skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Congratulations on the launch, it seems to be getting better all the time both the platform and the docs.
I'm sure this will take off.
There are even more flavours of diabetes each with their own complications
The problem is simple: in the past software was made to solve human problems, now and not since now is built to exploit most human problem for few humans profits.

Witch means that in the past the capitalistic model was: I solve someone else problem and get paid for that. Win-win. Now and not from now is I exploit others problem, I create DELIBERATELY new issues to be solved to earn more. Lose-win.

Until enough people realize that and not only say stop but start looking for plain old feral, raw, bloody REVENGE the lose-win model will keep winning. When, because at a certain point that happen, revenge will arrive, than we fall down to a pre-IT age because almost ALL things built in the past will be long forgotten and no one remain knowing how to makes thing for the people, not against them.

That's the simple sharing problem: to exploit users modern surveillance capitalism create proprietary human networks/service, like a citizenship with State border impeding peer communications. In the west essentially all criticize Chinese "great firewall" while not understanding that WhatsApp is a more powerful "great firewall" simply because is designed from the start to be a CLOSE network. The same happen with all other proprietary services. In the past, from Usenet to emails passing though XMPP communications systems was designed to communicate with the world so they was open to all, not walled garden. That's the "modern sharing issue", the same for instance that locks ipv6 to AVOID on purpose giving any device a global to been able to communicate IP2IP freely.
Thanks for the comment. You can check out an example component here:
https://github.com/andz-bb/budibase-component-star-rating
It just looks that Russians themselves don't want to die in the war but otherwise supported it.

I was reading vk.com and generally there was 1 post or comment against the war in Ukraine for every 10 or 20 posts pro-war.

Now the ratio is 1 post against the draft versus 1 post pro-draft.

You see the change? Russians mostly supported the war and those few people who were ready to protest against the war were simply overwhelmed and suppressed by those who supported it. Some people live in bubble where they see that everybody around them thinks similarly to them but that doesn't seem to be the whole reality in Russia.

I am not convinced about the resistance against covid restrictions in Russia. Russia had its own share of lockdowns and restrictions. It wasn't as free as Sweden. It avoided some most stupid ones like vaccine mandates. But the UK also didn't have vaccine mandates. Was it due to people actively resisting? Possibly, but I don't think you had something so active as Canadian convoy in February 2022. It can rather be explained that the authorities were not really very eager to introduce those measures in the first place. When they encountered even lukewarm resistance, they gave up because vaccine mandates were not effective at all.

Look, Russia had abysmal vaccination rates among elderly (the only measure that really mattered). That shows the failure of public health institutions. The UK (no mandates) and Canada (strong mandates) both had very good vaccine coverage among elderly – which shows that regardless of mandates, it is possible to ensure high vaccination uptake among risk groups. Russia doesn't have that and mandates wouldn't have helped anyway. No wonder authorities gave up so quickly even with a moderate resistance to those measures.
This. I was there when BoB fell, and despite being on the losing side those weeks of intense battles were _awesome_. That was it, though. Nullsec warfare became a rather tedious grind shortly afterwards, and CCP didn't bother to fix it, instead prefering to focus on microtransactions.

I assume my characters are still sitting in Amamake a decade later, but getting back into a game only to have it feel like a second job? Narh, I prefer playing Civ6 with the missus instead. Most of the people I played with quit anyway.
Some more indirect evidence that it was Russia: https://twitter.com/inteldoge/status/1573450988744331274?s=4...
I have interviewed hundreds of scientists-engineers-developers, and I never use esoteric quiz questions or logic riddles.

I want to screen people for the skills that they will really need in their daily lives, so that's where I draw my pool of questions from. For example, processing data in the most simple ways (sorting, searching, extracting) quickly reveals if the candidates have actually _done_ what they claim they did. You'd be surprised how many Oxford PhDs struggle to write done a pipeline for extracting a simple word frequency list.

Now you might say "Maybe they're Windows people, or prefer Python." and my response is "I don't mind what tools you use - but you need to demonstrate that you can solve easy/common tasks on the spot, without wasting have a calendar day to re-invent the wheel."
I think this would require a shift in mindset of programmers to change. As long as mantras like "space is cheap", "that memory would have been unused anyway" and "premature optimization is the root of all evil"* are frequently being passed on as good advice, we'll see stuff like this.

(* I know how the actual quote is meant, and there is a lot of truth to it: Micro-optimisations where the only practical reason is that the code invites you to do it are a bad idea. However in my experience, the quote is often misunderstood as arguing against any form of optimization. The quote is often used to justify code that's not just unoptimized but hilariously inefficient.)
If the average person has a good life then hooray that's great. Also irrelevant.

