skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yup, and it's been like that for a very long time. But I'm sure you could find something like a travel agency to make an arrangement with hotels to just charge room + minibar etc to them, with the condition that the hotel doesn't ask for ID.
UAW seems corrupt enough that anybody would be against it
DeFi - Contracts are code.

TradFi - Your word is your bond.
I would be surprised if he didn't. He has a history of being vindictive towards critics and has a lot of grudges and is more hands-on than typical CEOs.
Related: I’m by no means the worlds recognized expert in anything, but having known some technical experts and seen the communities they live in, it seems that experts tend not to disagree wildly with one another. Well, when they do, you can be quite sure you are witnessing a new field of technics being born!

FWIw, contrarianism has kind of become, in technical forums, a proxy for correctness and value.
I would argue that the right solution is safer stoves that don’t start fires as easily. For example, induction stoves. Gas stoves are incredibly dangerous, and for some reason even modern stoves make no particular effort to turn themselves off of the gas isn’t ignited, to detect dangerous conditions, or otherwise compensate for the inherent dangers of combustion.

(Basically any pilot-light-using appliance has a thermocouple and solenoid that will turn off the gas if the pilot light is out.)
Ok. But then you just proved Lindy effect is at best probabilistic, and most likely survivorship bias.

Because it doesn't hold invariant to time.

It's not hard to make a counterexample. E.g. when Windows 3.11 existed for several years and Microsoft published Windows 95.

If we were to travel back then and use Lindy effect we would get wrong predictions.

Because it's such a simple heuristic it only demonstrates one way effect.
> In my experience all 3 can be written in a really well maintainable way.

That's true, but that is generally true of any (non-toy) language. But in the modern world of rapid development, it matters how hard is it to write code in a non-maintainable way - i.e. how well it tolerates modifications by different people. And to me, it seems easier to write readable code in Go than it is to write unreadable code.

It seems to come from the lack of features - Java, Python and C# have too many features, and any problem can be solved in N different ways, each one with its own warts. If you want to work on a wide range of codebases, you have to know each one of the approaches and their warts and footguns.

Meanwhile, Go feels like it really reached the "there should be one obvious way to do it" ideal of Python, while Python has over the years evolved into something more Perl-like. Want to build a concurrent application? Chose your tradeoff - either you get CPU scalability (multiprocessing) but lose memory sharing, or you get a simple concurrent model (threading) that isn't scalable, or you get I/O scalability (asyncio) at the cost of function coloring, error-proneness and a single-threadedness. Go solved the whole thing with the goroutine model - internally it multiplexes coroutines onto a set of OS threads, but all blocking calls are wrapped by Go runtime which makes every coroutine behave and feel like an ordinary thread, without the massive memory use of OS threads.
It's not about perfection, quite a misnomer of an argument imo. You would be the kind of person that 100 years ago would probably be against woman getting the vote - "It's not about equality, that's not real life"
While we're on the topic of rooting, only Google, Sony, Xiaomi, Asus, Motorola, OnePlus, Samsung (Exynos only, breaks eFUSE) are bootloader unlockable.

Of the above, only Google has what I would consider "proper" software support.

At this point, I refuse to buy anything that I can't bootloader unlock and does not have proper software support because of planned obsolescence stemming from a lack of software updates.

Blacklisted for not being able to bootloader unlock: Huawei, Vivo, Samsung (Qualcomm), Nokia, Pixel (Verizon US variant).
At-will employment laws aren't an equivalent tradeoff -- which is why they are very uncommon outside the United States -- but the alleged benefit of such an arrangement to an employee is two-fold:

1. In places where termination is for cause, termination often causes an employee not to have access to various government benefits
2. At-will employment likely encourages more hiring in the first place, so it's possible that with more restricted firing you'd never have gotten the job.

I do not feel these benefits make up for the drawbacks and do not favour at-will as an organizing principle for industrial relations. But I just figured it would make sense to at least say the apparent argument.
Government is a necessary evil with a monopoly on the initiation of force, and as such a primary concern with government is restraining it. Democracy is all about restraining and also providing a (usually) non-violent pressure valve to avoid revolutions and insurrections that destabilize the entire system or threaten to cause government's restraints on the use of force to be removed.

Unrestrained government was a really significant cause of death in the early 20th century.

