skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Food used to be more expensive and rents a lot lower. If the reason for rent growth was that people were able to afford it, then probably rents (excluding energy part) will go down.
I would think the strategy would be to encourage low impact fraud with lazy compliance and making a customer whole (Credit card chargebacks). And then hunt out and destroy high impact fraud.

With the intent to incentivize and train criminals to stay small and low impact.

If you're a retail platform, and you have a few scammers making a few grand of 20-100 dollar scams. You can play wack a mole with them and then that keeps people doing that small fraud rather than leveling up and potentially doing crimes that could endanger the whole business with the exposure.
It has provided the tools to solve it but there is no silver bullet: countries need good, effective governance.
I swear a lot of Amazon stuff just looks so bland it might as well be AI-generated. "It is a wax museum of a show" is the best wording for that!
This is what happens when enforcement is both overzealous and uneven: https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/11/crystal-mason-illega...
> In Sweden, the company uses third-party workers

I never understood why Americans thinks this is bad. This means that the local company can handle labour laws and you pay extra for the workers to avoid having to learn the laws of yet another country. The local company could even be labour owned and negotiate with the employer as if it was a union, and even if it isn't the workers will likely be unionized anyway and they can easily organize against Amazon if Amazon abuses them.
Dealers have razor thin margins, like 1-2%. They make it up in...creative ways.
Wait, does anyone really use CGI instead of FCGI these days? Let alone like, php-fpm pools and the like?

The general gist I've come up with myself is 1000x processes for fork()/exec() pattern, 100,000 threads for pthreads, and 10,000,000 golang / async / whatever.

Maybe I'm off by a magnitude or two, but that's my general assumption. If you've got less than 1000x processes, CGI probably is fine. But I can't think of any reason to use CGI over FCGI, and FCGI's threads should get you to 100k or so.

I do feel like golang/async offers significantly more performance, but at the tradeoff of extra complexity. There's something to be said about the simplicity innate to collection of .php files in a directory, compared to a Django / Ruby on Rails / Maven Java Tomcat / Golang proxy / etc. etc (or whatever you need to get properly async and/or golang / cooperative multitasking code up)

-----

Then again, I'm not really a web developer.

Anyway, if anyone has reasons to go with fork()/exec() apache / one-process-per-connection CGI 90s style methodology, I'm all ears. Its just... not really that much simpler than FCGI / php-fpm in my experience.

Its not like Python / PHP / Ruby are very fast anyway. We're all doing these langauges because convenience is more important than performance. Still though, there's probably a few orders of magnitude between CGI and FCGI.
Yes! Long ago I read a book that mentioned that freelance professionals (accountants, lawyers, etc) tended to bill around 1000 hours per year. That the unbillable time went toward sales, client relations, marketing, learning, etc. I could usually do a little better than a 50% utilization rate for myself, but as you say that money goes to things most people don't have to pay. So the knock-three-zeros-off-salary rule served me well.
I agree, and NASA is increasingly using private launch providers. But it’s worth noting that many of the high level engineers and management in the private space industry come from NASA. Same goes for testing standards and valuable space hardware knowledge, which NASA releases as research to the public domain. The same can’t be said of private space companies, which keep their internal research to themselves.
Starbucks is one of the most successful banks in the U.S.
MDMA is indeed neurotoxic though, and should be used responsibly. Just because people were puritanical about drugs doesn't mean we need to go in the total opposite direction
You know if he could do that Intel would have hired him because the 3nm fabs aren't even in operation yet.

If you wanted to make a genuine argument you would have mentioned film based cameras rather than technology that doesn't even exist today.
I guess their parents should have avoided having kids focusing instead on getting richer.
As a non American the idea that it makes the US look bad didn't enter my mnd until I read your post. First off, space is hard, rocket science is, wel, rocker science, space engineering is hard and everybody is entitled to off days, including NASA.

But besides that, NASA is not the US, American are not their country. Why would some bad luck with a launch reflect onto people who have nothing to do with it?

