skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> and don't let the slower people in the group take a good rest after you rest to let them catch up you look like and ARE functionally an asshole.

This is every hike I've ever taken with my family on vacations. I'd always lag behind and finally catch up—out of breath—and the second I'd arrive the family would continue.

This conditioned me to hate hiking and physical activity. Then I started hiking with good friends who didn't even make it a problem to just casually hike with me, even if they could go faster. They're good folks.
How'd you come about this understanding? Very little of what you wrote here reflects my experience there.
FWIW, I chose to make my side project I've been working on for the last couple years an entirely vanilla js SPA. The biggest downside I've noticed vs using something like React is my speed of development is much slower. The upside though is the code itself is extremely efficient / packages sizes are small.

For my own project this is great - I have no deadlines, and half of the process is me just enjoying writing the code. For an existing company the demands are different. Not only are there time pressures, but aligning on something like React means you're introducing convention into the code. Hiring people who already know this convention is easy.

Vanilla js, even with webcomponents, just isn't quite there as far as convention and speed go, and there isn't a rich community around it. Is it perfectly able to do the task at hand? Absolutely, but at a price most companies aren't willing to pay. React is the easier of the two.
That’s actually all I use for state management. Elements pass data to children through attributes and bubble data up through events. It’s worked well for us on a complex front-end using native web components.
Sharepoint is similarly entrenched at DOE when I worked with them in 2009. Any project that gets a bid contract can't say specifically that it must use Sharepoint, but the requirements will be written in such a way that Sharepoint is literally the only system that fits all of them.
From a quick google, steam turbines cost about 50% more than gas turbines.[1][2] Gas is $500-700/kW, steam is $670-1140/kW.

That's easily compensated by the higher capacity factor of non-storage applications (since storage turbines, calculated above, cost 100% more per kWh due to idle time). Also, storage has to add the cost of the electrolyzer and ammonia storage tanks.

On top of that, round-trip efficiency of energy storage via ammonia is only about 30%.[3] So if your solar farm costs $20/MWh, your cost of stored energy is over $60/MWh before accounting for turbine/electrolyzer costs.

This means you can easily be competitive with a steam turbine plus a heat source that costs $60/MWh, at least for baseload.

[1] https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/ges-new-gas-tur...

[2] pdf: https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/09/f33/CHP-Stea...

[3] https://www.ammoniaenergy.org/articles/round-trip-efficiency...
No mention of the Golden Bough, no Jung, no Levi-Strauss.

Author has no idea what they're on about. This amounts to a hot take on an entire field of study, viewed through a very narrow and specific ideological lens. No self awareness.
I genuinely don't understand all these replies about "sTaY iN tHe GrOuP". Sure, if you keep stopping, waiting for others then going straight away that's kinda assholey, but so is demanding that others stop and carry on with you when they don't want to. Starting as a group shouldn't mean ending as a group. I mean, read what you just wrote.

> If you don't want to wait for others, then ... go hiking by yourself.

That's literally what's happening when you start with a group but don't want to wait for others........... If the others are slow and have no intent to speed up, you should be perfectly free to speed off, without judgement from the group. Otherwise it's just a frustrating experience for everyone.
> Their value is only in being 'the other guy', not in actually creating a valuable product for consumers

Mozilla's value to Google might be only being "the other guy", but Mozilla is valuable to me (a consumer) because they are producing a Firefox, which is a product I consider valuable.

Obviously I would prefer that Mozilla can find a self-sustainable business model to support Firefox development. But if I had to choose between "Mozilla doesn't exist" and "Mozilla exists only because it gets money from Google", then I choose the latter.
Nobody is suggesting that he "simply" lucked out. But this part makes no sense: "I feel that boiling it down to luck is pretty insulting to all the work people have put into putting SpaceX a decade or two ahead of the rest of the world."

One, there's no conflict between believing that Musk was lucky and other people worked hard. Two, if the hard labor of "the best rocket engineers around" was what made SpaceX successful, then that helps prove the point that Musk's reputation as a genius technical innovator is perhaps overblown.

> I doubt that they have any concerns about their income.

That is spoken like somebody who has never been through a lawsuit. Or incurred the disfavor of somebody powerful. You can bet that every one of the people who has worked for Musk has signed agreements that would let him brutalize them in court for years. Lawsuits, even ones you are confident of winning, are incredibly stressful and draining. If Musk is happy to fire people just for criticizing him privately, there's no reason to think he wouldn't sue somebody for publicly making him look like an asshole. So as with Jobs, they tell the positive stories loudly and the negative ones quietly or not at all.

> Musk appears to at least be able to keep up with technical details enough to be able to discuss them with technically oriented YouTubers.

Oh dang, YouTubers? Well then.

