skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You are not thinking things through and you're really not defining what it means to "violate someone's right to exist".

What if there is a person who was mentally ill and if they hear the word coconut it could cause them to inflict self harm? Now what happens if I'm talking to that person and I say the magic word coconut? Am I liable in the situation, even if I wasn't aware that this would cause them harm?

Now let's take a more real world example, let's take the word rape. Some people may have had traumatic experiences in the past that can cause just the mention of this word alone to act as a trigger that could lead to negative thoughts and possibly self harm, even suicide. What about now?
Interesting. It's hard to take that claim seriously, given that Rust's entire design is based around the idea that any code you write outside of 'unsafe' blocks should be free from UB. And that the only way you can introduce UB into your code is by writing an 'unsafe' block. Contrast that with C++ where UB can be introduced anywhere in your code.

The only thing I can think of is that you're using a different definition of 'safety' than everyone else. Which is fine, you can define words however you wish. But that's why I specifically included "with respect to whether undefined behavior occurs," in my comment, to avoid that kind of definitional misunderstanding. So perhaps you just didn't read my comment carefully enough.

But yeah, if you think there is literally no difference in safety between Assembly and Java, then I'd probably call that "totally and completely nutso." It's nuts enough that I don't think any kind of asynchronous discussion could fix it. Next time, lead with that statement, so that everyone else reading along can calibrate their expectations for just how seriously they should take you. :-)

The other interesting bit here is that I was effectively asking for a steel man. But instead, you just decided to give your own answer to the question. So either you misunderstood that too, or you just literally don't have any idea what other people are actually claiming.
Just look at how the 17th Amendment was sold...

https://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-11-3-b...
https://archive.ph/Zngbx
It was luck, honestly. I got three WD Ultrastar Data60s from a friend whose company was upgrading to some even more ridiculous storage solution. They were letting them go for $10,000 each or so, populated with 14 TB drives, so I went for all three.

I fully expect that I won't have to upgrade storage for the rest of my life, because, honestly... I don't know where we go past 4K. 8K is just dumb for everyone unless you have a 200 foot screen that you sit 10 feet away from or so. As far as games go, yes, they're approaching 250 GB, but there does come a point where textures, models, and sound will become "good enough". I figure 1 TB games will be pretty much "the end", but then again... the first computer I got was 28 years ago and had a 540 MB hard drive, but in fairness, that seemed small even back then.

I guess some day someone will bitch that their computer only has 6 PB of storage...
The answer is similar to the DNT (do not track) debacle.

When you give users a clear, informed, singular choice that would be sticky across their entire web/app experience, the choice in itself essentially becomes obsolete. Since pretty much nobody opts-in.

You saw the effect with Apple's new "do you want to be tracked" permission, which has a disastrous impact on Facebook. Consider that this is still a per-app permission, imagine the impact when its a single permission across all apps.

As users we may say "good" and "this is what we want", but I don't think we can truly oversee what impact that would have.
How do you imagine this happening? What would happen is that they would still own everything they have today, but in a more complex legal form.
That's a great example because I disagreed with them and have no problem consuming anything based on its nervous system or perceptive capabilities

but then these same people, themselves, will suddenly have a cognitive maturity enough to notice things the same way I could my whole life, and then freak out about consuming them!?

I'm dumfounded! When was that the line!? It was only the line because in some cultures the humans were cognitively stunted the whole time!? Can I trust a single thing they say and perceive? Can they even pass the turing test?
Things get pretty hilarious when you live in a city with two sports teams and they happen to be playing each other. Every year, Cubs/Sox Crosstown Classic for example.
Facial Recognition Is Out of Control in India
There are many things in this world which you can't observe with your senses but which nevertheless exist. However in the current case, the people who took issue with the city council's project were apparently perfectly able to spot the difference with their senses, so if you can't then I'm sorry for you.