We all know that the US is very successful in terms of launches shit into space. It's gonna take a bit more than this to change that record.
Yeah, that’s not the same. That sounds worse to me, so the question stands, how is it better?
Upload is brilliant! I talk about it at work, but I confess no one has ever spoken to me about it. You may have a point. Is it a sunk cost thing, where having spent the money on IP they market it heavier? The Norwegian thor on netflix was really good too. But its low buget so I figured they just don't push it as hard? Why do people really care that much about name recognition?
Thank you. Sounds like DosBox is worth it. I will give it a shot!
tbf that's more an issue with incompetent software devs and more importantly (lest someone accuses me of shifting the blame on devs like a clown would) horrible business product owners. My hope is that Biden's executive order on SBOMs and whatever thing like it which the EU probably has in the works will (unfortunately only slowly) shift the way in which the way business treats software development affects software development culture. (SBOMs may sound completely tangential to this, but in the long run they have a pretty important role to play here.)
Unfortunately this is mostly an American issue. CC fraud in Europe is minimal because cards have an embedded PIN required for each transaction. In addition, when purchasing online, an instant pop-up on your mobile phone asks you to approve or decline the transaction within 2 minutes. Contactless transactions under $25 do not require PIN or pop-up verification. These options are considered inconvenient for American consumers so we eat the fraud and sign receipts like is 1989 :-)
I'd bet they're going to be overall better for your health. You'll be able to have a focal distance farther than a screen, without having to look up or down (causing eye and neck strain), while also choosing the healthiest posture for yourself.
RIP Peter
Honestly I'd hit the red button. I'd rather take a guaranteed payoff of my mortgage and all other debt, with plenty left over for a few neat toys, than chance walking away with nothing.
There's also "purely statistical" problems with the argument the 50 million at 0.50 probability is the better decision: it makes an erroneous ergodicity assumption. In other words, it assumes that the expectation of a one-shot decision over people is the same as it is for the decision within-person. Sure, if you were making the choice over and over and over again, it would be better to repeatedly hit the green button. But that's not the situation. The situation is a mixture of outcomes, so for any given individual the expected outcome might be zero.

There's also I think an implicit stationarity assumption built in, that if you say you'll pay me X amount over time, that you'll actually do that, that inflation wont eat it into oblivion, etc. It's a classic case of theoretical models not working in reality.

This is kind of the point of the essay, but I think it could have been made more rigorously (as people here are pointing out).
This is correct, but what to do about it?

Just keep rolling with basically racist concepts because we like the other aspects of the mythology? Or explicitly overturn the racist parts, and keep the rest?

I like the second one, but apparently many other commenters are perfectly comfortable with "white=good".
The role of somatosensory innervation of adipose tissues
FYI: Your link about reloading is for browser-side reloading - it seems to me that parent talks about reloading the server on code changes, which as a sibling points out, should definitely already be happening using django's `runserver`.

I'd be interested to hear if parent's "typical" django app does something more involved that makes hot reloading impossible (like run in 3 levels of containers or the like).
It's cold. Burn the house down now!
I think Nokia had a third choice: Explore new market segments.

Personally, I want a smartphone along the lines of traditional Nokia phones: Big and tough. I'm glad to have something double the thickness of a normal phone, but:

- The screen shouldn't crack if you squint at it funny (bezel is fine)

- The battery should last a week (double, or more, the thickness of modern smartphones is fine)

- The cell coverage should be spectacular. Again, thickness means more space for antennas.

- It should have good cameras, at least 1080 resolution

- Standard plugs and jacks (USB-C, headphone, SD, dual SIM, etc.)

- Ideally, software updates forever, as stock Android / open source as possible, as little tracking as possible, etc.

- Ideally, stylus (with built-in storage)

- Good security, app sandboxing, no data collection, no cloud sketchiness, reasonable ToS

I think there are a lot of corporate segments as well. Increasing size should also cut down on NREs and allow more modularity, making it easier to make niche devices. I think there are enough markets to have a diversity of devices if NREs can be brought in-line.
Do you support the "colonial settlement" of Indo-Europeans outside of the original Yamnaya territory, or should they all go back to the steppe and give Finns, Dravidians, Basques, etc. right to return?

Should the English GTFO to Denmark/Normandy/... and give the island back to the Welsh/etc.?

What about Turks, should they move back to Central Asia and give Anatolia back to Greece?

If those are not your proposals, perhaps we can just chill for a few hundred years until Israelis living where they have built a state is old enough for you to accept? :D

Oh yeah for extra credit, do the facts that Crimea, definitely, and Eastern regions, arguably, were transferred to Ukraine very recently; and then Ukraine supposedly "oppressed" them by revoking some status from Russian language, etc., justify the annexation of Crimea and/or the invasion by Russia? Cause, you know, "history", and "oppression"!
They didn't have a choice. What should they have done?

Handed Ukraine while paying Putin for the privilege?

There are lots of things they should have done:

* Not shut down nuclear until they had alternatives

* Reduced dependencies on Russian exports

* Invested more in clean energy and reduced regulatory barriers to green projects

Supporting Ukraine fully wasn't a mistake.
Iron is 1000 times more abundant in the crust than copper.
The response I saw on Twitter that made the most sense: “sell your button press for $5 or 10 million to a person who has $100 million”
Artemis I Launch Attempt Scrubbed
This sort of thinking has been prevalent in the payments industry for a long time, and I find it infuriating.

The article is specifically limiting its discussion to situations where a payment credential is stolen. Those cases cost $10-20B per year.

This is HN, so most people here can figure out how to secure payment credentials, especially given the assumption that each credit card contains a tamper resistant computer with durable storage (as they currently do).