Private businesses have an entirely different purpose.
QPUs are effectively (and theoretically) high-speed, specialized coprocessors at best. There's no way they're going to be doing anything you mentioned any time soon because that's not what they're good at or built for.
You have freedom of speech just not freedom from consequences :)
Surely a better way is to start charging fees.
“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”

Sadly, the people who do the most to change the world are often unreasonable in their personal lives. And if a person sincerely believes they are working to prevent climate change or give humanity a backup planet they'll tend to view opposition based on quality of life issues or whatever as unreasonable.
Most employees never consider starting their own company, so we can strike off (2). Buying SpaceX is vanishingly unrealistic, so discount (3). My impression of working at SpaceX is that the options for employees are:

1. Keep working at SpaceX - work on truly innovative technology with a lofty mission. The work environment sucks, you work 100 hour weeks but the _work_ itself is great. Your work might land on Mars this decade.

2. Join another startup (Relativity, Firefly, Rocket Lab, etc) - no proven track record of success or work on smaller scale (but successful) projects. Work hours and culture are variable, but there is a general sense of urgency. Your work is not landing on Mars this decade but could still change the aerospace industry in smaller ways.

3. Coast and enjoy life with your family (Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Blue Origin, etc). Work 38 hour weeks. You will get the chance to work on large prestigious projects. Your project is regularly in the news for being over budget and late. There is no sense of urgency. You have complete job security.
"Point is that reaching upper middle class and higher is totally feasible no matter your walk of life as long as you keep the hustle going."

It's also unlikely, even just looking at it statistically.
John Lewis [1] springs to mind, although I don't know how deep that runs.

[1] - https://www.johnlewispartnership.co.uk/about.html
As someone who believes in free speech even for people I despise and opinions I find nauseating, I hate that people like Musk have become the public face of the free speech movement.
M1 Development Began in 2008
I'm gobsmacked. So this is what Steve meant when he felt Apple was in good hands -- what on earth are they working on now?!
A nice narrative that falls apart when you remember LTCM, Archegos, etc. I don’t understand why you think crypto funds don’t arrange the same kind of “oversite” you describe.
Including canals, which the author disclaimed for some reason. Here at least they have all kinds of aquatic and bird life.
I think we'd need to prove this is a change for him.
I'm with you here. He genuinely seems like a nice guy. There's never a "gotcha" moment. He acts like he's interested in the topic and person above all else. I'm okay with the rambling tangents and never closing the loop on certain topics because in the end he gives the interviewee as much room as they need/want to finish that out themselves. Many do (the more articulate ones do) but some don't.
Suing a corporation is timely and costly; and even if they're at fault for an illegitimate termination, they will drag you to court and humiliate you in the public domain. In practice, this means they can and do operate with near impunity.
First let me say that talking with you is really annoying, way worse than anyone else I've interacted with on this site. Removing the "must be hallucinating", "try undertaking to recognize", "scooter" would turn your comment more into thoughtful discourse than sneer (you might want to check out the HN guidelines). I am trying to politely argue, pointed out that your comment didn't make sense to me hoping for a clarification, and got shit on, twice. Nice.

To attempt to answer you (I might regret this): what did you take "every single way that matters to open source people" to mean? By gazing through your insults into your comment, trying to find the "∀x statement" you think you saw, I have to assume that you think that means "every one developing open source code isn't using Microsoft?" Is your made-up acquaintance working at a semiconductor company primarily developing open source software there (rather than, say, semiconductors)?

Is the "∀x statement" about "x: way that matter"? Am I to take "non-free software is being used for making semiconductor at a large company" as an example of something that should matter to open source people?

You seem so convinced that there is a logic statement written right there with quantifiers and everything that you don't hesitate to use ridicule on complete strangers and question their grasp of logic. It's funny but couldn't really count as an argument (assuming you were trying to argue rather than just get some bile out).
Surprised? No. There's no large company in the world where attacking top management won't lead to major consequences.

Of course, SpaceX (and Google, along with a stack of other "tech" companies) wasn't supposed to be just another large company; they wanted to disrupt things, and wanted fanatical buy-in from their employees, customers, and fans. (Corporate fans? Really?)

It'll take a while, because religions don't die easily, but eventually it will become clear to anyone except the die-hard that it's just another company.
Musk is the CEO, he has the right to fire any employees that damage the company's reputation. You could argue that Musk is doing it himself and that the employee was simply stating facts, but it doesn't change the fact that the board decide to place him in-charge. Any other CEO would have done the same.

It is the board that should be holding him accountable, but they aren't. Most boards today are lame ducks to collect a paycheck. No one is challenging him because he is delivering results (although I would argue it's actually Gwynne Shotwell keeping the shipping sailing). So there's that.
Wait, isn't the license [1] on this repo AGPL?

While I would like to voice a general protest against the AGPL FUD, it's also somewhat strange to do it in the same breath as "Much respect" for Citus here.