But sorry, "wanting" doesn't really cut it. I don't think many people object if you donate $50 even though you could technically donate $100 or if you don't allocate your complete spare time to community service. (Or at least I hope no one does). But one reason why that's not an issue is because someone else could pitch in do the work instead.

What I meant were cases where you wouldn't want anyone to help because if the situation inproved beyond a certain level this would actually results in a worse situation for you. So "want" in this context would be about conflicting goals.
Thanks for this reminder, I really appreciate it. I actually came to submit https://jobdescriptiveindex.info/ which is a job satisfaction questionnaire that I just filled out.

I was trying to see if I was "objectively" miserable (i.e. is it the job or is it "in my head"). The score wasn't really high. It helps to consider all of this.

Thanks again
When language is inflated you sometimes have to resort to understatement for emphasis, e.g.

“Ladies and Gentlemen, this is your captain speaking. We have a small problem. All four engines have stopped.” -- British Airways Pilot Eric Moody’s message to passengers when the engines failed flying through a volcanic ash cloud

I've tried underpayment as a response to currency inflation but it was less effective.
Its scarier because there is no competition for amazon. The closest company that comes to mind is Alibaba/Aliexpress, but even they haven't had an affect on the US market to the extent that amazon has.

The stores you mentioned are physical department stores, which have been competing in their own space for many, many years. Amazon originally disrupted the book market...now look at the amount of markets it dominates.
OR DOES IT???

Oh, it doesn’t? Carry on.

I’m quite fatigued by the recent (?) increase in comparisons of current vulnerabilities, attacks, and adversarial capabilities to Stuxnet and can’t help but tune out when it’s invoked. Yes, the ‘96 Bulls were the best team of all time. That has no bearing on how good the Bulls are now and sure as hell shouldn’t blind you to how good other teams have gotten since…
I guess those are the same thing to me. If something exists in everything, what is the point in labeling it? It can't be used to discern anything from anything else. Taken to less of an extreme you might find that consciousness is a synonym for aliveness, and you may as well just call it aliveness.
It's amusing to me that in none of these did you say why you were increasing the page size.
I dread the day the menubar disappears...
All of the serious wealth tax proposals I've seen have a rather high floor. A more practical hypothetical would be a person with 10m other assets worrying being taxed on the gains from their 5th vacation home.
A lot of people seem to be in the mindset that it'll never be them so it should never be anyone else. It's not just in the US, here in the Uk we have the same mindset too.

A lot of people dislike/hate Elon Musk for example, and usually they focus on two things: his tweets, and his wealth. Conveniently forgetting that prior to his work at SpaceX and Tesla (which he's driven) reusable rockets weren't a thing and EVs were restricted to oddities laughed at on Top Gear.

It seems to be the way, people look at the wealth and think "well that shouldn't happen". But it doesn't come from no where, it doesn't just appear.

For anyone who thinks this wealth shouldn't appear, let me ask this: if someone could discover a cure for all cancers — how much should they be allowed to earn for it? I.E. What price would you put on the cure for all cancers?
No I don’t support this. I keep trying to figure out how it could work, so I can understand the point of view of the people who propose it. I haven’t seen any salient proposal.
Interesting take. From my PoV I see a society that's rich in social fabric (such as relationships) to be a rich society, not a poor one.

Perhaps I think I kinda get the angle you're hammering on though? Are you kind of talking similar to the Walmart +EBT, right? ie No employer should get to pay so little that the tax payer subsidizes the worker's basic needs? For that I sort of agree-- albeit IMO a big part of the issue is rising costs of living, not a lack of pay raises... Pay raises are in the locus of control of a business, but a lack of housing supply caused by NIMBYism is not.
Until berry recently, USPS/FedEx/UPS was how Amazon delivered.
Wow. I have never seen anything close to that. Why would anyone put up with that?
This is the big one here. Amazon has a completely unrelated market dominate business that lets them enter new markets at a loss until they crush everyone currently in that market. Amazon is honestly the first company that needs to be broken up. Split up AWS and Amazon market and this becomes a whole new ballgame.
It feels weird I’d have to pay anyone just for owning something. Besides, how would you price private companies? Are those just going to be free?
>That's the point of the JWST: gather evidence to back up claims.

