skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My personal story:

I read patio11 over the years and was struck by his often mentioned "Write about what you know and it will surprise you the value it will add to people" (paraphrasing). In particular, in one of his posts about consulting he mentions: "Some of my consulting engagements were essentially me doing a dramatic reading of my blogs posts."

I realized that for the past couple years I had been coaching my friends through salary negotiations and general career advice as well. This led me to start a blog and write about some of the ideas and stories I used to help people get a better understanding of how to negotiate a compensation package, how to think about switching jobs etc.

I then posted it to Hacker News and didn't get any response at all for the first couple posts. Then one of them took off. I should mention that when that post did take off, I thought there was a bug in my metrics script but no, not a bug, it did indeed hit the front page of HN.

~30 people reached out and a couple turned into paying clients.

So answer to the question "was it worth it"?

- From a personal financial perspective, better than not doing it

- From a "wait! you can write things down, people read your words and then pay you money to hear more?!?!?" perspective, I can't think of a more worth it experience

PS There is this one distinct memory from when I did a free consult and the person said "I read your blog and thought to myself 'If I'm ever switching jobs, this guy is the first person I'm calling' ".
Our experience upgrading from go v1.17 to v1.18 for generics
because they used to market to kids. the whole place was kid oriented. fast food switched their demographic to adults about 15 years ago with great success
I have a dream of producing custom recumbents. I don't know where to get thin-walled pipes, but a start capital is roughly as you have described.
is there any group lobbying for the abolishment of all copyright? I'd like to donate to them.
I tend to err on the side of libertarianism. Everyone can govern hyper locally, why impose your view on others.

That avoids much of the conflict.

I think in this particular issue, the challenge is both sides view it as a global issue and they aren discussing on the same terms. On the one hand life does begin at conception, it’s a scientific fact. The question is whether or not it’s worthy of societies protection.

One view is that creation and life should be protected at high cost.

The other world view believes either their life matters above others OR society is better without certain life.

Listen to the arguments, that’s what it boils down to. Quality of life, career, mental fitness, problems with the fetus, removing genes from the pool — it’s eugenics.

I personally pass no moral judgement, to your point, I see both world views. However, it’s painful to watch people not recognize what it is. The discussions aren’t even framed properly; everyone just talks past one another.
Genuinely curious: it's obviously, well, manic, but which part of that quote is homophobic?
That describes me and I've made that exact argument before. I'd ask that anyone who feels gross at the idea that the government should have the authority to mandate organ donation or blood and tissue donations to save a life or disallow backing out of these procedures to understand that this comes from the same place.
I have several questions about your APL example.

Why did you use (foldl1 (+)) instead of sum? Also, (fromIntegral . length) is (genericLength) - and that means you used implicit type conversion which may add terseness and also lead to errors. After all that, your example becomes (liftM2 (/) sum genericLength). Not much longer than APL's in terms of actual symbols used.

APL fails differently, I think. It may very well fail you if you try to express parsing combinators, especially when context sensitivity and/or non-determinism are important.
Anyone ever see WP source code, or maybe an open source clone project? Many aspects of WP (mostly the reveal codes) is still useful (much like markdown), that I'm surprised that an up to date open source app isn't available.
I agree the survey questions were badly formed and that the HN thread title isn't an exact representation of what the survey revealed - but it does strike me as a pretty minor quibble compared to what the survey results do actually imply.
> which means the model is a reflection of that data

Sorry for the image, but a deconstructed animal - here's a paw, one eye in that glass, muscle fibers sorted on that shelf - is not "what it was" anymore: it's incomparable to the original - it's not really a reflection.

"To go to the other side" is not meaningful, it made sense in the joke and in limited other contexts.
The way I see it, the issue of abortion is obviously one of the most controversial things out there, some people think it’s baby murder, other people think it’s no big deal. With something so controversial, why not just let the person who is carrying the baby decide for themselves? You might think a mom is killing her baby, but she might not. Just let her decide for herself. Forcing people one way or another is a terrible solution. Pretty ironic for a party that loves to claim they’re all about personal freedoms and small government.
Sperm are floating around in the vicinity of eggs before fertilization. If left undisturbed, fertilization will occur. Many methods of birth control disrupt that sperm/egg interaction. It's not all that dissimilar from disrupting some intracellular interaction, or some other intercellular interaction, to prevent a fertilized embryo from replicating or implanting. Sperm+unfertilized egg mixtures in a uterus are on the path to life.

For that matter, mixtures of uneducated teenagers will, if undisturbed, make a whole bunch of babies.
Snapchat for Web
at conception it's just a cell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygote#/media/File:Zygote1.jpg

I don't think anyone would mistake that for a human life.
The article kinda points out that there is no single Abortion In Europe standard - it's all over the map (figuratively speaking).
I did not really think I was the only one who gets frustrated, but wow - My rants are not quite that inventive/descriptive...
Lots of laws were ignored or creatively re-interpreted, by plenty of people & entities, during the unprecedented pandemic health emergency of early 2020. Many emergency actions taken by elected leaders have been later found illegal by courts.

