skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As someone who has organized many dozens of events, and attended hundreds, my core thesis for running a good event is: "Make events attendees want"

The only good events are those made specifically to benefit the attendees of the event, not for the sponsors, not for the organizers.

There are many different formats for having a good event, there are lots of basic things that are important to get right. All of those things can seem intimidating, for good reason. It takes a special type of person to get all of the details of an event right.

That said, the events that I have enjoyed the most are the ones that I know were built solely for the benefit of the attendees.

This has been a tricky insight for me to get. Every event starts out as one to benefit the attendees. The issue is that at some point as an organizer, you need money: Finding a space to host the event, providing food, providing infrastructure. All of these things require money and once money is involved, you have to make a compromise somewhere to get that money.

The typical compromise that an event will make to get money is to get sponsors. Sadly, the traditional model for sponsorship is one that will insidiously shift the focus of the event from one that is built to benefit the attendees, to one that is built to benefit the sponsors.

To run an event that doesn't suck, you have to make the event for the benefit of the attendees.
You should probably read the rest of that paragraph. It specifically starts off with "this may seem overly deferential," and then goes into explaining it in more detail about what exactly they meant.

The way I read it, it's not about asking permission, per se, it's about setting expectations. "Head's up, I'm about to disagree with you." Also by giving them this ability to "opt in" to the disagreement, you're creating a relationship based on trust. In other words, they're hearing you respectfully express your thoughts and feelings, and that makes them _more_ likely to listen to you in the future, versus just barging in with your thoughts unannounced. (Contrariwise, if they say "no" too many times, then they don't trust you or your opinions -- and that's information for you to do what you wish!)

And sometimes? Your boss doesn't want you to disagree, they just want you to execute, saving both of you the time and energy of arguing.

You may still disagree, and you may not like their decision to just execute, but at the end of the day, they're the boss and you aren't. You're free to get another job!

As a leader in my company, I welcome disagreement early on. But at some point, we have to execute and we can't get stuck in a stalemate because I want A and you want B. Someone has to make a decision, and as the superior, that responsibility lies with me (or in some contexts, it lies with my superior, even if I disagree!).

(P.S. You are allowed to disagree with your parents, too!)
Why add a keyword when you don't need it?
Charl-e: “Stable Diffusion on your Mac in 1 click”
> Transpiling to C++ means it will work wherever C++ works.

It also means you don't really benefit from any of the new semantics. Why do all of that static analysis work to establish safety, and then throw the results away by writing out clunky old C++? It all makes very little sense.
I don't "favor censorship", I favor people not being forced to store and serve content they object to. It doesn't require technicalities or side arguments.

If the government wants all speech to be available, it can provide a space for that itself.
The primary component of an event must be to know what its purpose is. After the event, if everybody had fun and would go again, but nobody learned anything new or met any new people, would the event be considered a success? The referenced “RINGKNOCKER” events would not be, since they had other explicit goals. The event must be designed to be fun to attend while maximizing the actual goal of the event.

Far too many people seem to believe that the goal of any and all events is simply “fun”, and leave it at that.
I'm distinguishing between the content of the message (wire fraud) and defrauding the telecom itself by exploiting the system itself.

I am confident you have absolutely no examples of cancelling a customer because of the voice data they transmitted inside of a call, to another person.
Doesn't ProtonMail the company fight back on most inquiries and demands and they get and that French thing was just one of the ones they lost the ground on because France used Europol contacts to file the warrant Switzerland?
(Might be misremembering)
These articles make it sound like people waste many hours creating cases for disagreeing with someone with more role power than you.

It's really not that difficult to show the right amount of candor while being objective about the disagreement.

This doesn't have to be a game of chess where you overanalyze your every move. People will respect the fact you said something that might be the elephant in the room anyway.

The challenge is that these articles assume that you're working with vindictive egotists, and there's plenty of those in corporate America.
Xorg, the original super-app.
The Immorality of ‘The Godfather’
"yet our output is affected by what we experience in other parts of life, unrelated to the art we create."

Right, and what happens when you let that loop feedback to itself?

An asphalt road on every corner, so we build more asphalt roads, we design only what has been designed before. Amplify this thousands of time through computer generated design, the feedback loop is closed and unchanging. Unless your goal is actually to create an independent organism (different moral issue), you are creating sophisiticated feedback loops, not worthwhile content generation. Unless by content generation you mean endless remixing...which is not the same.

Sort of like changing the color of a 3d model and claiming it is a new race with new attributes, as is often done on the cheap e.g. in videogames.
I think you problably never witnessed the brutal effiency of modern logging machines. It's quite a sight to behold. These are very expensive machines, so they are typically not owned by the people owning and maintaining the forests.