The original cost of James Webb was meant to be $500m and it was meant to launch in 2007.

The actual cost was $9.7b and it launched in 2021 and still isn't fully operational.

We don't know how to build things any more.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Webb_Space_Telescope#Cos...
Thank goodness you did not buy that property for cents on the dollar 30 years ago and now have to also pay a fictitious wealth tax on the property when it was at the peak of its "value". Count your blessings.
I suspect OP meant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-gold
Yeah, and also; Amazon knew (or, at least, Bezos says he knew) from Day 1 that books were only the beginning. They started with books because they're an extremely broad category (hard to stock one Barns & Noble full of every book), easy to ship, and they have a practically unlimited shelf life (versus clothes/technology, which experiences seasonal trends, or even food; all of which Amazon now does).

Big difference between "we think this is The Business, ope its not lets pivot" and "we think this is a good place to Start the Business and grow out of".
Poker is not even remotely as popular as it was in the mid-00s. Google Trends shows "texas hold em" currently at 1% of its peak in mid-2004, and the more general "poker" at about 14%. It definitely still exists, there are still tournaments, and it's still played by people around the world, but it's not a part of the cultural zeitgeist like it was ~20 years ago.
In current total surveillance panopticon, you can hide transferring a $20 note maybe, but hiding transfer of something that can be called "wealth" is virtually impossible. Especially at scale we're talking about here. Especially if you aren't Pablo Escobar or somebody of a similar caliber.

> I am concerned about the distributional equity of wealth not wealthy people

If you exclude people, I am not sure I understand what you're talking about at all.
I think it’s not efficiency of getting a product to a customer that Amazon has squashed, rather the efficiency of innovation that comes with competition.
True. But there should have been some limits. They put over eight different drugs into me over 1-2 years. I flunked out of school because the drugs made me either fall asleep or manic or sick. I don't know if it's changed, but they seemed to be able to put me on nearly any drug, or any combination, without recovery in between, as long as the doctor signed a script. I had been on Ritalin since I was 8, too, I think.
So in 2020 I inherit $16k and decide to buy 1 BTC for $16,082 on Nov 12, 2020. Later that day the wealth tax department is created and levies a 20% tax on all unrealized appreciated assets. Your reporting day is on the anniversary of the original asset purchase. So a year later (Nov 12, 21) Bitcoin is at $64,400. My accumulated unrealized appreciation is $48,318. I file my wealth tax return and have to borrow the $9,663.60 to pay my wealth tax. Bear in mind, I still own my 1 BTC. Have not sold it. Have not enjoyed these promising riches. Six months later BTC is $40k and sliding down in price. By Nov 12, 2022, at the end of the 12 month reporting cycle, let's say BTC collapses all the way to $5k. I sell my 1 BTC for the $5k, and now own nothing but I am "happy" to only still owe $4,663.60 on my wealth tax loan.
I forgot to add here that if danger itself was the factor, you probably wouldn't see many black skateboarders, but you do, and causally or not skateboarding isn't on the same level of cost as skiing
If you don't sell a franchise, you have to pay your workers. Better for workers to pay you.
Damn. For a second there I was hoping Apple was going to take on real estate brokers.
This has almost no similarities to stuxnet. A more analogous hypothetical attack to stuxnet would be if they repeatedly cycled spinning rust drive heads in a certain way to cause the motors to fail and corrupt data, all the while faking the SMART data of the drive to not report drive head parking cycles.

Your understanding of either this attack and/or stuxnet is flawed.
Rail costs. Comprehensive, but lacking bottom-line monetary numbers:

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/why-is-europe-so-absurdly-...
The link you're looking for is the main article here, no? It doesn't explicitly say that heart surgeries were done without painkillers, but its literally talking about how surgeries for newborns (heart surgeries are in that set) generally did not involve anesthetics?

