skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No one is saying that iphones are the most expensive flagships. A difference in maximum isn't the same as a difference in average.

Apple doesn't make a product that costs less than $430 (the SE). If you need a cheaper phone, you have to go Android. For lots of people, $400 is a lot of money (especially if you're also buying phones for your kids, who are likely to break whatever you buy them). In lots of families it's iphone for the grownups, android for the kids. And that's just within the US.

On a global scale, if you're selling phones outside of the US and European markets, some part of your product lineup has to be in the sub $200 range (in addition to the flagships you sell everywhere). For example, in India, Xiaomi sells the Redmi 9A for Rs 8,000 (about $100). They're competing with Samsung phones we don't see in the US, like the Galaxy M series, which are in the same price category. Those phones exist because (a) people need cell phones (especially in places where a phone might be your primary access to the internet) and (b) Apple is choosing not to go after those customers.

Even though Samsung makes a more expensive flagship, the average income of Android users will always be lower because (a) there are more poor people world-wide than rich people, and (b) Apple isn't making phones for poor people, while Samsung, Xiaomi, Oppo, etc. are. Apple's strategy is totally working for them (selling a luxury product at luxury prices works well) but it also means that most poor people (which is most people) won't ever have one, so the average income of an iOS user will always be higher (along with the other things that go along with a higher income, like higher spending).
Note that the most feasible type of DDoS is still amplification attacks via DNS.

Well, and technically, distributed slowloris.

Most "collectives" still use forks of LOIC though.
That's just called Mechanical Engineering. All machines involve compromises. An internal combustion engine needs oodles of these kinds of compromises. It's idiotic thermal efficiency itself is a big expense if you think about it.
Most companies are only "progressive" inasmuch it lets them make more money. They'll be whatever you want so long as it lets them sell more stuff. The fact that this is apparently such a shock to people is exactly why they do it.
Well, just barely. They claim to have made some samples.[1] Read their SEC filing for Q1 2022.

They already went public via an SPAC reverse merger, with a nominal value around $1 billion.

The biggest concern is in the "Risks" section: "Our roadmap to improve our energy density requires us to implement higher energy density materials for both cathodes and anodes." That's a fundamental problem, and the story of too many wannabe battery makers. It would be much better if the SEC filing said they had a working prototype which met the announced specs, and the big risk was scaling up the manufacturing of the prototype.

The stock symbol is ENVX.

[1] https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1828318/0000...
Others already explained why.

Now a bit more background, this goes back to C and C++, and is considered a best practice to name translation units as name_os_arch or similar pattern, with the header file being only name, instead of #ifdef spaghetti.

This is actually one of the few things I think Go did right.
I highly disagree with the interfaces criticism.

Firstly You can literally just use one of the dozens of go lsps or code tools to search for API invocations to find what structs are passed/called into it. More importantly if you need to know you've written bad code. The entire point of an interface is that you SHOULDN'T need to know the underlying type. If you do you've violated the entire point. Just pass concrete ones. I've written Go for years and never had a problem with this, even in large open source projects like Kuberenetes.

Secondly, the criticism about flipping return values order/meaning isn't a criticism of interface being structurally typed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_type_system). If you return int, int and the second int "should be even", you should have defined a type "Even" and returned int, Even*. Systems which are structurally typed can demonstrate functional extensionality and (https://github.com/FStarLang/FStar/wiki/SMT-Equality-and-Ext...) and check whether you've flipped the arguments, which would be a more valid criticism (but such checks are expensive and conflict with compile time requirements). Also Java has the same problem, if you define two interfaces with the same method signature and a single class implements both you can't disambiguate.

Thirdly, the structural typing has a huge advantage, namely looser coupling and more tightly defined interfaces. If you follow the "accept interfaces return structs" go idiom, you'll see why. An open source library that does so leaves their returned structs open to be used by consumer code, that itself uses interfaces, without modification required. This means most go code has small, tightly defined interfaces, where every function on the interface is invoked in the relevant function.

For example if you have a library with this definition:

type Baz struct {}

func (b Baz) Foo(){}
func (b Baz) Bar(){}

I can use Baz in my code like so:

type Fooer interface {
Foo()
}

func DoSomething(f Fooer) {
}

And use the underlying library, while being decoupled from it, without having to modify it.

Fourthly: You can explicitly say a type implements an interface...

* A good study: https://blog.boot.dev/golang/golang-interfaces/

* In Idris we would do:

even : Nat -> Bool
even Z = True
even (S k) = odd k where
odd Z = False
odd (S k) = even k

int -> even
doubler a = 2 * a
There's a thing called philosophy of religion and philosophy of science. Every single thing on the face of the earth falls into the purview of philosophy. It's harder to see but the field is just as ludicrous as religion itself.

