skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The theory was one of economies of scale. For exclusive in-house content, you should have a positive feedback loop of "more users" -> "bigger content budget" -> "better or more content" -> "more users". And the theory was that with their headstart they could basically build such a large user base and content pipeline that nobody else could catch up.

It was a solid theory, and honestly it still isn't obvious that it's failed. Netflix still has an much larger user base than any of the competing services, despite charging much higher prices. But other than the stellar job they did with international content, they certainly haven't executed on this as well as people imagined. It's quite amazing how badly they have been spending that massive content budget, and how long the mismanagement has been going on.

(Their prestige "Hollywood movies at Hollywood budgets straight to streaming" projects are probably the most obvious example. Who the fuck greenlit Gray Man at $200M?)
I'm not pro-gun and do not own any, but if I had to fire a gun in that instance I sure would prefer my ears to be able to tell me if there were someone else in another room shortly after the fact.
Which part of the gun laws are not based in reality?
I don't know much about LoRa yet, but i would be interested to tinker with it. Can the LoRa radio of the Aranet4 PRO be used by alternative base stations or is it somehow locked down to their own Aranet PRO base station?
> For example in Texas they can immediately turn her information over to law enforcement to collect the reward for turning in someone who is trying to get an abortion.

It is frankly insane to me that the ones claiming the highest moral ground created a vigilante system driven by ruining people's lives when they are at their most vulnerable.
I think it failed for Netflix, those two sites have massive corpuses and a constantly pumping pipeline of fresh content. I guess they also figured out the economics re: paying content creators to ensure that's the case, Netflix I think dropped billions to establish IP to keep people hooked to Netflix and failed.
> PMC is pretty much exclusively bourgeoisie and petit bourgeoisie

As usually defined (where by the 2010s it accounted for more than a third of American jobs), it's not. It's mostly proletarians, a bit of it is in the petit bourgeois, and a numerically irrelevant or even smaller numerically irrelevant slice is in the haut bourgeoisie (it's not clear to me if the upper end of the usual understanding includes the haut bourgeois who incidentally have the kind of job usually ascribed to the “class” but for whom it is not particular job reflects rather than is in any way necessary to the power they exercise over capital, but it makes little difference either way.)

The whole purpose of the designation, within Leftist discourse, is to identify and growing (even at the time first identified) segment of the wage-labor force as class enemies of the proletariat by inventing a new class label to apply to them, so as to justify why they aren't targets for solidarity efforts.

> PMCs (e.g. C level execs) of major corporations a often make out better than shareholders.

C-level execs of major corps aren't typical members of the PMC “class” by a long shot.
In order to find "new music" the listeners themselves have to put in some effort, be curious and open to the experience. It helps if there is a culture around it, not around "genres" but around discovering music (be it old or new) in general.

When I was a kid I always enjoyed walking into my uncle's living room being awestruck by the enormous hi-fi sound and his massive collections of LPs and later CDs. He, at times, offered me to play what I like. Because I had no real clue about music back then, I just picked the ones with "interesting" cover art.
I vividly remember picking Bauhaus' The Sky's Gone Out or King Crimson's In the Court of the Crimson King, totally alien music for me but quite the listening experience.

This kind of ceremonial setting and the work and care around it, is missing in the days of immediate availability under our impulsive fingertips and with it the disposition to take a good listen with a clear intention, with a beginning and an end. It seems that we are more or less offered to be drowned in music streams making it hard to discern, unable to recover with fresh/curious ears without taking breaks and the possibility to listen more sparingly.
>Until recently people simply were not aware that personally identifiable location data was gathered on them to the extent that you’d be able to detect a visit to an abortion clinic. Or that period tracking apps are sending data in a way that can be later bought on a free market and tied to personal identification.

"People" were utterly certain that their phones and computers were listening to every conversation they had, then big tech was advertising the products that they thought about back at them.

But the location tracking software they have enabled to find their phone/keys/bag/friend couldnt possibly be used to see where their phone/keys/bag/friend is ...
There is so much ill and wrong in this.. true this is how it is in a lot of places, but accepting and sating

> That is how society works

is just resignation and ignorance (and sad to read) that it could, can and actually is different somewhere else ;p
This is lame. It spends most of its time going over film and architecture in order to prove that music is stagnating. It’s not a good comparison. Film is stagnating creatively because the budgets are too big to take a risk. The same is not true of music at all.

One real point they make is that people are listening to older music. So what? That’s what we do in a culture. People continue to be inspired by the classics because they good.