As a person who has spent years doing anti-abuse work, including at Twitter, I can tell you that what he's been saying about Twitter's issues has a plausible gloss but is both ignorant and wrongheaded. Musk is happy to pretend to be an expert genius when he doesn't know shit. That gets lots of Twitter/YouTube likes, but that's not what matters when running a real business.

Or we could look at his attempts to automate the Tesla factories. Tesla almost went bankrupt because this nominal genius vastly overestimated what was possible, ignoring decades of manufacturing experience in favor of huffing his own... vapors. This was a multi-billion dollar error.

So is it possible that he was helpful technically at SpaceX? Sure. But it's also possible that the difference at SpaceX is that he had a stronger staff that kept him at bay while they did their "best rocket engineers" thing.
Thanks. I had the impression this book and his work was widely regarded. I'll have to put a mental asterisk next to some of the stories I was blown away by.
Yep. I have seen these errors

botocore.errorfactory.InternalServerError: An error occurred (InternalServerError) when calling the GetParameter operation (reached max retries: 4): Server busy. Please try again.

botocore.errorfactory.InternalServerError: An error occurred (InternalServerError) when calling the GetParameter operation (reached max retries: 4): No Content-Type received. Service returned the HTTP status code: 500
Consider privacy. I'd wager that most people on HN would prefer it if major social media and advertising companies were doing more than waiting for legislation and implementing the bare minimum. "Privacy" in the aggregate is vague rather than concrete. Similarly, you could imagine a team who is responsible for addressing actual policy concerns around things like amplifying sectarian violence and also having a broader and more vague mission around "harm".
I don't get a chance to read many comments that cost $40k to make. Thanks.
Quite so. Imagine agreeing to do any other activity together with someone else, and then immediately separating yourself from them because you decide that is more efficient. Agree to, say, cook a meal with someone -- but you decide to just prepare your own portion, and then go do something else while they are still trying to figure out how to chop some unusual vegetable.

Is that person ever going to want to cook a meal with you again? I suspect not, and you can't force them to. Instead, show them how to chop that vegetable, maybe discuss general technique, maybe even divide labor in a more reasonable way -- whatever works best for the two of you. It will probably take you longer, but you'll probably also get to do the collaborative activity again.
It really is generic Jungian horseshit. I find it so bad (and with such airs of pseudo-profundity) that it actually complicated my feelings about Bill Moyers, about whom I like everything else.

edit: I don't even know how you discuss it for more than five minutes. Whenever discussion about this Hero's Journey gets specific, it gets obviously wrong. The lane the discussion stays in is endless cherry-picking of particular events from stories and calling them examples. I get that you can tell a story about a hero taking a journey, what I want to know is why you think that most stories are about a hero taking a journey, or why that's more important than any other story, like a woman trying to start a stationary shop. And don't tell me that the woman is the hero, and the stationary shop is the journey.
Was thinking of Frances Haugen revealing her identity coinciding with the market drop [1]. I dunno; IANAB (Banker)

[1] https://www.barrons.com/articles/facebook-stock-tech-apple-5....
Vanilla html/css/js are great for static sites, but once you start building an application it gets more difficult to manage state: both on the page, and with the backend that stores user data.

What you're saying is similar to saying "I don't understand why someone would use Django, can't I just use the python http.server for an API and psycopg to connect to postgres?"

The answer is yes, you can do that, but over time you'll find that there are pitfalls with a bare-bones approach that are easily avoided by using higher-level frameworks. Mostly the spaghetti that someone else mentioned, but also getting caught up in technical details that the frameworks have mostly already abstracted away.
Your comment looks like a close call. The "moral obsequiousness" thing was probably too sharp and personalized, and if you're arguing that someone who is being broadly mourned is unworthy of warm regard, you probably want to make that point in more than just two sentences. As your statements get more controversial, they need to be written more carefully, because you have to consider more than just the impact of your ideas on the world, but also how your writing will affect the thread: even if you're absolutely right and making an important, intellectually curious point, if the way you writes it starts a 30 comment slapfight, you've done more harm than good.

I think if you'd written this comment on any other day, it wouldn't have been singled out, and also that there's a colorable argument that you got swept up in a bunch of really awful comments that happened to express the same sentiment.

But also: you could have just put more effort into it. As it stands, the comment you're talking about could be persuasive only to someone who takes your word on things, because it doesn't support any of the arguments it makes.

(I don't care at all about QE2 other than to say that I once made a joke about the death of Princess Diana in a bar in Calgary a few months after the event, and that is a mistake I won't make again, so there might be something to the idea that being casually and curtly dismissive of the Commonwealth's feeling about the queen is a poor arguing strategy.)
I think these sort of "Responsible Innovation Teams" and whatever else they are called are double-evil for various reasons:

1) They are literally created by these companies as a means for deflecting attention from the real problems that are occurring at a higher / hidden level. For example, these people have no idea that Facebook has actively lobbied to prevent countries from enacting a digital tax that would more fairly spread the tax revenue associated with profits generated in countries around the world. There's nothing these people would ever do about that in their "work."