> Most American hospitals are now believed to give anesthesia for major surgery.

Key words being: most, believed, major, and now.

But also to answer your question:

> In the preface to the book 1000 Doctors Against Vivisection, Hans Ruesch cites the Lancet and Parade Magazine:

>> So the Lancet, Britain's most authoritative medical journal, could report with its usual professional aloofness in its January 31, 1987 issue that at Oxford's John Radcliffe Teaching Hospital eight premature babies had been subjected to open-heart surgery without any anesthesia. The controversy that flared briefly in a few press organs concerned mainly the question as to whether the babies had or had not received painkillers during the operation.
Not necessarily. There’s deductibles that need to be met, Copays, and co-insurance (what you pay after the deductible), rather you’re in network or out of network, etc.

For example, I had pneumonia some time ago and was in the hospital for about 10 days. The hospital billed by insurance something silly like $100,000. I ended up having to pay something like $4,000 out of pocket. I consider myself one of the lucky ones. It’s really important to review an employer’s health plans before accepting a job offer.
Amazon have a colossal amount of cash sat in a variety of banks, investments and probably rainbows. It makes damn good sense to splurge, sorry liquidate, strange and probably slightly dodgy financial instruments into tangible thingies. It also makes sense to diversify your portfolio generally. Amazon also need quite a lot of strategically placed parcels of land for its warehouses, depots and what not.

If I was Amazon, I would be buying land as fast as my grubby little paws could do so, with a healthy nod to debt to value. The beauty of this is when you have shit loads of cash at hand you can grab loads of long term investments like land and win/win and you even tend to find "incentives" from grateful local govt.

In this game if you get bored of buying the usual stuff like London and Texas etc, you can also grab the bits of the Caribbean that the cruise sharks have left behind. Ideal for a party island.

lol etc
It has been read somewhere that's due to the possibility to gobble up/buy competitors with no blocking by the state of such behaviour, specially since state deregulation in the 70s.

So there is the possibility the market can be made to care again.
Oh crap you've discovered the loop-hole into which the billionaires are going to disappear! They are going to get massive loans to take their companies private and never have to pay that stinking wealth tax again. No more audited financial statements either. But the interest on their loans will be income tax deductible.
Europe is a big place, 45k might be a lot of money in Romania, and it is below minimum wage in Switzerland.

Software Engineers will still be pulling 100k+ in Europe with those 2 hour days.
just a list of the top languages in use, and a couple of smart contract focused languages sprinkled in, but pretty much meaningless words around each

garbage article trying to disguise its content marketing origins
In support of your comment. This debate reminds me of the sex education and free condom and abortion debate in the past.

It may be a personal choice that causes unwanted pregnancies, but putting the failure of teens to avoid getting pregnant on their moral failing has been a massive fail for decades until we fixed the social infrastructure around it instead to make doing the right choice easier.
The Van Horn property is primarily for Blue Origin, and I believe most is under the Blue Origin LLC, not him directly.
I told a new team about my successful daytrades during Covid during a team building dinner. I swear this team had animosity towards me for the remainder of my time on that team solely due to that conversation.

I did not tell them my struggles of getting to that point just the success story of doing all the technical analysis and profiting from it. I did explain my TA, it wasn’t like I was just bragging but I can see how off-putting it could be.
Not sure about this, it's very contingent on the specifics of X and Y as well as how specialized the hires were. Obviously it depends on the domain, but I definitely bias towards generalists of the Joel Spolsky variety (ie. "smart and gets things done") versus loading up on specialists early as it can often constrain the thinking in a way that hampers exploration when you're trying to find product market fit.
Non-engineers can edit Asciidoc or Markdown in the GitLab IDE.
I don't think buying of real estate was their downfall - it was the other practices - as you point out. The real estate portion may have actually delayed the inevitable downfall.
> Do you actually do this, or are you just virtue signaling? You never buy factory-farmed animal products from the store?