And my last snarky point is that if you think music isn’t good or creative anymore, you just aren’t paying attention. Go take a dive on a streaming service for a while. It’s an amazing time to be alive for music.
No, it would be nice to have a silencer in this situation actually, since I will be letting off around 15 shots into that person's chest, at about 162 dB each time.
Downloaded scripts do generally have extensions, and they are almost exclusively .eh, which was the point of my comment.
Notice also that we are looking at a “minimum 1k” observations, and the y-axis is labeled in increments of one-one thousandth starting at zero, so really it’s “1”, “2”, “3”, etc. The observed fluctuation may be attributable to removing the components of the top-1k which were not movies (reducing the size of the denominator).

I don’t know if I would go so far as to call the rest of the article drivel, though. There are some pretty interesting points made elsewhere, especially the average age of actor plot.
Imagine for a second if you replaced "Texas" with "North Korea" what the very people who support this would say.
FWIW Netflix brand is big outside US thanks to piracy. Instead of focusing on clamping on password sharing which is literally free growth, they should focus on becoming truly international by overcoming currency issues like classic brands do (through franchise business model for example)
I was just thinking the same. I live 10 minutes away from the coast and have just enjoyed a few hours sat by the beach where most people were sunbathing, paddle boarding, taking a dip, etc. I didn't notice anyone gazing at their smartphone.

As a kid I lived inland and a casual trip to the beach just wasn't an option. I look back and remember a lot of boring Sundays where the option of staring at a phone screen all day would have been a luxury.
Yeah you can bet that Google will do anything they can to stop adblockers once their FLoC replacement is online. After all, in their view they have solved the "privacy problem".

Chrome is only going downhill from now. So is Edge, Microsoft has already at the stage where they don't prioritise user experience and appeal anymore and are priorising monetisation. Like with the "buy now and pay later" scams they're including. It's IE4 all over again, once they arrive at the desired marketshare the user is just a dumb sheep to them again.

Unfortunately Mozilla is far from perfect, they're becoming too corporate and weaseling in monetisation schemes totally in conflict with their goals. But they're still a world better.
I had the payment problem the other day and it's because I wanted to pay with PayPal. It seems if you use a card they can roll together all the items, but PayPal can't.

My biggest frustration is not being able to download a zip file of all the tracks I just bought. Going one by one is tedious, especially because I tend to download both a FLAC for backup and 320 for everyday listening.
Evaporative cooling is also used in cooling towers to cool both indoor and outdoor spaces. These are basically a tall hollow tower with hanging fabric inside at the top that is kept wet. Hot air enters at the top, and gets cooled by losing it's heat to evaporate the water; then, with cooler air being more dense, the air "falls" town the inside of the tower and flows out at the bottom cooling the surrounding area.

http://www.2030palette.org/evaporative-cooling-towers/
To me it seems a no brainer for Netflix to buy Spotify in a year or two at the peak of the recession and offer a dual service membership alongside its existing options. As it stands, if Spotify raises its prices again then it makes more sense for me to buy an Apple One subscription and putting up with the worse interface rather than forking out for Spotify. If more and more people start doing the same then it’s done as a service and its price is going to tank. At the same time, with more and more tv/film content being split across different providers, I’m most likely going to start rotating e.g 1 month Disney, 1 month Paramount, 1 month Netflix, with a yearly Prime membership and and Apple One subscription being my only constants. If Netflix had Spotify that would be a reason to ditch apple one and keep a year round Netflix subscription rather than demoting it to rotation.

I’d also look at acquiring Criterion and A24. Netflix then becomes the home of independent cinema, auteur and classic cinema and original storytelling vs the other options which (HBO/Now TV excepting) all seem to rely heavily on existing franchises. I’d also look at upping the amount of stand up specials which it seems to be doing with the Netflix is a joke festival.
Does that mean the world didn't exist before capitalism? I think the world did exist.
| We need no algorithmic timelines, no manipulation

That would require a totally different business model.

For years, I've been convinced that a social network that figured out how to painlessly charged people $0.50 a month for an ad-free, non-manipulated experience would be more profitable per-user than existing social networks.
This has a simple explanation. The creative frontier has moved on to social media and the internet. Looking at box office movies and declaring stagnation is like looking at the music industry minus MTV in the 80’s.
The HU likely charted because of their inclusion in the OST of a game by EA - Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order. I was pleasantly surprised to see them start prominently in the opening of that game!

Doom Eternal, for the record, also had some Mongolian throat singing from the late vocalist of Tengger Cavalry.
The slow cancellation of the future has been accompanied by a deflation of expectations. There can be few who believe that in the coming year a record as great as, say, the Stooges’ Funhouse or Sly Stone’s There’s A Riot Goin’ On will be released. Still less do we expect the kind of ruptures brought about by The Beatles or disco. The feeling of belatedness, of living after the gold rush, is as omnipresent as it is disavowed. Compare the fallow terrain of the current moment with the fecundity of previous periods and you will quickly be accused of ‘nostalgia’. But the reliance of current artists on styles that were established long ago suggests that the current moment is in the grip of a formal nostalgia, of which more shortly.