2) The people who take these jobs are generally quite terrible. They are willing to accept a paycheck from a company whose ethics and tactics they supposedly find reprehensible. If we take their jobs at face value, they are paid to show up every day and hate what they see and criticize it. It takes a certain type of toxic mental state to find that appealing, regardless of how much money you're making for doing it. And, if you're motivated by money to take such a job, well... What does that say about you?

3) These teams spread the false belief that these companies are so big and powerful that you have to try to "fix it from within," rather than doing what we have done so well for so long in the tech industry: we've burned these empires to the ground and started all over, with something better/faster/[eventually] bigger.

4) People within the organization who know that these teams exist for regulatory / PR purposes think that they've been given cover to continue to act in shady and unethical ways. These sorts of groups perversely make it easier for the bad actors within these organizations to continue acting bad, and sometimes even act worse. Facebook and its current/former executives are the gold standard for this: the more you see "regrets," "internal dissent," etc, the more utterly depraved and shameless the behavior behind the scenes is.

In summary: Bad people working for bad companies that do bad things. Pointless jobs at best, a net negative at worst. These are toxic jobs that attract toxic people.

Thankfully, none of this really matters, because Meta/Facebook is slowly disintegrating and there's nothing Zuckerberg or anyone else can do about it.

(And before someone posts the inevitable "2 billion active users" response, do remember that these are network effect businesses in which the network effects need to be constantly replenished with new and exciting reasons to stay connected. If people are more excited to be connected somewhere else, you're dying. And, the sort of people who invent exciting new reasons to be connected don't work at evil corporations that silo "responsible innovation" off from the "real work.")
Thanks! I'll start checking various Meny locations as I pass them.
All this proves is Turing's methodology is flawed. It ignores the primary question in a vain attempt to create an oddity.

What good does it do for the "hints" to do the work of Python, Pascal, C++ or anything else for that matter?

It does "hints". Does it do "hints" well? If yes, then it provides value.
I think you're misplacing blame for this, I don't think the engineers are the root cause of this problem. Why don't these devices let people set their own custom codephrases? I suspect that wouldn't fly with management/marketing etc, who want to create a marketable brand out of the codeword. In fact I'm virtually certain that engineers at amazon weren't the ones who chose the name "Alexa" in the first place, that decision probably went through a dozen squared meetings and committees of marketers and PR people.
You commented about my code quality, but I will assume you were in a rush and missunderstood that I was talking about work in progress stuff and debugging, so if that was teh case I apologize (if is not the case then you might understand in a few years)
Yea, I mean I was born in the 90s, and I have to say the ads are really really enjoyable. I love the amount of depth and detail, and the longer-form article style that they use.
There were a few things that bothered me in that statement.

"what did you expect to happen" blames the victim.

"Police officer is as likely to engage in domestic violence as a cat is to kill a bird outside" is not a strong analogy. I think almost all young cats would kill birds outside. It's a far cry form "a far higher rate".

As a rhetorical device, it falls flat because it argues for something obvious by comparing it to something obscure. It would work better the other way - if you were on a thread talking about domestic violence and comparing it to cats killing birds.

Men commit violence at a far higher rate than women. But it's still lower than the "what did you expect" threshold.
Probably best not to tell HR that there's a joke going around that your team should be laid off. Wouldn't want to give them any ideas.
Using RDP to control your work laptop with your own setup
Quentin Tarantino settles NFT lawsuit with Miramax
It really isn't.

AirPods are a case where I broke my rule of thumb with Apple, not to buy in to a new product line until the fourth iteration. And sure enough, they've been a little flaky, my first-gen not-Pros developed a terrible crackle and had to be replaced.

But fixing flakiness with Apple stuff by buying a new one works more than you might think. They do actually iterate on reliability (not you macOS).

Man, finding them in the cushions might be worth the cash all by itself. The ones I have do the one-ear thing like one in ten (?) times, and I swear quietly and stick them back in the case. Reboot them a few times a month.

So, fine really, could be better. If they were a bit worse I'd run out and get the new ones.
> helping the disadvantaged raises the mean level

In the future. And even then, not necessarily. So for those advantaged it looks a lot like a forced investment of dubious profitability. Of course they oppose it.

> A rising tide lifts all boats

It has been shown several times that no, this doesn't necessarily work in economics, it is entirely possible that the rising tide will only lift the boats of the rich.
An excellent question, let me elaborate.