----------------------------------------

[1] https://github.com/citusdata/citus/blob/master/LICENSE
SpaceX fires workers who criticized Elon Musk in open letter
To accomplish (4) you have to become a sociopath and sociopaths won't attempt to substantially improve culture for its own sake because they lack empathy.
Yeah I get that, but I usually listen to his podcast when I'm working in the garage or something, so I don't mind periods of less-than-interesting conversation. Though at the end of the day, there are enough gems in his conversations that keep me listening.
That was charming. Great demonstration of scientific communication. Great visualization.
> Back in April we launched Empower, and we decided to put the full weight of Brex towards building the best global payments platform for tech startups and larger companies.

The "larger companies" part is surprising to me. I would have expected that larger companies have already figured out good ways to handle global payments. Global commerce by large companies has been common for decades and so I'd expect there would be large, efficient, well established services supporting that.

It is smaller companies being able to participate in global commerce that is still fairly new, and I'd expect that many of the older global payment services that served the larger company's global payment needs aren't designed to scale down for smaller customers.

Thus I'd expect that global payments for smaller companies is where the opportunity lies.
Cool project, however for me the value of a gift has always been the time and thought someone put behind getting me a gift than the actual gift itself. I feel like services like this would just take it away.

Plus wouldn't you want to get the person what they wanted rather than what a <typical person of that demographic> wants? It's a lot less personal this way.
> I really get the sense that people are increasingly getting sick of hearing from or about him. YMMV.

I'm just a rando on the internet so maybe not representative, but this uBlock snippet makes anything related to Twitter or Elon invisible on the Guardian front page. Definitely improved my QoL

##.fc-item__container:has-text(/\bElon\b/)
##.fc-item__container:has-text(/\bTwitter\b/)
On a related note, thank god these chatbots have gone the way of "ribbon designs" and flash intros. By far the most annoying web dev trend in history.
Tesla has always been "about to explode" in one way or another. When will people realize that manufacturing businesses, when they are limited by property and equipment, are slow-burning?

Also, "reusable" doesn't matter as much as "affordable" for rockets. I am waiting for one of the smaller companies with a dirt cheap rocket to eat SpaceX's lunch.
Do you guys really just think of unions as just being a good thing? you see no issues with this massive unions at all?
> I don't blame the evil companies even a little bit for this mess. It's the people who passed these terribly thought out laws. They'll keep passing more of them until we stop letting them.

Apart from being a... very interesting take, how do propose to do this?
So I guess next stop is President
Yes. And there was also an impact that instead of an influx of new people on a regular cadence it was never ending. People were used to a brief disruption of netiquette standards and then things would go back to normal. But once the gates opened it was a never ending, yet increasing, set of new people arriving every day. It didn't take long for the new folks to outnumber the old hands.

To your creator:consumer point, that is also true. And I also think part of it was that the existing crowd couldn't comprehend that this was the case. People on Usenet at the time tended toward certain personality types. It was a bit of a shock when the average poster started to have wildly different goals and expectations.
I am surprised that the warning message is that long. The first 4 lines of the text contain nearly zero information. Most warning messages I see in real life are succinct.
World population in 1950?
Here's a concrete example. AAVE is a protocol that allows lenders to lend money to borrowers in a decentralized manner.

So as a borrower, today, if you were to borrower 8000 USDC and deposit 10 ETH as collateral, the AAVE protocol would automatically sell your collateral if the ETH price went to 941$. So your position is "auto liquidated".
https://aavecalculator.com/

AAVE currently has ~$9.9B in assets locked into its protocol.
> The only way to defeat such a meshed power plant would be a small nuclear bomb.

Or to quietly cut off the underwater power cable.
There is definitely an element of parental responsibility that often gets conveniently ignored in these debates. I'm a sceptic about placing the blame entirely there though, for the simple reason that so much of normal life is now connected. That includes time at school or when kids are playing with their friends and not under their parents' immediate supervision 24/7. The only way a parent could truly keep their child away from any possibility of getting online today would be to restrict their activities and access to technology so severely that they'd barely live a normal life or socialise and develop in a healthy way. So whatever we think of parents and how they raise their children, the problems that modern connected technologies create are always going to need societal solutions as well as parental or schooling ones.
Yeah, it's pretty sad. I think what happened is he "crossed the chasm" so to speak and became mainstream. He was famous for his work, which is super interesting and so he was appreciated by a subset of nerds. In the last year or two he bacame famous for his personality, which turned out to be "generic right-wing edge lord". Thing is, there's very few people who can talk in depth about rocket design or actually bring their wild schemes to life and he's one of them. On the other hand, there's a whole spectrum of thousands of celebrity right wing edge lords to choose from if that's your thing and there's absolutely nothing interesting or unique about his take on this.
It should go without saying, but governments and companies are not the same things.