It is not that nothing happened in the period when the slow cancellation of the future set in. On the contrary, those thirty years has been a time of massive, traumatic change. In the UK, the election of Margaret Thatcher had brought to an end the uneasy compromises of the so-called postwar social consensus. Thatcher’s neoliberal programme in politics was reinforced by a transnational restructuring of the capitalist economy. The shift into so-called Post-Fordism – with globalization, ubiquitous computerization and the casualisation of labour – resulted in a complete transformation in the way that work and leisure were organised. In the last ten to fifteen years, meanwhile, the internet and mobile telecommunications technology have altered the texture of everyday experience beyond all recognition. Yet, perhaps because of all this, there’s an increasing sense that culture has lost the ability to grasp and articulate the present. Or it could be that, in one very important sense, there is no present to grasp and articulate anymore.
This just seems like a kinda shitty implementation of sms 2FA.

Equifax is the third largest credit agency, and I’m sure the rental site partners with them.

Nothing to worry about.
In fact, the current CEO of Unity (One of the most popular game engine) said that anyone who's not baking monetization into their games right from the start is "f*king idiot".
What I don't get is why Netflix never licensed their technology to other platforms. For instance, why not white label their tech for Disney, Paramount, sports leagues, etc. Their tech is better than competitors and it would have been great to watch MLB through a white-labeled Netflix experience rather than MLBAM. Maybe they did try to pursue this path but it wasn't lucrative enough?

I also wonder if Netflix thought that perhaps content could be licensed on multiple platforms. It's unfortunate that movie/TV content seems to have exclusive licenses in contrast to music which is available on multiple platforms.
The 'hardest' part is realizing that basically everyone reasons this way unless taught otherwise. The books do a lot of hard work to cover this up.
From a sales-only perspective, this article makes sense, but the very obvious influence of TikTok seems noticeably absent from the analysis.

TikTok, by nature of its scale, has completely changed how the music industry works. If you want to prove this, check the top 40 chart of your favorite music streaming service or listen to your local top 40 station for a bit. Both of these were originally designed to provide a good metric on what songs people enjoy listening to from beginning to end. However, they're now almost entirely populated with songs made popular by 30 seconds to a minute of their content rather than the entire work.

TikTok has created a fundamental shift in the metrics by which people collectively evaluate music's popularity. Forty years ago, what was most "safe" for radio (in the sense that it was palatable enough for most people) was what got played. Now, the shareability of even a single segment of a song is its entry point into the feedback loop of exposure that creates viral hits.

Whether this is a good or bad thing is honestly subjective (and likely polarizing to some) but the article's failure to recognize it feels significant. In a system where the extent to which people get bored of listening to a song in its entirety is no longer a concern, people are revisiting old releases and finding that they perform extremely well under the current metrics. That's why we have Kate Bush and Metallica in the top 40. Their songs performed well under the previous system before fading into irrelevance, and they just happen to perform well under this new system as well. Stranger Things may have given them the push they needed to re-enter the public conscience, but what followed was the same process that would have happened if their music was released, say, ten years ago rather than 40. Age itself is secondary when shareability is king.

Personally, I'm of the belief that this will stabilize in the long term if short-form shareability remains the dominant metric of a song's popularity. In the same way that radio stations stop playing songs as people get bored of them, so too do older songs fade from popularity on TikTok as they begin to become tiresome to enough people. Combined with the fact that this happens at an extremely fast pace and that the amount of legacy pop music is finite, this means that TikTok users are bound to run out of sufficiently popular legacy content to use eventually.
This is what keeps me away from Firefox. I gave it a try for 3 months a little while back but it was so much slower than Chrome for general browsing. Maybe I'm due another try.
This is a statement of profound and frustrating ignorance. It's not physically possible even in the best case to use over-the-ear or in-ear protection (even doubled or tripled up) to reduce ~2kHz sound by more than 40dB or so, because that's how much reduction a human skull provides. No matter how blocked off your ears are sound will still be transmitted through flesh/bone. More realistically, even 30 dB of reduction is quite good. And a naked firearm can easily be 160-175 dB at the muzzle, and it's hard to overstate how VERY loud that is. A chainsaw is like 110 dB, and remember this is a log scale. Every 10 dB = 10x the energy (only about 3x the perceived "loudness", but it's energy that matters for cellular damage). Furthermore, firing inside (or next to any large hard surfaces that can reflect sound) can increase the total exposure.