But if there was no malice or net harm from such technical violations – or indeed if the breaches effectively prevented greater harms – society and the courts will often find such "law-breaking" to be forgivable or even praise-worthy. For example, you are allowed to break trespassing laws to save a life, and in other situations of private or public necessity.

With regard to reading & education in early 2020, publicly-funded schools & libraries that were supposed to be operating were closed with little warning, for a potentially indefinite amount of time. Millions of purchased books that were supposed to be circulating sat idle in locked buildings. A crucial cultural & civilizational function was stopped dead in its tracks.

Against that, the Internet Archive rapidly deployed a novel technological workaround to re-enable some (but not all) of the pandemic-impaired booklending/reading activity. It did so in a way that had no more effect on the publishers' economic prospects than normal-times library operations, and was arguably within the 'fair use' & format-shifting rights well-established for book owners & libraries in the United States.

So I think IA expects to "win" the lawsuit because they did a good deed for the world's readers, as a temporary & reasonable adaptation to an extraordinary emergency situation, that caused negligible harms to the publisher plaintiffs.
> If people of an area choose a certain law so-be-it, just don’t impose your will on others.

This statement is in conflict with itself. If a red state bans abortions then they are imposing their will onto others in that state. Why is it only "imposing will" when the Federal Government decides to dictate to a state what to do?

By this logic why not let a municipality decide to ban abortion? The state shouldn't impose its will onto the people in that city. Why not let people decide at the neighborhood level, or within their houses, or at the individual level. Why not let every individual decide what is morally acceptable and abide by their own set of laws?

Trying to intellectualize the argument about who can and cant criminalize abortion ignores the hard scientific facts that we know: Criminalizing abortion does not decrease the number of abortions, only the mortality rate.
A simpler explanation: if the center of the earth-gas was hottest, it would heat up the area around it, which would heat up the area around it, etc. eventually there would be no temperature gradients left!
> "Schwangerschaftskonfliktberatung" (Pregnancy Conflict Counseling, gotta love German).

Just a linguistic note: German and English are almost exactly the same in how they make large compound words. The only difference is that when you write English, you put spaces between the different words that make up the compound, but when you write German, you leave out the spaces. But when spoken, they're exactly the same.

Germans could theoretically change their orthographic rules to write, "Schwangerschafts Konflikt Beratung," but they don't.
> If something should be a legal right, enshrine it specifically in law

I mean couldn't you turn that around? Normally things are legal by default, not illegal. Wouldn't the onus be on the law to explicitly make abortion illegal?
Your fingers are hitting the keys.
I think that is wrong, and would advocate for a rape exception for child support.
Surrogates, I, Robot and A.I. offers a small glimpse into the inhumane treatment of the non-human population. Minority Report has the "technology turning on protagonist" aspect.

Maybe we could pull a Godfrey Ho and cut&paste some scenes from these to produce the ultimate cyberpunk flick?
“Learned helplessness”, comic edition, where the author’s self-insert is still The Smartest Guy In The Room because he knows better than to ever try anything.
> The eucalyptus trees they imported from Australia have had the terrible affect of making wildfires in California even worse.

I watched the eucalyptus stands burning in the Oakland Hills fire. They go up like torches. I've never understood the rationale for keeping them. Owls really like them though.
They are lending with limitations like a library.

If the nation was founded today people would never build a single library and they would be deeded evil.

Requiring libraries to buy books is an evil practice. As a function of copyright you should have to donate a book for every 10 numbers sold. Libraries create readers who are necessary for writers/publishers.
So the evidence that a Democratic shift leftwards (in party platforms, not necessarily actual actions) in the 1990s is at fault is the results of a single Presidential election thirty years later?
If you neglect your 1 year old they die you are responsible. In fact, if you neglect a 17 year old and they die it can also still be your fault.
I've personally tried it, and there are things that end up unconvincing.

Mostly surrounding cellular life bridging to complex lifeforms. Now I know there are "explanations" for all of it, but it's not convincing and not very well backed up. I believe in parts of evolution and creationism.
I was in Penner's class. Hard work, but I think it was worth it.
Unless I knew there was going to be a huge boatload of data, I'd go for an association table too. That's the cleanest thing in terms of the DB.
Eh. It can become a bad job too. When a tooling team has fulfilled its basic mission and things are good enough it can turn into a really bad job because it turns into a scrum death-march for features of questionable value and never ending bug fixes to fill time.
Hindu texts are the few religious texts which date the universe into the millions of year, time in Hinduism is an interesting concept off four Yuga's or ages that are cyclic
My first Ubuntu was 9.10. It feels more like modern Debian rather than modern Ubuntu. That is why I prefer former nowadays.
> terrible for everything else

Define terrible. Wasteful, yes. But when we run chat programs inside electron apps, does it really matters?