Companies are synthetic people; there are a lot them in one place and they can die.

Governments are not synthetic people; there is only one per place and the idea is that it lasts forever.

One can generally avoid working for a particular company if one wants. One cannot avoid the government.
For most people, analytics is just about know how much traffic you're getting and where it's coming from and what they're doing on your site. For example, if 30% of the visitors from reddit.com convert to paying customers but 60% of users from indiehackers.com convert to paying customers you'll know to spend time, money, etc on indiehackers.com.

Also, my understanding is Google pretends like they don't really look at your traffic data and use that for search.
As a startup CEO that uses Brex and hasn’t been kicked off I have to say that I’m strongly considering self-evicting. What a shitty way to handle this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation
I've had bad gas most of my life. I just kind of assumed it was me and there was nothing I could do about it. I started on 10 Billion CFUs of Lactobacillus Acidophilus [0] a few weeks ago and my gas went away in literally one day. I take 10B CFUs every day or every other day now (every other is probably sufficient), and it's still gone. I'm literally amazed. I started taking it because I saw a video from Dr. Eric Berg [1] about how to deal with a potential candida overgrowth.

[0] https://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements-acidophilus/art...

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9wWC7M0QxI
Brex non-customer here.

1) If I were doing due diligence on a vendor, and ran across something like this, I wouldn't buy from them. It's unlikely to come up (I've never done due diligence on a CEO), but if I learned a CEO had pulled a stunt like this, I wouldn't buy from a new company.

2) Actions like this bias my judgements to the entire buy vs. build decision, and the SaaS space. My experience is that each time a service provider pulls something like this, the cost is higher than any net benefit from having worked with that provider.

There are exceptions. There are vendors with long track-records of stability. I happily use AWS, and would happily use Azure. But I don't do business with Google because of a history of stunts like this (several affecting me), and I avoid small startups for anything business-critical for the same reason.

In finance, stability is especially key.

In the same way as firing employees impacts the morale of existing and potential employees, firing customers does the same.
I don't know if I would say new, Eternal September had already been in progress for 11½ years when the Green Day song was released.
Was that OTC probiotics? Most of them seem to need refrigeration, and I'm surprised they are not sold as such (just placed on non-refrigerated shelves in stores or sent by mail in a normal box without cooling).
> and even the author of this piece is celebrating that.

I don't think so. Read the last part of that sentence which I've emphasised in italics.

"So if you work in any sort of tech or digital related role, and the work you put into the world can be viewed, or accessed, by anyone of any age in the UK, and you are (rightfully) celebrating the loss of the cookie popups, I need you to do me a favour and drop the balloons and party streamers and sit down."
That's not how free speech works. Right to speech freely doesn't give you magical protection from consequences of your speech.
Oh, yes, I would absolutely never use Plaid, or any service that requires it in the meantime.

But, there are many services that should exist, that could be safely used, if such an API mandate existed.

I actually think it’s a matter of time. Eventually the current state of affairs will lead to a crisis. Someone operating like Plaid (a centralized nexus of banking passwords) will be breached, funds will be drained, and banks will shrug.

At that point, the API law becomes much more likely. Banking regulations have a way of moving very slowly until a crisis erupts.

Another path is, once most of the bigger banks develop their own APIs, they will probably push for the regulation as a path to making it harder for smaller banks to compete.
Yes, you'd certainly make sure everything was automated or at least have a software lock-out to ensure the pantograph is only raised on the correct sections. But having a battery makes this a lot simpler, there'd be no need to stop or coast during the changeover.
There are mechanisms out there that try to minimise data exfiltration to validate certain facts about a person. IRMA [1] has a system that's developed quite well though development and expansion has slowed down over the years. It's a lot more chatty than using offline certificates, but the privacy challenges are very similar. The basic premise is that your ID holds your date of birth and that date of birth can be used to generate a signed token that says "over x years old". For Europe this can be 18, for America this can be 16 or 21, depending on what you're trying to gatekeep.

Having users manage cryptographic secrets seems like an absolutely terrible idea. Developers and system administrators are incapable of renewing certificates in time, it'll only slow everything down.

None of these technical measures solve the core issue, though, which is that kids will lie about their age online. They'll find a friend/family member/random guy over the required age and copy the super privacy friendly secret token to their devices and boom, everyone is 18. Cryptographic age requirements raise the bar but ultimately they'll never be enough.

[1] https://irma.app/?lang=en
Netflix has a documentary series called "The G Word" (about the US government) - episode 3 shows part of a bank takeover.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_G_Word