A sibling post writes "Firing a gun with no hearing protection is a pretty jarring experience", but let's be clear: ANY exposure to sound over 140 dB or so mean instantaneous permanent hearing loss. Period. "Jarring" isn't quite the adjective. A single use doesn't mean you just go deaf or even "merely" get tinnitus, but it does mean you just burned some of your hearing forever. It doesn't heal and there isn't any treatment. For practice with regular usage even with ear protection it's quite possible to exceed NIOSH limits on sound exposure. Obviously lots of people just live with that, but hearing loss is serious. There is environmental damage and bystanders to consider as well. All of this of course ignores that for self defense at home someone might not have time to put on ear pro at all.

The only way to really make guns hearing safe is to double up on multiple physically different methods combining both hearing protection and sound reduction of the gun itself. A suppressor can take a gun down to the 130-150dB range, and then a further 20-30 dB of ear protection takes that to 100-130dB for the shooter. Subsonic ammunition can also be use, sacrificing performance to eliminate the supersonic crack and somewhat reduce sound too.

Suppressors should just be standard safety equipment. The Hollywood meme where you screw something onto a rifle and now it sounds like a can of compressed air is as real as people jumping through plate glass windows (actually made of sugar) and other such ridiculous physics. 130dB is still LOUD, you will absolutely here that from a distance. The original impetus in America for trying to make them a thing only for rich people was concerns about "poaching" by poor people and ties into a bunch of class warfare there. It's an obsolete consideration for a host of reasons at this point. The societal benefits of less hearing damage would be considerable, it's now known quite a number of significant issues like dementia can be influenced by hearing loss.
Every feature removed by Google will have to be maintained by the open source community instead. That's going to be a workload that I'm not sure who is going to pick up. After all Chromium right now is maintained by Google. There's some forks like degoogled chromium but they are mainly focused on removing features, not rebuilding ones that have been deprecated.

Brave is an option but I don't really like where they're heading with their crypto tokens.
this is literally such a meme. it's not that hard to hear everybody still wear earpro when shooting suppressed. you will still hear it ffs. it's literally a safety device.
The article may have an interesting premise, however the only statistics we are offered in support of the author’s claim is two years’ worth of data (2021 and 2022). What about the more long-term trends? We might be missing the big picture for short-term cyclical trends. Also, the data for 2022 is, without doubt, incomplete.
Of last month.
> Also if it's the police doing it, you're not allowed to defend yourself even if they don't announce/identify themselves.

You are allowed, it's just that they are allowed to kill you if you do.
If you need tab groups and tab search, you’re using tabs wrong. Bookmarks exist for that purpose and they do have search and grouping (folders).

Coworkers look at me like I’m a freak because I usually keep fewer than 10 tabs open :)
Ed Cheatsheet
It's corporate politics. The amount of tracking and data collected is not decided by the engineers nor the content creators. Most entrepreneurs think that the more data the better and that it somehow can be monetized in the future - and analyzed by "AI", but don't want to to be liable so they use third parties to collect and store the data.
Is it just me, or are posts moaning about the quality of contemporary music not as good or original as old-school articles moaning about it?
> A goodreads for movies?

Letterboxd wants to be that, pretty much, without tying it to one specific catalogue of titles available to stream.

I think Mubi still has a lot of reviews, regardless if movies are available there or not. There it works, I think, because their offering always was understood to be much more niche than Netflix's.
I only use .sh extensions for Bourne shell scripts and .bash for Bash scripts. It doesn't really matter in terms of executing scripts, but it's a handy visual indication.
Wikipedia is mostly useless as a reliable source of information. There are exceptions but for anything beyond superficial information you really have to look elsewhere. I generally block it from results.

One of the biggest problems is the broken links issue. Supposedly all information on Wikipedia is sourced to newspaper articles, books, research reports etc. but more often than not those source links are broken. It would seem to be a relatively simple task to write some kind of bot that would check Wikipedia links and report the number of broken ones at the top of each Wikipedia page.
I'm surprised at the article date (today, 17-Jul-2022). From the topic and content I would have expected that the article is at least 15 years old. If you want a "just works" debugging experience on Linux, try QtCreator, or VSCode with the CodeLLDB extension (an lldb frontend) or the Microsoft C/C++ extension (which provides a debugger frontend for gdb, lddb or the MSVC debugger).

The main downside of both VSCode extensions is the very limited data view panel (this is indeed an area where DDD was, and still is revolutionary), but unfortunately the whole are of user friendly debugging solutions is in stagnation or even regressing :/