Let's move on to the bottom of the heap. The people starving to death for numerous reasons. The 62 people at the top are probably not responsible for the hundreds of millions of humans in poverty but they sit on top of a system that has been tuned over many centuries to make rich people richer.

I have no objections to billionaires but I want the rules changed so that earning a 100 million dollars is as hard for a billionaire as it is for a millionaire or just a person starting from scratch. I'm not quite sure what the rules would be but it'd be interesting to engineer that level playing field.
In other ways, web environment is the most secure part of your OS. Download and install an .exe and it's essentially completely unsandboxed and has free reign over your computer. These 'PWAs' are much more limited and scoped.
I've been hearing/reading all these for a while; the attention went up a notch post 2008 financial crisis, more so after the bailouts.

As much as I'm disturbed by these numbers, I'm beginning to wonder if the attention is all just a waste. Like just see what happened during 2020 lockdowns? Rich got more richer (at least in India), and then in 2021 the searing inflation hit the middle and lower class the most; and now the fed is raising rates leading to job loss of, again middle/lower class. Also, the energy crisis in EU is hurting small/medium businesses the most.

I don't know; maybe it's better to focus on institutions and structures that lead to this inequality rather than directly attacking the rich by drawing attention to these inequality numbers. Instead of these numbers why don't we figure out what lead to that inequality in the first place? How do we prevent rich from converting their money to power through lobbying, and funding politicians? How do we help the lower income group through free education, and housing?

I for once really liked the recent student debt (partial) cancellation/reduction program in the US. Though I have absolutely no horse in this as I don't even live in the US; I'm glad that (ex) students' debt burden is being reduced.
Thank you. Up to now, we've lacked on the education front. Hopefully the university helps onboard users and gets them ramped up asap.
If you distribute them widely why would that happen? You could even give them to the people who actually work in the business and their suppliers and their suppliers suppliers etc. to make it "fair". Wouldn't want people's hard work to be stolen from them.
When will I finally live a life where my work iPhone is plugged into a USB4 dock with mouse, display and keyboard and it makes my whole work desktop? M2 is already here, why can't we do this?
USA did look there some something sus https://twitter.com/inteldoge/status/1573450988744331274?s=4...
The person writing this article is almost definitely part of the 1%. Who cares what gender the 62 richest people in the world are; these people cannot be the victims of inequality. What evidence is presented here that says "if rich people earnt less then poor people would earn more" which is the obvious inference. It is intuitive but is it true? If rich people pay more tax this doesn't get given to poor people as wages, so how does the tax question relate to the poverty issue? I agree that more tax revenue is good as it pays for better public services but there isn't any talk of 'wealth' provided by public services being part of the discussion.
I’ve been a customer for years but never touched their file storage, calendar etc. I just don’t feel they’re big enough to have real quality focus on anything other than email.

That’s just the impression I get. Happy to be corrected
> Putin takes away a major reason for deposing him - whoever takes over is not going to get those sweet, sweet Euro millions in return for stopping the invasion and withdrawing.

Do you think that someone intending to depose Putin will now not do it because the Nord Streams are gone?

Ya'll are really stretching. Sorry, but, consider who benefits directly from ending European dependence on Russian energy? If your first thought is "Russia" you... I just... don't know what to tell you.
Not Invented Here?
The problem is not technical - there's already a supercharged version of the old popup blocker: uBlock Origin, and it is permissively licensed such that any browser can embed it by default.

The problem is commercial - companies that make browsers have gone all-in on "growth & engagement" and the "attention economy" and rely on the web being terrible to make their money, either directly (Google, Edge) or indirectly (Mozilla, funded by Google and thus unlikely to bite the hand that feeds).

Browser makers have given up on serving their users because it turns out you make more money by exploiting them.
Well.. I mean, I've been using $100 PCs-on-a-stick for about a decade now, plugging them into hotel room TVs or my projector at home or wherever I go... just need a cheap wireless keyboard/trackpad. I use that for about half my home entertainment viewing as well. Definitely no need to strap hardware to my head to game/code/surf on a big screen with a tiny device.
Code Review Velocity – Need for Speed
(For those unfamiliar:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis

)
how is slamming the lady in an HN comment any different? have you peer reviewed or criticised her in a professional manner? talk about hypocrisy
I like this thread. A bunch of possibly above average intelligent people going all in on discussing why and how such an attack was done. Very entertaining to read.

What struck me, was that a few of you seriously think about the US as a contender for this attack. Does anyone has an recent example of the US being that hostile to friend nations?
The economic power imbalance is still problematic.