> is the superior approach

My idea of superiority is linked to availability and support. Multiple competing formats are often a problem

> Kitty has an (incompatible) variant

Indeed, the multiple competing formats might each have some specific technical advantages, but networks effect makes your life harder.
Made an account so I could mention David Levy’s infamous bet: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Levy_(chess_player)#Co...

That’s the way it is with AI: first people say X is impossible for computers, then they say X is hard, then they say X doesn’t work for certain edge cases, then they say we’ve known all along that computers could do X.
With ROCM Software and Instinct MI200 GPUs, AMD Has Ecosystem Critical Mass
Another reason I still use "cat" is that I don't want the remaining commands to modify the input file, but I don't want to spend the time to inspect the command line to make sure that is the case.

For example I'm pretty sure "grep" won't change the input file but "sed" may depending on the "-i" flag. Using "cat" conveniently bypasses all that thinking because the program only gets stdin from a pipe.
Case in point why you should never ever use a 3rd party VPN ever for any reason. Even for something quick.
No-one uses Elastic Beanstalk -- use ECS instead. With ECS Copilot you can do it in 1/2 commands.
Somehow I don't think you've been in a position to emphasize with how uncomfortable a woman would have to be to consider aborting her unborn child.

Slavery is not a good analogy.

This is indeed as you say a hyper-local issue, often local to the individual person.
Humans. Infernal humans.
Also, the Mississippi law that started the Dobbs case was virtually the same as Florida - 15 weeks with some exceptions.
The way it works is a questionnaire is created by the rating agency, meant to cover a wide degree of workplace factors. The do tend to cover the ones that have some academic rigor, like questions about autonomy or career growth, beyond the fluffy ones. Weighting of these factors hasn't ever been transparent to me as an employee. And it does seem to be pay-to-play to be considered, but there is an attempt at objectivity. But for your example, if 90% of the employees say they enjoy coming to work everyday, or they would recommend working to in that workplace to a colleague at a different firm, then independent of the factors enabled such opinions, that company did something right, modulo people just giving bullshit answers.
I can explain it to you, and this is backed up by studies.

You're forcing a parent to be involved in a child's life when they don't want to be. The person will likely be a force of evil / detriment / abuse in the child's life. The child will grow up with issues, which may lead to crime, health issues (mental or physical, our mental state greatly impacts us physically), etc. etc.

I would much rather pay for them not to be involved than put the child through that. Not only does it prevent issues down the road for society, it is the right thing to do.

Saying you don't want to pay is naive. You're paying whether you like it or not. And surprisingly, the pay now is actually cheaper for society in the long run.
Call your state legislators and tell them!
When Netflix first started, it was an engineering challenge on the order of the Google search engine. High Availability was the newest thing and Big Data was just getting started. Now though, it is so easy you can use similar technology to host your cooking blog in AWS for $0.10/month. It's not terribly surprising that Disney+ was able to execute, probably for a bare fraction of what Netflix had to put in technically speaking.
The thing that strikes me about the US government at the moment, is that it's sclerotic. In some ways, decisions have been made that allows this - a hands-off regulatory environment means that if nothing happens, the market runs pretty free and everyone assumes that government will happen so we more or less pretend like there are rules (with some notable, un-enforced exceptions: Uber, Facebook, Theranos etc).

But it seems beyond parody that now, in the midst of a massive crash in crypto, now we're going to start looking at energy usage? How many decades will it be before they do something, and what message are they really sending? It's like looking back at Facebook's acquisition of WhatsApp and saying "Whoops".

The problem comes with what happens next. What happens if some Billionaire decides he can just completely ignore the rules and fuck around with other companies and drive them into the ground? What happens if the next Uber doesn't feel encumbered by the same restrictions on their behavior that Uber did, and start actively blackmailing members of congress. Grey ball was cute, but how many congressmen would stand up to Uber threatening to leak their questionable trips to a certain friend?

People in Silicon Valley talk about innovation, but what if a lot of that innovation is finding ways to steal from the common good to enrich a handful of people, and what if the innovation in SV is totally lacking in Washington DC - bogged down by the cash in SV that has an interest in making sure that continues?
You are reminding me about the startup that did on demand single avocado deliveries for 700% markup with only SF/Oakland as a delivery area.
How’s the performance? This seems like a terrific stack
You missed the point there - the 15 week limit alone is more open than many European countries.
Subscription model should be abandoned and replaced by paying for actual time using/consuming. Many useless apps would die immediately, scammers would be reduced and innovation would grow up.