No doubt some of it's ideas are mind bending and complex. But that attribute is independent of legitimacy which philosophy lacks.
In 5 years of writing to code this has never prevented me from naming a file what I wanted to name it. I enforced conventions are nice, when I need to look at what’s different between platforms I can very quickly do so in any large repo.
Low turnout for primaries produces non majoritarian choices, while I'm interested in proportional representation systems but who picks the candidates?

Also, realistically we vote too often, and on too many things - the last time I voted, I had no less than 26 offices to vote for, I'm a reasonably well informed voter, and I had no idea who 3/4's of those people are and in some cases, what their office did.

I'm if the opinion we don't need more choice, when so few people show up to do the choosing.

Im interested on your ideas to solve it.
Celsius has had a chilling effect on the crypto market.
Ive heard conflicting viewpoints on the current crypto crash. Some say that this is different than the rest, and that crypto has already reached it’s all time max, whereas others say that this is just another pullback before an even larger bull run. With crypto, it is so hard to know what it’s actual value should be, since unlike a stock there are no earnings and thus you can’t look at the P/E ratio to determine its pricing. I’m curious to hear what you guys think—-and how you determine the value of crypto.
A couple of karma burning facts:

- Amazon has better wages and conditions than the industry average. Warehouse work is tough in general, Amazon isn't making it particularly hard and pays relatively well.

- Unions aren't universally good. The reason we got to "defund police" is because cops are practically unfireable due to a strong union; and unions were at least part of the reason why GM lost so hard in front of Toyota and other competition.

In general, societies create wealth through freer markets, then vote to spend that wealth on social policies and income redistribution. Which is perfectly fine, btw. However, this gives a framework for answering the question of timing: do you want more social policies now? If you think it's a good time, then yes, unions are one way forward. If you think the economic/geopolitic situation is still fragile, you may want to vote for more slack in the system.
I thought I did answer it with my first paragraph, but if that still seems odd to you we can probably chalk it up to English as a second language or to a misunderstanding.
GP was being facetious, showing how ridiculous the OP's claim that this is just Amazon calling the cops to stop trespassers is.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1536476104986267648.html
Crud APIs...
Average trip lengths in America are not that much longer than in Europe. On the rather rare occasions when you do several hundred kilometers in a single day, stopping for fifteen minutes to recharge every two hours or so doesn't increase travel time all that much. You have to take breaks anyway.
> designing tamperproof public metrics for credit approval has huge risks involved

The worst scenario that seems to fall out of this is "evolving arms race between bad actors and the metrics".

To me, that doesn't seem anywhere near as bad as the (current) lack of transparency.
Gas station could store the energy (supercapacitors?) to average out the utility load.

According to https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/piprod/documents/Ses... the technology seems to exist.
You'd need 4x the power to charge 4x as fast though.
This might actually be part of the reason, interesting. Is this common in the states?

The Samsung line are the only carrier (full purchased, unlocked, not leased though) provided phones I've used. Pixel and iPhone bought from source directly.
Good relations to the unions is one of the reasons for the success of German car brands.
I don't want to spill the beans here, and well: you figured it already out by yourself.
I mean those rats thought they were being submerged in water. They know they can't breathe in water. They were freaking out.
I was a member of a Union and in my opinion it contributed to a negative work environment where management develops an adversarial role against employees and vice versa. I'd say the employees and the company are better off without one.
I've seen exactly one gas station that had EV chargers... and it wasn't in the US. At least in 2020 (last time I was up there), the Petrol-Canada somewhere along BC Hwy 17 between Swartz Bay and Victoria had (paid) DC rapid chargers. It was pretty neat. Never have seen such a thing stateside.
Apple introduced a System Preferences UI with a sidebar on the left 35 years ago.

https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/System_4.1?file=System_4.1

So if we are playing a game of who copied who then I think Apple wins.
I'm shocked at how often I see software engineers not paying for Sublime Text. These are people who get paid to write software not paying for software.
Ugh no. History is indeed a good basis to observe and learn from.

Bearing in mind it's not a 100% successful predictor, but is useful for figuring out how things are _likely_ to play out.
PS.: ophtalmology residency candidates compete for an absurdly small number of seats in Canada/US, so an ophtalmologist’s opinion on optometrists should be weighed relatively heavily (they’re very smart folks). Commenter is being very humble.
> However, this gives a framework for answering the question of timing: do you want more social policies now? If you think it's a good time, then yes, unions are one way forward. If you think the economic/geopolitic situation is still fragile, you may want to vote for more slack in the system.

Absolutely! Let's give it a few more hundred years of the Bezoses of the US getting richer off the work of everyone else, and only then ask for some rights in return - wouldn't want to do it too soon!