Free trade and supply/demand were supposed to be a way to decentralize economic decisions, but they lead in practice to inequality and a situation where we have an economy that's planned by the wealthy for their own benefit (see planned obsolescence, predatory marketing practices, dark UI patterns, the privatization of justice through arbitration, lobbying, ...).
> Max Blumenthal is a Russian propagandist who is a regular guest on Russian state backed networks such RT and Sputnik.

He is an American, and he had also worked with Al Jazeera, The New York Times and a few other wide-known and reputable organizations.

Your logic that someone is somehow inferior due to being "tainted" by interacting with those you don't like isn't really solid, especially when discussing a journalist.
Hello, author of the article here, feel free to ask anything!
Until they offer an office suite, cloud drive and directory that supports SSO/SAML they’ll stay a fringe email provider.

Why pay $5 to fastmail when Microsoft offers heaps more.
Yeah, I think if those 62 people were all women nobody's life were improved (except for those women, I guess). That note is largely tangential to the claim.

The reason women are generally more affected by wealth inequality (i.e. why more women are poorer) is that women generally perform more unpaid labor (e.g. in traditional mixed gender couples, women typically perform a larger share of domestic duties and spend more time raising and nurturing children than men).

For a less obvious example: my grandfather was a homeopathic practitioner and when his wife wasn't doing chores or looking after their daughter she would help in the practice as an unpaid assistant. As she had never formally been an employee and thus never paid into the federal pension fund, she ended up on welfare when he died and left her without any savings. We had to teach her the basics of banking after his death because he had always insisted on managing the family finances and insurances. This may sound absurd and careless by modern standards but was culturally normal when they were young. In fact, married women only gained the right to seek employment without the permission of their husbands during her lifetime.
This made me think of Calico/Google trying to develop early cancer detection systems. If I recall correctly, they wanted you to swallow something that would be wandering in the bloodstream, ready to attach to loose cancer cells. That combo could then theoretically be measured by a wristband of sorts that we would wear around.

I remember seeing that demo 8 or 9 years ago. Yet here we are, still waiting for the pancreas to start hurting, when it's obviously too late to do anything about it. If only we had good incentives around preventive care...
So I'll start by saying, I've spent the past 7 years working predominantly on open source, 4 of those years were bootstrapped and the majority of stuff I've written is basically given away for free. I fully understand what that does to my own earning potential but at the same time as a developer at every single company I ever worked at, I came to rely on open source for quite literally everything I built. Whether it was linux, apache, nginx, docker or asterisk or whatever else. Our entire industry is built on the foundations of open source and without it we end up in these silos where only the incumbents thrive, that's how we end up with platform centralisation and inevitably struggle to break free with no alternatives.

I think now is the time for us to start moving beyond just open source infrastructure and into open source services. Yes as developers that means the things we write will change, yes some of us will have to reskill and learn new things but that's also just how evolution works in engineering. Whether its code or whether its cars, we, the current generation will be displaced by automation and large scale solutions.
The 2022 Web Almanac
The headline has has, not could have or might have. The body text says «according to multiple sources, Bezos has never demonstrated an inclination to interfere with the Post’s journalism» and «several reporters I spoke to said there was no evidence that Bezos has ever weighed in on anything other than strategic matters focused on the business side.»

I take this to mean that an owner like Bezos isn't good enough to be unproblematic. Someone rich and apparently impartial, as far as that can be judged from his actions. This raises the question of who could be unproblematic.

Everyone who's not rich can be excluded, and everyone who has a shorter history of impartiality than Bezos too. That leaves an extremely small set of people. A newspaper doesn't have to be owned by a single person (or a set of persons), though. Some possible alternatives:

Another well-regarded newspaper is owned by a foundation, set up by someone whose impartiality is guaranteed by his having died long ago. That seems excellent, but that trust was once established, and it's not clear to me what the money in that trust was before it became a trust. Most people who set up large trusts do it with money earned from investments that offer conflicts of interest for a newspaper like the Washington Post. So a trust or foundation is fine, but the way there seems likely to have Bezos-like problems.

Another option is an owner who stays remote and unknown. (A do-goodish company I know is owned by an unknown person whose Swiss lawyers remain polite even when the company makes a loss.) Such an owner cannot have much influence for lack of communication, or cause self-censorship. It's not clear to me whether the CJR author would see it as worse, equal to or better than being owned by Bezos.

A third option is to be a public company, ie. owned by institutional investors, hedge funds and random smallish investors. This might tie the interest of the newspaper a little too closely to that of the general stock market, presenting the same issues of self-censorship that the article mentions. Again, it's not clear to me that the CJR author would see this as a smaller problem.

I think that's all? No, not quite. A newspaper can be owned by someone who's rich enough to afford it, but less rich and above all not so sprawlingly rich Bezos. That would be a near-billionaire who hasn't diversified their investment. Do such people exist? Maybe. Doubtful.

