.
Human brains have bugs, and anyone going into a casino or a pay-to-win games know what they are going into. (If they don't that's their problem for not doing their own research and using common sense before putting their money)

Human brains also have a bug around sugar consumption. I've yet to see selling people sugar or sugar-containing foods/beverages being regulated.

Human brains also have a bug making many of them social media addicts.

Human brains have so many bugs. At the end of the day regulating these businesses will hurt more people who voluntarily want to be involved than saving potential addicts.

The real solution is never preventing people from doing things (of course as long as they affect only the person and not the others' rights), instead, it's educating.

If those governments placed their efforts into educating the people about addiction mechanics of those games/casinos etc. instead of blocking/regulating altogether, it would be much more beneficial than blocking people from their own decisions.
> they're just people with an addiction.

Everyone has an addiction to something. You are lucky if its to something thats cheap and legal.
That's neither cheating, nor pure luck, but good preparation. I've gone through lots of questions asked in interviews and if I got one of them for real I'd answer it immediately without an ethical soul searching
If there's any sector that tech should enter and disrupt it, it is healthcare.

Going to consult a doctor is such a painful and dreaded experience for most people in all countries. Many health issues get mishandled due to lack of access to information. Even when you visit a doctor for consultation, you get very little information.

I had to visit a doctor earlier this week – it was a 8-9 minute consult for which we spent 1+ hours in wait time in a busy hospital, not to mention the registration/consultation fees typical of a big brand hospital. At the end of the consult, we had a tiny bit more information about the symptoms, root-cause or the treatment options.

The way patients are treated while waiting for the doctor is highly disrespectful. Just because you are sick and need to see a doctor, you shouldn't be treated like your time is less valuable than doctors.

With the help of tech, I can order a food delivery or taxi from one end of the city to the other end and know precisely to the minute when it will arrive, and I can do the same with delivery of any product or most services.

Why can't we do the same to doctor's waiting room? Why can't they give an appointment slot that's accurate to at least ±10minutes and I would like the option to book a 10 minute slot vs 20 minute slot and have a meaningfully longer/deeper conversation with the doctor.
As a tech lead I try to check in with everyone's 20% time at least every other month. Junior and even mid-level developers, who are usually doing projects to learn a new language/framework/etc. often need help structuring their approach or just someone to rubber-duck with. But for people who are trying out projects that might eventually be merged into our prod code, it looks more like pair programming or PR-based collaboration.

> It's not as if the things people work on wouldn't be of interest to others either.

People on the team feel different pain points differently, and don't see the full picture for things they don't feel pain on until they see the solution. Alice has no problem writing a lot of similarly-shaped code and doesn't see the point of Bob's refinements to the code generator. Bob isn't on the on-call team and doesn't care about Alice's unified metrics collector that simplifies 20 different alerts.
The thing is - is it necessary to have the best gear to enjoy the game?

As a different example - I'm sure it would cost tens of thousands of dollars to max out your characters and gear in Genshin Impact, but I've played very enjoyable 100h+ and it's perfectly fine even if you don't have the max ascended characters and gear, I have a feeling those are there basically for the wales to spend money on but aren't necessary for gameplay in any way(well maybe for some crazy hardcore end game content, but as always, that seems to be something 0.0001% of the playerbase enjoys).

My point is - the game can still be enjoyable and worth playing even if you can't get the endgame gear. Is that the case here? I don't know.
You emphasize personal responsibility, but most of the world doesn't have that on the top of their societal values[0]. And one person's problematic gambling, as any other addiction, definitely impacts others, similar to how substance abuse or any other addiction really[1].

[0] See it as "individualism" here on the first map: https://geerthofstede.com/culture-geert-hofstede-gert-jan-ho...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_gambling#Signs_and_sym...
> I'm struggling to see the point of department store clothing if they do nothing but mark up clothes

You may or may not case based on your disclosure, but lots of brands have “outlet store” and “main store” versions of their clothes manufactured differently or with QC difference. Sometimes literally cheaper materials and sometimes simply “binning” of QC.

Similarly, many brands of eg TVs will release shadow “holiday versions” of their TVs with worse warranties or lower quality specs meant to hit holiday sale prices (eg 50% off). Obviously iPhone 13 specs are know and won’t get away with it but Panasonic 65TDQ56P (made up SKU on a brand that does BF models)? If they subtly change the specs on the holiday version would you know even when shopping around?
There Are No Bugs, Just TODOs (2020)
> Playing the game is a voluntary action taken by an individual, just like going to a casino.

The same argument can be made for other regulated activities like drinking alcohol or smoking (whether you agree or not, that's how it is in a lot of places today). Those are voluntary activities too.

> whereas it doesn't have negative effects to society

Addiction _does_ have negative effects on society, which is why these rules get introduced. It looks like this ban [1] is enforcement of gambling laws, because the loot is transferrable it's deemed to have value. I'm curious in this case to know how much of an impact banning these particular games actually has though.

[1] https://www.thegamer.com/netherlands-loot-box-ban/

edit; haha, lots of people spotted this same argument.
The difference between type 3 and type 10 is probably the difference between providing the username and password when connecting to RDP or after already connecting. In the latter case it's “interactive”: you enter the password via the GUI of the server you connected to.
It depends on the timeframe obviously, but $10k is hardly cheap.
It's kind of shocking to read the phrase "vibrant food court". If this was the bar before COVID it can only get better.
Actually it's the opposite, the mobiles games are less fun for playing because they are optimized for addiction rather than fun.
Well sad for them. I'm not involved in either gambling, daytrading, nor pay-to-win games, or any other addictive practice.

Just because they shared a similar view on this doesn't mean that I'm also an addict too.

While you didn't explicitly tell such a thing, directly replying with this example implies that.
Are you referring to bankruptcy courts or something else?
>You just have to accept that other people have different personalities from yours.

Yeah, being drama queens.
The worst thing (for me) about this is that whenever I go to the Apple App store I get bombarded will all these "games" that just try to make my life actively worse.

I don't understand why they pollute their brand like that.
That's what happened for me in a way. My first PRs were stuff like fixing dead links, typos, stuff like that. Now I regularly do PRs to fix stuff that's broken, either code or documentation.
The Flossbank Attempt
Casinos and machine-based gambling are fairly heavily regulated in a lot of places, requiring a license with auditing, with rules on everything you can possibly think of. The mobile gaming industry has so far avoided this body of law by never providing anything of value in return.
Ah, but windmills are made of stone:

https://www.dandelionstonetroughs.co.uk/millstones-for-sale/
Either way, it's pointless to "reprimand" the perpetrator. This could have just as well been a deliberate spam attack eg. someone using the @-mention to promote their scam-coin or penis enlargement product (and some people in the thread seem to have already used the opportunity to promote their band etc.) Telling a spammer they are doing an evil thing is obviously useless as they are well aware of it. This should be viewed and handled as a security / access control failing on Epic's part - that this was ever possible was a mistake and only a question of timing when someone would stumble upon the vulnerability. Whether their purposes for exploiting it are nefarious, sincere or even accidental is irrelevant.
Putin warns West of strikes if longer-range missiles supplied
I was replying to the argument by parent comment which gave that specific example of gambling vs. loot boxes.
There is one administrator. I always found that fallacy the hardest to realize.

It’s like owning the entire supply chain. I remember this bit from someone who used to work at Heroku. It’s impossible for us to switch we spent so much time making the system work with AWS, switching or adding another provider would be a kin to starting over.
At the end, it is a NetEase game with Diablo skin. So do expect it use all the horrible trick from China mobile game company.
Why Technology Hasn’t Delivered More Democracy