Yes, it's not zero, but when comparing the extra co2 cost these machines add compared to the fossil fuel alternatives, it might as well be. In a few years they'll probably start to
be battery powered, charged via clean nuclear and water power.
Under modern law, basically everything that expresses anything is considered speech under the First Amendment. Just last year (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahanoy_Area_School_District_v....), some angry Snapchat messages were given First Amendment protection.
I'm not the parent post and I have not tried autopilot, but I do have a question.

Does autopilot make you orders of magnitude more productive?
According to the website 80,000 Hours, the typical career is just that: 80,000 hours long. That’s an almost unfathomable amount of time. But life is long too. The typical person is alive for slightly more than 4,000 weeks, and awake and conscious for the equivalent of 3,000 weeks. When you do the basic math on 80,000 hours, you discover that the average career is roughly the equivalent of 480 sleepless weeks of labor. A little bit more math, and you realize that the typical person has five waking hours of not working for every one hour of their career.

Careers are not the mere linear progression of titles ascending toward the “C” acronyms: CMO, CTO, CEO. Better to think of your working life not in one dimension, but in two: the horizontal exploration of ideas, skills, and tasks, and vertical commitments to a single line of work that really fits.
TermVideo: View Video Files in a Terminal
They don't? Apple and google exist
This seems pretty blatantly unconstitutional. I’d be fine if it added due process for getting banned or something. But it doesn’t, it compels speech. Now HN can no longer ban people for low quality memes or flamebait. Or did the judges write an HN exception into their opinion?
If the aperture is below 0.50m, it should be subject to US Department of Commerce’s Commerce Control List (CCL) of dual-use technologies governed by the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) — not ITAR. How big is the aperture? Did something else qualify it as being under scope of ITAR?

SOURCES:

https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/satellite-export-controls...

https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/proceedings/Download?urlI...

* (might try reaching out to author’s of paper above to see if they have any suggestions)

Personally, I would not make to much of how people respond to you independently trying to complete paperwork. My guess is it’s more likely related to any non-consumer system that requires paperwork not wanting to deal with non-professionals and/or give legal advice.

____

Unrelated, do you have a breakdown of the SatComm expense by type product/vendor and/or utility fees/rates and expected utilization?
yeah we prefer the illusion of 2-3 conglomerates
If you are going to use a centralize database coupled with edge compute, you may end up with far worse end-to-end latencies if your compute<->db does multiple roundtrips per request (which is fairly common in practice). In most cases, you need compute and db to be colocated.

I am skeptical of edge compute being generalizable. I do forsee a bright future for it for embarrassingly parallel problem space, where data sharding can be done cleanly based on an end user.
A government-held database of fetuses, what could go wrong? "Our records show you had a fetus but no subsequent birth. Provide proof of a natural miscarriage or be subject to a criminal investigation."
I don't think spammers are a protected class.
In Canadian provinces, bait fishing in streams is often illegal.
That sounds like a reasonable point, from a purist business perspective.

I have a tendency to assume the big players like meta have many pockets of inefficiency with respect to engineering headcount, and that many projects aren't very important (or even negative) to the bottom line. Maybe that's not true.

It still sounds like they are taking a low friction path, and a little more effort here might result in a decision that has better social outcome. There's not enough info to say that with real certainty though.
They recently hired consultants.
I kinda hate how the "across emerging markets" superapps are just the last paragraph and the 98% of the article is about wechat which everyone already knows about. How are those superapps doing in other markets? That would be interesting information.
You either didn't read the article or misread it.

Option B didn't and couldn't have had a massive tax burden. The $700M in the title is referring to option A.

The company only has ~$100M in profits to tax in the first place.

Non-paywall: https://archive.ph/ifEzF
Unless the offices are empty, their kitchen areas are going to get rather grody if nobody is cleaning them up. And I can’t see the admins (if any are left) doing this, nor the engineers. Penny wise and pound foolish.
Uncommitted Logic Array.