I grew up in a town in Mississippi of about 2000 people. Everyone hunts. My grandfather's best friend was a butcher with his own shop. Everyone around us had cows because most of the people around us were farmers. I now live in Fort Worth, or as it's affectionately known to its residents - Cowtown. I don't have to buy meat from the grocer because there's ranchers all around me. I can - and do - get sides of beef regularly.

I go hunting in Alaska with friends about twice a year, depending on what's happening with work and our schedules. One elk has a tremendous amount of meat.

> But it's not necessary for survival, so why would you?

So you don't eat anything? How are you still alive? I'm pretty sure eating is necessary for survival.

> Interesting thought. I wonder how great of predator you are faced with a lion, or even that elk, but disarmed of technology.

This is kind of a stupid thought. In fact, I would hope your friends would tell you that you're beneath this level of incredibly poor reasoning. We are the greatest predator because of our mastery of technology.
Better that somebody get some usage out of the millions spent. If that's going to be called a 'hijack', so be it. Germany didn't have to stop using it.
All OSs and architectures and will soon have VS. All except Linux.
> Founders often want to “reward” their early investors and find salvage value while investors see major pivots and restructurings as leaving them with free “option value.”

I think more human, personal elements are probably at play before this conclusion. Moreover, I think this mentality the OP is suggesting is good is actually wrong and actively harmful.

> For almost all of them, it won’t be worth it. When things get really messy for seed companies, it’s almost always already a lost cause.

The "almost" in this sentence is the actual key. How do you know? By not doing everything you can to find out you run the risk of the opposite reputation: Gives up easily, not willing to put in the work, fair weather founder, etc.
"franchise owner" usually means managing the restaurant, not passive income.
On my team, we had a process (for nearly a decade) that lead to us being done on time, on budget, and a very low bug count that didn't involve a lot of overhead (not everything required a ticket, we did code reviews only when we thought of doing so, etc.).

New management took over (they finally realized they bought us out a few years ago), shoving "Agile" down our throats, we've missed multiple deadlines, every deployment has been a disaster, and there are still outstanding bugs that won't be fixed Any Time Soon because they're not on the release schedule.

Oh, and the new mandatory code reviews before checking in code hasn't helped since bugs still got through (and I've lost code because it wasn't checked in---it's not helping matters that we're still stuck on SVN, and half the team can't access the master SVN server).

Yeah, the overhead sure is doing great for us.

Edit: fixed typo.
Correct, employer provided housing not taxed in certain cases, so you get some massive tax savings this way. Be interesting to see what argument amazon might make. Needs to be:

* The housing is provided on the property owned by the business or employer.
* The housing is provided for the convenience of the employer.
* The employee must accept housing as a condition of employment.

Intended more for folks like on-call firefighters living in a firehouse or a park ranger who is required to live in a cabin in a park or nanny's staying with their family. I could see some situations amazon might have an argument to make - they could probably do micro-units or shared housing / dorm style housing for workers and save massively on labor costs especially in high cost urban areas where folks would otherwise never be able to afford a place.
“Babies feeling pain is something that should be self-evident, shouldn't it?”

I have yet to understand the historical underpinnings of this phenomenon, but as someone who deals with chronic pain, doctors don’t seem to be aware that people feel pain _in general_.

I’m being sort of facetious, but any chronic pain community is full to the brim with stories of various medical professionals being skeptical of patients’ pain reports or treating pain like it’s not a particularly important quality of life concern.

I have my own stories about this, of course, and some of them are pretty horrible.

It doesn’t surprise me, then, that we assumed at some point that infants don’t feel pain: after all, if we don’t take the pain of adult humans seriously, then why would we consider the pain of a creature who cannot even directly complain about it?
McD is the largest property owner, at least it was for a minute.

It’s actually how they make their money, rent.

https://www.wallstreetsurvivor.com/mcdonalds-beyond-the-burg...