Besides, peeing in a bottle to make your delivery times is actually fun once you get used to it!
Elixir has the if-else being an expression.

foo = if x, do: 1, else: 2
I find that writing helps clarify my thoughts and own them, rather than just being an amalgamation of the content I consume. It also helps keep my opinions and predictions in check—-I have something that I can look back on in future years and see how my opinions have changed, which can be a humbling experience because in the present it is easy to think that you are always correct.
> On the contrary, I think it is sad that such a reality terrifies people.

So I am religious (Christian -- with a belief in God, afterlife, etc. ) but I actually find a lot of comfort with the very high likelihood that I am totally wrong. The idea of ceasing to exist after this life sounds pretty awesome! Or maybe the afterlife being a completely different experience than what I can currently comprehend.

It's interesting, though, because when I talk to other active members of my congregation about even the possibility of our views being wrong they often view the entertainment of such thoughts as a lack of faith or lack of spiritual experiences. There is often such a fearful, defensive arrogance with religious people (not excluding myself) that I completely understand why many are completely turned away from religion. It's tough to talk to people unwilling to be wrong.

I too, find it sad that people can't cope with the possibility of life being just a random occurrence. There is something beautiful to me about the idea that once we die it is all done (or that an afterlife would be different now than what I can comprehend now should we continue to exist).
I'm still baffled by their decision around date formatting.

https://www.godateformat.com/
There is an assumption here is doing anything is better than doing nothing. Inaction is not inherently inferior to action. Sometimes, if not most of the times, doing nothing is exactly what you need to do in response to something. If your brain prevents you from doing something, maybe it's because it has a point? Trying to find a shortcut by generalizing will do more harm than good.
https://archive.ph/EFeSX
You can also do that trip in an electric car in a day. That's at least a 12 hour drive. Stopping at a charger for fifteen minutes can be done as part of the breaks you need to take anyway to drive safely and doesn't increase you travelime meaningfully.
Which is how it should be. In the end consumer is making the purchase decision.
They are but ultimately the author wish that their usage is enforced. And that is IMHO in no major language including the above.
It's so that you can learn about the Tower of Babies and the great confusion it sowed among humankind.
The basis is logic. Certain attributes of philosophy make it ludicrous. Additionally the way philosophers formulate arguments brings the whole field into question.

Philosophy is just a vocabulary word. It is a arbitrary word with a definition that is so general literally every academic field or school of thought on the face of the earth can fall under it's purview however ludicrous or legitimate. Literally, any form of deep thought or complicated complex is "philosophy." It's the most pointless and pretentious category to have ever existed.

This is the main problem with it. It's like a man who won 7 nobel prizes but is a child rapist at the same time.
IMO it’ll be slower to write crud apis and there are some missing batteries you have to look for, it’s fairly verbose but I think some of that will change with generics and hopefully more pattern matching.

On the flip side when you deploy it, it will like just work and run smoothly. Also very easy to add full integration tests as you can create a mock http server at runtime, paired with some db tools (go migrate) it’s very easy spin up a whole env and test it. It’s also very easy to get at lower level things like headers and cookies without it getting in the way. Also much of the web middleware is interchangeable or a few lines away from an adapter as there is a common interface in the std lib.
Or swappable batteries if we standardize on a few sizes. You can then charge those slowly.

However that brings problems with quality control - a worn battery costs less than the new one. Maybe a model where the customer doesn't own the battery?
It looks like GNOME System Settings
Are you sure they aren't just being practical? Seems like the changes they endorse could result in increased workplace safety for their members.
I'm not talking about the distinction between free non-commercial and commercial licenses. I'm just talking in general that it's tough to get companies to purchase any software.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/1/1/ss1/s_1001
This is so ridiculous. I spend a lot of time hiking the mountains around LA. White people are not a majority and I'm not even sure a plurality. I'm not Latino but still somehow wound up in a mostly Latino hiking club. I hear so many different languages on the trail. I see people of every ethnicity.

This really could be as simple as minorities tend to be more working class, and don't have the wherewithal for a big road trip to the national parks. But put hiking trails near their communities, and they utilize the heck out of them.

Makes me think of this: https://twitter.com/ryangrim/status/1536491555426652162. Progressive non-profits are getting destroyed by this kind of internal strife.
So, either that battery is very small or it needs a very powerful charging station to get a full charge of 100 kWh completed in such a short time.

This means, if this was supposed to be commercialized, the country would need to install thousands of charging stations with half a megawatt power.