Instead of ending credential theft (at least in cases that don't involve violence/coercion), the payment networks pass the cost on to vendors, then advertise fraud protection as a feature to card holders.

This only works because the payment processors' monopoly prevents the merchants from fixing the underlying security issue.

So, the payment networks charge the merchants a large percentage of sales (imagine what your local government could implement if it increased sales taxes by 3-5%!) to supposedly pay for fraud protection.

This is exactly like a classic protection racket, except that the thugs that smash up the business don't actually work for the credit card companies.

(I do agree with the premise that driving crime to zero is usually not worth the cost, but that's just "Innocent until proven guilty", and not the subject of the article.)
Yeah, hourly billing gets knocks, but I think it's the right approach for a lot of circumstances. If I can control the shape of the engagement and it's the kind of thing I've done enough that I can reliably predict the work needed, sure, project pricing is great. But if you're just putting in work on a project somebody else is leading, hourly's the way to go, because that insulates you from all sorts of risks.
That's why I used the phrase 'global general public'. Your average citizen in India, China or many other places is only going to see egg on Uncle Sam's face here.

I do agree that it makes SpaceX look better, especially in terms of Falcon 9. But their fate is so closely tied to Starship now that if it runs into serious problems and/or has to go back to the drawing board, the company's very viability could be threatened and it would be yet another big blow to the national image. Our hopes are riding on a lot of untested stuff right now, and the hype magnifies every failure along the way.
>Taken in isolation, the optimal amount is clearly zero.

But the very point of the article is to not take zero-fraud in isolation and instead, explain how non-zero-fraud is an unavoidable tradeoff when balancing 2 simultaneous goals:

- (1) prevent fraud transactions as much as practically possible

- (2) make legitimate transactions as easy as possible

If one accepts the premise of pursuing those 2 goals at the same time, then by definition, we're no longer talking about "in isolation". You've now unavoidably entered non-zero fraud territory.

Perhaps it's the author's particular wordsmithing of what he's trying to convey that just rubs many readers the wrong way.
> the promising results in question are actually quite slim

Promising results that occur outside of formal scientific settings still occur, although consciousness (possibly amplified by various pre-existing beliefs) can make it appear as if they do not. As luck would have it, psychedelics can be very helpful in sorting out one's thinking on such things.
Bitcoin. It can easily be confirmed as valid (zero chance of counterfeit), and is otherwise a bearer instrument with no further settlement, and impossible to reverse (like cash).
> it explicitly requires that the questions being posed are as far removed from policy decisions as possible (i.e., useless).

This is far from accurate. Sure you can pick a strawman example, but in reality questions can be posed and useful irregardless of what the politics are at the time.
Maybe Israel should stop shooting people on the Gazan side of the wall within the so called "buffer zone". Why one side shooting is good and the other side is bad?
>>Did this even happen? I cannot find any articles in which miners were told to learn to code.

Then I guess you really didn't look to hard:

https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/education/47...

snip:

"During a rally yesterday, Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden spoke to a crowd in Derry, N.H., a town that many miners call home. He acknowledged the economic setbacks and job insecurity that coal miners face these days, and gave them some advice: learn to code."
Light brightness and spectrum are associated with retinal damage. Blue light from LED overexposure can certainly do harm and can also affect your sleep cycle and hormone balance. I would not bake my eyes with these things anytime soon.
Especially if the burden of proof of fraud falls mostly on the consumer. This is how it works, we don't know the actual ratio of fraudulent vs ok cases so we compare accross institutions. If one institution is an outlier than arbitrarily changes the acceptance threshold pushing the cost to the grieving consumer.

If on the other hand the cost of misidentifying a case fell on the institution then they would simply accept only personally identified payments e.g. sms or other 2fa at virtually no cost for them and effectively zeroing fraud

In some places with more modern banking, this is pretty common
The article talks about how Saudi Arabia is not reinvesting it's profits on expanding oil extraction and chalks it onto higher costs to extract said oil without any proof. Another completely valid explanation is that the Saudi govt knows they can make pretty good profits for some time if they don't increase supply
This is genius and I wish I had read this comment a long time ago.
History as Mind Furniture
Ascendance of Bookworm is not Doctor Stone
Also, not means testing universal benefits means everybody appreciates them as just something their society does, so that reduces stigma for the beneficiaries and increases pride in your society. "We ensure children in this country have nutritious food" not "Why are my taxes going to feed this 10 year old whose mother has a full time job".

I grew up in an area where many parents could afford (maybe if they budget carefully, maybe just anyway) to privately educate a child. But they mostly didn't, because the government funded schools were pretty good. In fact, as children it was actually a minor stigma to be privately educated, because if your parents are spending a lot of money on the fancy school, either they don't know how to spend their cash (so they're stupid) or you're really stupid and they sent you to that school in the hope of making up for it. It was seen as like easy mode. Smart kids don't go to private school, why would they waste the money?
> Economics is a thin veneer we put over thermodynamics to make accounting easier.