It was a semi-custom chip type, where the silicon layer was standardised but the metal layers varied by customer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gate_array
> They go on to claim the 1st Amendment has a role to play in determining permissible restrictions on corporate censorship

How on earth did they arrive at that? I'm reading the text of the First Amendment and it's explicitly only talking about the government. These people call themselves Originalists?
And this is why the us supreme court will throw out this appellate ruling. They really don't like grey zones.
Unrelated: Does anyone know of a platform that has court opinions in HTML?
Thanks for writing it out. I always tried to tune out the words. The sound is grating.
Whatever you do don't burn yourself out. Make sure you're doing what makes you happy, and not what you feel like you "have" to do for one reason or another
Didn't stop the Supreme Court from reverting the Roe v Wade "superprecedent" recently.
In theory I agree with you. Unfortunately this is a very, um, privileged way of viewing this aspect of the world. A lifetime of selection bias clouds, wherefrom this strategy works for you, but would not if tried by an other.
It's more like saying that iOS is a browser. But that's precisely backwards. iOS is an operating system. Browsers are also basically operating systems. Superapps also behave like operating systems. This is probably where the "superapp is like a browser" sentiment comes from.
Apple end game:

Apple ISA. Might take them a decade, but in the end, they will eventually do all their own thing.
Went to a great Google event where you got a bag only as you left. In fact I wasn't even aware there was a bag until I was leaving and one was nicely passed to me. Had some nice bits to share around the office, and also some things I still have to hand. And a Google home mini - a chunk of the people who came with me moved to the Google home devices after that event, after being amazon people before.
Quick googling seems to indicate no (other than the use of "Year of our Lord," an expression to refer to dates). Apparently all of the state constitutions do, so this was obviously an intentional omission.
this is amazing. So simple and beautiful. And photos are incredible!
And stop blocking off exits for crowd control when the effect is that everyone's maps, which never list the blocked off exits, are useless.
Reddit is still a free for all - including porn
They're not technicalities; they're the essence of the balance point where the First Amendment hinges. To bend the old saw, "your right to free speech ends where my right to free press begins."
The main function returns zero implicitly if control flow reaches the end without encountering a return statement.
If you try to improve your human connections by grading them according to audio quality you will go in the wrong direction.
Agreed, but the browser never got the identity/contacts bit down. So what would be a relatively simple social app when you can rely on your existing social graph becomes much more complicated and loses out on network effects when it has to be its own completely independent site.

Now, I’m not saying we should have this as a centralized app either. The closest and most interesting thing I’ve seen along these lines in a decentralized approach is https://spritely.institute/
Yeah, no redundancy could account for it, which is why confident predictions that the Titanic was uniquely unlikely to sink due to the presence of redundant systems were so ridiculous.

Keep that in mind next time you think your system is ultra-reliable because you have 50 instances of every service, but they're all running in us-east-1.
> Burn wood that is sourced somewhat locally (for me, typically 1-2 km, but I think even hundreds of km would make sense)

This is unlikely to matter much for carbon (modern ocean shipping is ridiculousy efficient, assuming the goods have a long shelf life). However, you need to do this to avoid spreading tree diseases and invasive insects.

> Burn the wood quickly at a high temperature to minimize particle emissions. This is quite effective.

For about $2000 you can get a 80% efficient wood stove with minimal emissions. It will have a catalytic, and can cleanly burn wood extremely slowly. It takes me about 36-48 hours to really get ours going in an efficient smoke free way. (It dumps smoke at startup, then you need to establish a solid coal bed.)

These are mandated by California, at least. Example model:

https://www.woodstovesguide.com/blaze-king-wood-stove-pricin...

https://www.blazeking.com/products/wood-stoves/princess-clas...
I used to code for a language called "Spad" — originally shipped in 1972(?). The syntax:

x : t = e

Was called "headform" and was the only syntactic form for the whole language. (Expressions used a shunting yard algorithm to desugar into a sequence of headform.)

The language included modules, classes, parameterics, functions, constraints, ..., whatever.
Other people playing with and using it decrease his ability to make breaking changes freely.
I’ve been writing Python professionally for over 20 years, and I’ve needed to use the things here once. It was highly encapsulated inside one module of an ORM-type project, where other code wanted to use it without having to know anything about its implementation details.

You can do these things in the extremely rare cases that you must, but other than that you shouldn’t.
Nope. The fact that it doesn't when the people who wrote it had some inkling that one existed always seemed like strong evidence to me that they intended to keep government and church from meddling in each other's affairs. It seems like they always intended for us mere mortals (religious or not, and regardless of religion) to be responsible for figuring out right from wrong and making sure the Constitution reflected that evolving understanding.
Can reflections in eyeglasses leak info from Zoom calls?
> I’ve been reading what you linked and I see nowhere that the all the same legal rights of PEOPLE were applied to corporations for millennia. Not sure if you actually found that either?

Ability to partake in contracts, due process of law, have internal rules of conduct (like having a conscience). Are these not rights that both both 'types of persons' have?

> There are therefore two kinds of legal entities: human and non-human. In law, a human person is called a natural person (sometimes also a physical person), and a non-human person is called a juridical person (sometimes also a juridic, juristic, artificial, legal, or fictitious person, Latin: persona ficta).