I don’t think this is ever going to happen. Especially, with western countries being slow in building new nuclear power plants.
Debug Driven Development
You engaged none of my points, and are strongly suggesting that you don't care about the state of economy and overall wealth, as long as "the rich get what's coming to them". That's spite socialism.
What I came to say.

https://www.fossmint.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Ubuntu-1...
I'll see if I can find one, there were some extreme[ly amusing] examples on the Hang Seng Index and the Shanghai Shenzhen one, or maybe just those stock exchanges and not the index

It all helped me realize that its all just contracts. If you get someone to agree then you can do it. Most of finance is cookie-cutter stuff that the company legal and the MBAs thought was familiar, but you can do anything if the other party agrees to it. Such as buy a share at a tiny float.
This company seems like the real deal, and it seems like they have managed to actually start manufacturing cells. What they haven't done, is create batteries which are likely to be used in electric vehicles which carry people yet. The web site [0] has data sheets for 4 sizes of cells, from "eyewear" to "smartphone/laptop". While they claim energy densities that are much higher than conventional cells, none of these are as big as 18650, 2170, or 4680.

There's reference to higher capacity cells in this presentation [1], but they are sited as design targets, which I take to mean: they only exist on paper. They also try to sell 100% packing density since they are prismatic instead of the conventional cylindrical cells. In one of their videos they say that they get less than 2% swelling after 500 charge cycles. So how does one get 100% packing density if the cells even only swell to 2%?

After many years of experience, I do not trust any battery vendor's mechanical specs. Inevitably "<2%" will be a lot higher than that. Battery companies can't even get the static cell size correct with proper tolerances, let alone truthfully report the swelling.

The 3 cofounders spent ~20 years at IBM San Jose before going on to other things. There are also a lot of very senior people from the auto industry and other top tier tech companies like Cypress. Enovix has 94 patents (+63 pending), 14 years of R&D and $254M in funding to get to this point. Their videos have much more detail. [2]

According to their CEO, the first shipping product is in wearables (watches). From what they are saying about volumes and ramp plan, I wonder if they might be working with Apple. They're also working with AR companies, developing products specifically for them.

[0] https://www.enovix.com

[1] https://www.enovix.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Ashok-Lahi...

[2] https://vimeo.com/enovix
Maybe since he stepped away from running Amazon he's had time to think and realize he went too far in turning people into robots and now wants to make up for it. It's not likely, but it's possible. He's got some tough competition in the "do good" department from his ex-wife MacKenzie Scott
If anyone wants a free pinephone + will use it for something useful (and is prepared to pay the postage from Melbourne, Australia), then they're welcome to mine.

I bought one a few months ago to support the project but never ended up using it. It's still sitting in a drawer.

Realistically, there's no hope I'll ever do anything with it myself. ;)
Hiking - so expensive! GAHHHH
An AR Model for Life
Learn to code :)

Seriously though, traditional intellectual pursuits are too crowded? Find new ones, it seems obvious.
another person who can’t get over his java stockholm syndrome in three (!) years

one particular thing that tells that is the attitude to interfaces:

while in java (and most languages) interfaces are used to tell which contracts a class implements, in go it’s reversed. you must declare interfaces to _require_ certain contracts, for arguments in your functions

for example:

type interface Operator {
Operate(int, int) int
}

func IntOparation(a, b int, op Operator) int {
return op.Operate(a, b)
}

this is a major difference highlighting the ownership boundaries:
* when I write a package and rely on a 3rd party contract, instead of referencing it and adhering to it, I will copy-paste parts that I need to my package and be independent
Every major editor I can think of has a way to find out what implements an interface using guru (https://github.com/golang/tools/tree/master/cmd/guru). In VSCode, it's right-click -> Find All Implementations. vim-go has :GoImplements. Using go-mode, emacs provides go-guru-implements.
maybe in the US, but this is not universal and Amazon is a global behemoth. For sure, right-wing conservative politicians are birthed within police services (exhibit 1 peter dutton), and support for conservative gov feels natural for police (pact with the rich and all that), but there is a lot of groundswell left-wing within the active union members- support for communal good etc.

I've been the guy in uniform who turned up to negotiate a peaceful settlement to a transport dispute. I'm not sure why the inspector picked me to go inside the picket with him, but once there we both ended up dealing with the union. My starting points were "you want an outcome, some of this is private property, some is a road under the traffic act, but irrespective, nobody wants an injury" (trucks driving over people in the picket seemed distinctly possible) and "I'm a union guy"- which an inspector is not really (they have a separate commissioned officer union which .. is. .not like a union )

We didn't move anybody in the picket. Management acknowledged the petition. Business resumed later that day and no-one got runover. Over the next 18 months there were investigations, in various states including ours, that identified breaches of transport acts, OHS etc, by some of the contracting companies- and a couple of directors got fined. And going on, general issues with trucking law enforcement , fatigue management etc had an impact on normalising the laws across the states. (ie the transport unions had a valid point about problems in the industry)

So I'd say, don't expect police to go heavy against unions, you may be disappointed. 15 years exp.

YMMD outside Australia
Bezos has no say in editorial.

Unless they are all lying and some of the best journalists (who tend to be maybe too ethical e.g. 'equal coverage') are complicit.

I could see an argument about access to the opinion section but he doesn't need to own a paper for that.