More subscription = more consumerism = less time for creativity. And more work to pay all subscriptions. It's a trap.
The comment you're replying to didn't make a week-based distinction, just that the "personhood" claim of a fetus is irrelevant to whether or not an abortion is legal.

Personally I'd just prefer to base it on fetal viability (which was the standard). That's roughly 25 weeks or so (some variation and debate). If a fetus were to come non-viable after that, or endanger the mother, I think that should be back on the table too.
Point-in-time viability isn't the idea behind the analogy. The point the poster is making is that the continued ability to live into the indefinite future is what is contingent.
> The alternative is setting an arbitrary line in the sand “birth” or “20 weeks”, it doesn’t make much sense. Why not “1yr old” or “12 weeks” they have much of the same traits.

Yes, because we need lines. Why 18 years or 21 years? Why 55mph instead of 57?

Except "birth" is a pretty clear line. There is a big difference between "could survive outside the womb" and "is surviving outside the womb".

Unlike the line between 17.5 and 18.5.

And if you require that the unborn child is given the full rights of personhood in society, does "full rights" include full rights?

Access to child support payments?

Do they have a legal name? Can you register them with the Social Security?

If you wish to be Christian about it, can you baptize an unborn child? Can you offer them communion? On what moral grounds do you deny them the basic sacraments of the religion?
This is a weak argument as are most "rationalist" pro-choice arguments - the kidney itself isn't a conscious creature 't dependent on you prior for it's sustenance. Most pro choice arguments fundamentally boil down to "my convenience outweighs any moral imperative"

Which is fine, but I'd rather people be honest about their arguments rather than dress it up in pseudo-moralism.
Wait, how are you getting oily coffee from a Clever dripper? If anything the paper filter should be largely eliminating oils.
Yes. Do it, you won’t regret it
> Agreed - mathematics is predicated on the idea that there are individual things, but as we are learning, through things like quantum field theory, there are no individual things, hence, no individuated 'things' to count.

Even setting aside the absurdities of reducing math to elementary arithmetic, and of reducing arithmetic to counting particular concrete things - claiming to have undermined math with quantum field theory is like writing an essay that argues against the existence of language. "There are no particles, only waves" is not QFT. It's a reasonable position for which QFT arguably offers some measure of support, but that's not even remotely the same thing. QFT is layer upon layer upon layer upon layer of deeply technical mathematics, with a bit of blind symbol-pushing to round out the rough patches.
it’s not a tree but kudzu is a pretty famous example. it was imported from japan (i believe —may be mistaken on that point) into the American Deep South for erosion control, it quickly grew in the warm, wet environs and now literally smothers nearly all native vegetation. Its incredibly invasive and difficult to eradicate.
Takes 5 minutes.
They don't explain the pretty chart at the end however...
I'm a bit mind blown that you can write a driver in python. I thought it would be too high level to do the job at all, nevrmind slowly
> You also have to have a "Schwangerschaftskonfliktberatung" (Pregnancy Conflict Counseling, gotta love German).

That's mentioned in the article:

> if (a) it’s during the first 12 weeks, (b) the woman has obtained counseling, and (c) there’s been a three-day waiting period.
Small batch soaps, candles, "bath oils" and such can be done with minimal capital and little regulatory oversight.

Print shop type things, especially specialized like vinyl cutting and large banners, could be a good business depending on where you're at. Might be able to buy used or lease equipment too.

Woodworking / furniture shop and / or antique furniture restoration might not be terribly capital intensive.
>Late-term abortion on-demand is nonexistent outside the US

By the stats he provides right below that statement, it's nonexistent in the US as well. 92.7% of abortions take place in the first trimester (13 weeks). All but 1% of abortions take place by week 20. People just aren't having abortions after that point unless something has gone horribly wrong with the pregnancy (the antithesis of "on-demand").
I'm sorry for what you're going through. If you can afford it try paying a therapist to talk to. Just saying things out loud to another human can make a big difference.
When does a person die? When the last synapse fires? When the heart stops? When your brain is too far gone for you to be responsive?

The truth is there is no bright line. Dying is a process, not an event. So is coming into being. Personally, I don't see a zygote as a person. But a 32 week pregnancy is pretty close? Close enough that I wouldn't condone an abortion except in extreme cases.
All the problems from the hyper loop involve the energy of a vacuum. Why not accelerate the air in the tube in an actual loop? You reduce air pressure in front and increase it behind the car? Train cards could have baffles to allow for stops (let the air pass by the car).
I am bit puzzled by how much focus we put on where life begins.

The reasoning seems to be:
1) Ending a human being life is wrong
2) A foetus is a human being
3) Therefore abortion is wrong.

It seems much more interesting to me to wonder: Is ending a life always morally wrong?

Not saying I have the answer, I just find the question interesting.