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_person

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juridical_person

IANAL.
Tried it for a couple of years, and as many already said, its more that its different than that its a lot better or worse than the altrrnative.
Solar+heat pump is cheaper than a tractor
So we can agree that some interpretations are bad/wrong/illogical?
I think it's more about losing control.
As soon as the documentation is open, there is a lot more pressure to explain the decisions made in an accurate or accepted fashion.
Add some good old bike-shedding or contributions that miss the point and a project that was once fun becomes tedious to work for.
Transpiling and compiling are turtles all the way down.

It's a bit more complicated than, say, typescript to JavaScript, but in spirit is not so very different, right?
Ooh, I like the analogy to family-owned conglomerates. Also not something you see a lot of in the US because of the structure of US finance.
This is an interesting model, and there's nothing stopping someone from starting a social media site that works like this. But that doesn't mean that existing ones should be forced to use this model. Let's try them both (and others) and see which ones work best for their users.
It’s founded in natural law, not modern conceptions of positive law. The framers wouldn’t understand why the answer to your question would matter.
Open standards body for digital wallets announced
We should stop trying to find analogies to historical precedent. Social media is an entirely new beast of the 21st century without any comparison.

A new paradigm and mindset around free speech is needed, because social media and unfettered unmoderated free speech can't simultaneously coexist without collapsing our society.
This is not true. You can verify it by setting showdead to yes in your profile. Such comments are not that common.
But "acts" that aren't obviously speech acts are not generally regarded as speech.

For example, you have the freedom to say, "nobody should be allowed to paint their house pink", but you don't have the freedom to act on this view, by over-painting someone else's pink house. Similarly, free speech gives one the right to say, "this post ought to be removed", but it does not follow that the right to free speech allows one to actually remove the post. Of course, it might be that there are other reasons why one has the right to remove the post, but arguments about "free speech" or "compelled speech" seem to miss the point.
Yes, it would be very interesting if there was a material in it that hasn't been discovered yet. I imagine there are conditions out there, way out there, that bring forth conditions that aren't available here that could create new things not seen here.
The next deep magic Linux program to change the world? io_uring
On author's Instagram https://www.instagram.com/charlescellist/ there's a new (not featured on the website) photo of Kawai Grand Piano that looks like a corridor on a space station. Absolutely amazing.
I'm the opposite right now. I had a startup then joined FAANG. Spent the last 8yr in product at Google + Coinbase, and now I have the startup itch more than ever before. Maybe the grass is always greener.

What is it about your current route that is leaving you unhappy?
Because you don't actually work with the C++ output I guess? Same with Kotlin/Java — there's no difference in nullable vs non-nullable types for example. But as long as your codebase is 100% Kotlin, you get proper null safety, and there's no need to fall back to what Java has
>people not being forced to store and serve content they object to

Corporations are not people. I agree that small independent websites hosted in someone's basement should have the right to pick and choose what they host, but when your service becomes so popular and widely used that it's effectively a standard public communication platform (and is marketed as such), the rules should change.
Porn is and has always been very political
How are any of the guarantees lost as long as the resulting C++ code isn't touched?
Everything here seems pretty fine (if basic), So often I see engineers screw this up, usually by forgetting a few things:

* They only have some of the information, and don’t account for that fact.

* Their goals aren’t the same as a leader’s goals.

* The leader has ownership of the larger outcome, and may want to make tradeoffs that are suboptimal for an individual person or team, but may ultimately be good for the overall outcome.

* Being technically correct isn’t a “trump” card, it doesn’t mean everything.

If I were a better writer I’d explain this better, but often you can tell who is used to thinking at a high level and who is used to hammering out details, based on these kind of conversations. Either you recognize your visibility and responsibility or you don’t.
Even in India all the super apps failed spectacularly.
Detroit Community Technology Project
like how if someone looses a hand in your factory, they get compensation?
I'd say https://gitlab.com/exotracker/exotracker-cpp has fairly decent code quality (though I'm obviously biased as the author), but it's not feature-complete or useful, and I've put it on hiatus because it's a struggle to implement high-level editing, mouse interaction, copy-paste, etc.
> I can’t help but suspect the true motivations of anyone who opposes the ruling

We don't want society to collapse as unfettered conspiracy theories cause fascists to get elected and 500k deaths due to anti-vax brainwashing. That's actually our true motivation.
will update my posteriors when i see some evidance contradicting my a priories.
I'm not following. How does your personal anecdote lead you to believe the tweets are bulls**?
.. this doesn't make sense at all. If you prove that a program is safe in language A, it doesn't magically become unsafe when transpiled to language B. Every language works by clunking out instruction sets mostly devised in the 1970/80s, this doesn't remove the safety properties of the higher level language.