- On the first instance I contacted apple via their customer support chat. It took about 30 minutes to get replacements shipped to me.

- On the second instance, the problem was well-established, so they just shipped me new ones.

- On the third instance, they asked me to go in to a local Apple Store, and that did take a bit longer.

In fact, I'm due for round 4 here soon. There's no stopping the dusty environment.

I'm pretty demanding of headphones - 2 pairs of jaybirds died horribly under the same circumstances and the company would only replace the first set. A cheap set of Aukey buds fared considerably better and they still have life left in them.

The tight integration of the airpods with my other apple devices and the perks, plus the overall sound quality and excellent noise cancellation around loud equipment more than make up for the hassle of a free replacement rigamarole every year. I've been pleased with them since I received them as a gift in December of 2019, and I'm absolutely not upset in the slightest that there have been problems. Fortune has smiled upon me with regard to my experiences with Apple products.
Digressing here, but...

That show is incredibly good. I'm not quite done with the first season (two more episodes, will likely be watching them both tonight), but it's very interesting.

I think a lot of people at first think that if they could have an operation done that makes them essentially skip their work day, they'd jump at the chance. This show really shows how there could be serious problems with that.
Appreciate you've bowed out of this discussion, but what you're saying makes no sense to me, because then we would just say things are or are not Turing machines. The reason we have the term "Turing complete" and not just "Turing machine" is precisely the fact that nothing can literally be a Turing machine, and we need a useful term in discussions of computability nonetheless. The analysis as to whether or not a system is Turing complete or not is done with respect to the operations it can perform, not its memory capacity, or even the time over which is performs the operations, both of which are always assumed to be "enough" rather than infinite.
Getting CloudFront internal errors preventing deployment...

`An error occurred (ServiceUnavailable) when calling the CreateInvalidation operation (reached max retries: 2): CloudFront encountered an internal error. Please try again.`
It's not what I gained. It's what I would have lost.
My airpod pros had this issue and were manufactured mid October 2020 and two months out of warranty. Apple refused to replace them.
"50 million cycles" is a meaningless measure far detached from the actual work being done. You're choice of front end framework has almost nothing to do with total CPU use: how the text box looks (rounded corners, drop shadow) has far more impact on cycles overall.

But it doesn't matter. Cycles are not in shortage. CPUs are mostly idle. If something takes less than 16ms to complete, you simply won't notice.
Needed, but does this have any chance of passing?
Lazarus hackers are using Log4j to hack US energy companies
Meta can (kinda) guess what you’ve heard via your brain waves
Can you build Microsoft word or google maps or any of the 100s of other moderately complex web apps without a framework?
That is very much not my experience. At all. I just tested it again, in case something had changed recently without my notice, and a friend with whom I only use SMS responded within five seconds of me hitting send, so clearly there was no delay of any kind when sending the message, let alone a ten-second-plus delay! That sounds very broken, and you might want to contact your phone service provider about it.

Unless...are you perhaps talking about when someone with whom you previously used iMessage is offline, or switches away from iOS, and the Messages app first tries iMessage, and only when that fails, falls back to SMS? Because that process includes a delay (while it tries to establish an iMessage link). But that should only happen in very limited circumstances for a very limited period of time. That's the only thing other than service issues I can think of that you might mean.
> How many elite should there be?

The number we have today minus those unemployed minus those on responsible innovation teams. (Using the broad definition of elites, which captures pretty much everyone who went to college.)
When I got 4k monitors, I enabled double pixel mode, and adjusted the fonts to be bigger. Solved 99% of visibility issues (playlist buttons are small, but the playlist itself is fine).
You said western standards of living, but don't you really mean modern standards of living? I don't think people in Russia or Japan or Singapore or China are doing much better with respect to cacoa, coltan, etc...
I don't know much about academia, but I'd expect journals would force authors to remove preprints given the opportunity. Better for this to be impossible, imo.
Very much disagree. Good security teams, good privacy teams and good accessibility teams should understand that their highest priority should always still be to ship product. Their job should just be to make sure that the product that ships is secure, ensures privacy and is accessible.

The difference between these things and something like a "Responsible Innovation Team" is that the goals of the latter are often poorly defined and amorphous. What does "Responsible Innovation" really even mean? But contrast that with, for example, security goals, which are primarily "don't get breached". Security folks, privacy folks and accessibility folks should all have a very well-defined job to do. For the other "PR-focused" teams, they usually have to make work up to justify their jobs.

Note that, obviously, it's also possible to have bad security people, for example, who only see their job as to throw up roadblocks and demand that your security checklist is ever-growing. I'd even say these are the majority of "security" people. But the good security people who are able to integrate themselves successfully into your product development processes are worth their weight in gold.
WihomPay