If the assessments above are reasonably close to correct, then the problems with Bezos are the smallest the Washington Post can have. It could also have other kinds of owners with different problems of approximately the same size, but AFAICT not any with decisively smaller problems. (In the near term. In the long term, someone like Bezos could set up a trust and eventually die of old age.)

Sounds good to me. I know many things in the world that don't suffer from the smallest achievable problem.
Pro Eugenics comment to a post about keeping my kid alive.

Wow!
> Can we stop with this absolute fantasy about PCs that "fit in your pocket"?

No, because it isn't fantasy and i want those PCs that "fit in my pocket" - after all they do exist, see GPD's pocketable PCs.

> Smartphones have been "pocketable PCs" for more than a decade already

Smartphones have their on OSes, UX, applications, etc. The point of projects like GPD Win or the one linked above is to run the same programs, OS, etc as you'd run on a regular laptop or a desktop PC.

And this is something that can be useful, even if it isn't at the same frequency as a smartphone - they do not have the same use after all.

Personally i have a GPD Win 1 which is pretty much the same form factor as the pocketable PC linked in the article (actually it is better IMO because the joysticks and back buttons it has are used very naturally to move the mouse cursor on the desktop and act as a mouse). I do not use it daily but whenever i want to go somewhere briefly and need a PC (e.g. i need to show a project of mine to someone), i pick that up instead of my laptop: it is much lighter (its weight barely registers), it fits in my fanny bag next to my smartphone and provides pretty much the same functionality as a regular laptop - it is just weaker and slightly more awkward to type on. But i'm not going to write code for hours straight on it anyway, so it doesn't matter. However i do use the keyboard frequently, for command line or shortcuts or whatever, and it is miles better than something like Termux and/or the virtual touchscreen keyboards you'd find in smartphones (which with swipe typing are decent but fail at everything else).

The main issue with the linked PC is that it is ARM instead of x86 which IMO limits its utility. I can run any old application on my GPD Win 1 and for my own applications i can just copy the binaries to it directly but for something like the MNT Pocket i'd need to cross compile just for it and it is limited to stuff that i can do that.
hopefully not, but...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locked-in_syndrome
> The main reason is that difficult tests has positive signal

They provide a signal, but I don't think the evidence suggests that it's necessarily a positive one. "Can you play Czardas on the tuba" is a difficult task that would provide a strong hire/no hire signal, but that doesn't mean it would be a good signal to use when looking for developers.

The big tech companies themselves admit that a bunch of their employees are not sufficiently competent [1]; clearly, current hiring practices are suboptimal. Just because a test exists doesn't mean it's valid.

> You mean all those jobs requiring college degrees

There are many jobs where high performance doesn't require a college degree, and for those jobs, requiring a degree is again an exercise in box-ticking that should be replaced with a more meaningful measure. There are also jobs were significant education in the topic is important, and a degree provides better evidence of that that many other things, so can be a useful signal.

We know that tech hiring is broken, but whenever it's criticised, the people invested in this system get outraged. "What do you want us to do, just hire everyone?" etc. No one is saying - or has ever said - that assessing applicant competence is a bad idea, just that assessing the ability to rote learn is not the best use of time when hiring developers.

The current system is not the only way, and for an industry that prides itself on being filled with problem solvers and hackers, it's bizarre to me how much people rest on the idea that the existing system is imperfect but present, and so should be left alone.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-meta-girds-fier...
I reiterate my recommendation of that book by Pheme Perkins. Acts contains the oldest Christian traditions. Oral traditions, natch.

Your comments on my tone are bewildering in their absolute irrelevance - discussing the historical Jesus doesn't require reverence or adherence to the themes of Christianity, like how
discussing the historical Muhammad doesn't require me to adhere to the shahada, nor consider dogs unclean.

But hey, maybe you're neurodiverse, or maybe you're just an asshole, but you do you.

If your objection to my tone was because of closely held personal beliefs, then I'm afraid you'll just have to build a bridge and get over it.
> I agree with you, it generally makes absolutely no sense for Russia to be behind this

Like it makes no sense for them to invade with the state of their army, shell a nuclear power plant, dig trenches in the Chernobyl exclusion zone, waste rockets on civilian targets? Why are you assuming Russia to be a rational actor?
What do these 62 people "own"? Probably stocks, luxurious real estate that's very expensive but probably doesn't occupy huge swathes of land, collectibles and some spare cash.

What's more disturbing is the decision-making power they possess, both through their companies and through their connections with policy makers. They can influence the media with their "investment plans" and grand visions, they can lobby for their undertakings against the general interest of the population, essentially undermining democracy.