Maybe you could link a source explaining this correlation with some examples? Otherwise, it just sounds like “higher salaries for more effort”, which is obviously false.
Sarah Boyd interview: ‘The Boys’ director
There’s nothing creative or secret about it, they make the most of their money in the Service department. All the doc fees or loan kickbacks, etc. are the same if its EV or ICE.

I think hesitancy by dealerships is in the long term EV’s require much less maintenance and that means their service and profits will be much less.
Luckily, it’s just a hydrogen leak and not something highly reactive that could explode just because you looked at it funny. /s

Hydrogen scares the bejeebus out of me. Did a high altitude balloon launch that was meant to be a hydrogen balloon. When attempting to purchase the tank of gas, the sales person went out of his way to educate/convince on the hazards. In the end, switched out everything needed to use helium instead. I knew nothing about it, but hydrogen tanks have connectors that are uniquely sized so that you can’t accidentally connect to a tank of hydrogen when you were expecting something else. I was convinced when he explained that the hydrogen fire has no color and is only noticeable when something else starts to burn. “You don’t want the first sign there’s a fire to be your arm burning”
The fact that businesses are anti-union should be all you need to know as to why you should support them. Workers and employers have nothing in common.
> "in an optimally-beneficial fraud prevention effort, the amount of fraud is non-zero".

Yeah, but that phrase won't get any clicks.

I gave up about half way through the article and just skimmed through the rest.
Posits have advantages for low-precision numbers, e.g. up to 32 bits.

For high-precision numbers, e.g. for 64 bits, the standard double-precision floating-point numbers are the best.

Any number format using a given number of bits has the same number of values that can be represented. The only difference between various formats, e.g. integers, fixed-point numbers, floating-point numbers or posits, is how the same number of points is distributed over the line of the real numbers, being more dense in some parts and more rare in other parts.

For scientific computation, the optimal distribution of the representable numbers is when the relative error is constant. The ideal number format would be logarithmic, but it is too difficult to add and subtract logarithmic numbers, so the second best format is used, i.e. floating-point numbers, which allow fast implementations for all important arithmetic operations.

Posits have a non-uniform relative error, low close too 1 and high for large and small numbers, so they are unsuitable for complex physics modelling, which needs more computations with large numbers and small numbers than with numbers close to 1.

On the other hand, for the applications where low-precision numbers are suitable, e.g. machine learning, graphics or some kinds of DSP, posits could be better than floating-point numbers.
> Taken in isolation, the optimal amount is clearly zero.

The post makes it clear that the discussion is not about theory or taking anything in isolation - it's about fraud in the real world. In that context, the way it's stated is correct - if you have zero fraud in the real world, that means that you designed the tradeoffs wrong and that the cost of your fraud prevention (in terms of actual dollars as well as inconvenience to customers, etc.) is greater than the overall cost would be if you allowed a small amount of fraud to occur (looking at the total cost of that fraud as well as the cost of preventing additional fraud).

I suppose the problem is that whether or not the title of the post is true or not depends on the context in which it's taken, and the title itself doesn't have any context. Since the post does offer context, though, I think it's reasonable to take the title in that context.
Great analogy re. appsec.

Risk is never zero and achieving it prevents everything.
a few months ago those same companies were complaining about "the great resignation" and how hard it was to hire and how they couldn't fill openings. Now they are talking about how many dead weight employees they have that they don't need

the experts giving "the best advice possible" are generally giving pretty terrible advice
“Money is ink on paper or bits in a computer.
Neither of those things runs a tractor or lets water flow.”

Yes but they tell the people who have the fuel and the water where they should send it: the highest bidder.

The person who is willing to spend the most money has:

a) acquired more money than competitors through smart decisions that have added value to people who have in turn given them their money

b) decided they have a more pressing need for those resources that they will outbid the other buyers rather than wait for a drop in prices or to seek an alternative.

If the buyer does not make good use of his newly acquired resources he will soon lose money and will not be able to compete with the other buyers.

This is how the economic system is meant to allocate resources. To people who have a proven track record of making decisions with successful outcomes.

If you start bailing out failures as happened in 2007-2009 you break this fundamental allocation of resources to where they will be most appropriately used based on the historical precedent of success. And when that happens you get what we have now, which is a breakdown of the entire system.
The Kubernetes IDE
The younger American middle-classs hate their HOAs but want unions at work. If you don’t like your HOA telling you how to cut your grass you’re also not going to like your union telling you how to do your job. Both are ostensibly democratic but in practice oppressive.
I don't believe this in a majority of my brain, but the thought has crossed my mind that China's draconian COVID response is to hide their real estate collapse and other macroeconomic problems.