skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You are decades out of touch with reality, because I read years ago already that some guys estimated we hit the break even point (in the "western world") in the mid 90s already. That is almost 3 decades ago by now, and automation hasn't stopped during that time. Do you see the effects? Very much so, if you start looking for the signs of that.

Furthermore, the idea that we went through a number of such changes and this one is all the same is merely wishful thinking. Economy exists because humans divide work. Why do we work? To fulfill our needs, you know, stuff like not being thirsty, hungry, having shelter, being healthy, having some entertainment, this kinda stuff. The more we automate all these things, the less humans are involved, and following that it means the economy will shrink. As said: humans divide work, or more correctly: Their time, which is the ultimate currency in this whole thing. It is only during the phase of ramping up the automation that we need to do more than for our needs: We have to have additional economy and thus work to make the automation happen.

Following that it is clear that a basic income people can actually live from MUST happen during the transition phase towards "full" automation, not after. Even more so with the system as it is currently, because no work means no income, and if the government doesn't keep people alive, you can just wait for civil war to happen, and before that a big raise in all kinds of crimes. There are more than enough examples of that out there, some of them pretty recent.
Apple has been expanding its search activities for years. Google absolutely has giving Apple an incentive not to compete as part of its aims
Can someone explain a bit more how “remember me” works? If symmetric encryption requires a “key” to decrypt - one might expect that you will need to store that key to auto-decrypt. But here it claims that the key is stored salted and hashed. But to auto-decrypt - you need to reverse that salt and hash because you need that key back. How would that work?
Fecal indicator bacteria on indoor NYC floors linked to sidewalk contamination
> if they automated and outsourced everything they would end up with roving bands of unemployed men causing trouble in the countryside

Tangent: I'm not even sure that Universal Basic Income would solve this problem. If you browse Financial Independence forums, you'll see many anecdotes of early retirees who go back to work for one reason or another. So even (some? Most? Not sure...) people with enough money to not have to work, want to work. It seems like a large cultural change around work would be needed.

Having said that, it's also possible that we just keep inventing new jobs and a huge unemployment spike never comes. That doesn't seem likely to me, but I'm fairly certain most of my predictions will end up being wrong.
I recognise that DI frameworks may have a place when working with large teams and large applications, but otherwise I discourage them for a few reasons.

The prerequisite knowledge problem:

"Manual" DI requires knowing the language. Framework DI requires knowing the language and the framework. This alone makes it harder for new people to approach the codebase if they have not familiarity with the framework, even if they have mastered the language. There are already several DI frameworks for golang, but which ones are your new hires familiar with?

The "how do I do X" problem:

If you want to do something with your dependency graph, it's usually straightforward to express with plain code, but it might not be immediately obvious how to accomplish the same with the framework. For example, having multiple dependencies of the same type. With "manual" DI this is totally unremarkable. With wire, it goes against its mechanism and requires a minor workaround.

The implicit graph problem:

A DI framework the frees you from having to think much about the dependency graph may cause you to accidentally create a messy, illogical graph. It's easy to end up cornered by dependency cycles, for example. With manual DI, a flawed graph is more obvious early on because it's code you have to read and write. Explicit, not implicit.
If you take principled stances you will generally end up making a lot of enemies of powerful interests. They will shred your character in public mercilessly and persistently even if your record is pretty much spotless.

It's much much easier to be casually evil and join a bloc of powerful interests who will take care of you and look after you if you happen to be caught in bed with a prostitute.
Namecheap.com isn't bad...I think that $10 is kinda expensive for a domain though.
Why not just disable Family Share instead?
To clarify, Wikipedia[1] describes it better:

The term ["Presocratics"] was coined to highlight a fundamental change in
philosophical inquiries between the philosophers who lived
before Socrates, who were interested in the structure of
nature and cosmos (i.e., the universe, with the
implication that the universe had order to it), and
Socrates and his successors, who were mostly interested in
ethics and politics. The term comes with drawbacks, as
several of the pre-Socratics were highly interested in
ethics and how to live the best life.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Socratic_philosophy#Termin...
Yeah, it was the first time (I was then a young adult) when I smelled a rat at the Presidential level. Even then I called bullshit – later to learn it was all part of a hostage-for-arms swap.

Disgusting.
All good pieces of advice.

I also want to throw out a recommendation for this sucker in particular: https://www.engineertools-jp.com/ss02

I kind of impulse-bought that recently and had to repair a device where the AC line cord was damaged and is soldered directly to the board. I heated up the joint and sucked out what seemed like a gallon of solder in one go; the wire then just fell out with no problem. I was very very impressed. For $22, worth having in your toolbox if you ever interact with large quantities of solder that may be to removed.
(EDIT) I was talking about a different deal here. I originally assumed this was the Google/Safari deal.

It is interesting, however, to see the amounts:

2007, 25 million: https://daringfireball.net/2007/06/wwdc_2007_keynote

2009, 82 million: https://techcrunch.com/2013/02/12/google-to-pay-apple-1-bill... (sorry couldn't find the original article)

2013, 1 billion: https://techcrunch.com/2013/02/12/google-to-pay-apple-1-bill... (same as above)

2015, 1 billion: https://searchengineland.com/prediction-apple-will-not-renew...

2016, 1 billion: https://www.macworld.com/article/227243/report-google-is-the... and https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jan/22/google-pa...

2017, 3 billion: https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-paying-apple-3-bi...

2018, 9 billion: https://searchengineland.com/report-google-to-pay-apple-9-bi...

2018, 12 billion: https://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search-en...

2019, 9 billion: https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/02/12/apple-may-have-be...

2020: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-24/deals-wit...
Seems ok for personal tagging but for a general schema that can be used internationally, like the kind of thing the link is talking about, you can’t really have words that need translation mixed in with the tag data.
CEO of company on a long death spiral talks about a bright future when ability to attract talent and execute doesn’t make a difference.

A future where a company needs a great visionary CEO and an AI
Logistics and order destination and they will work 247, give or take.

There is quite some overhead if you have to schedule all the pick ups and update the order and shipping status. They have all this automated and they have warehouses strategically located everywhere.

This is something that many of the chinese sellers still do not use. They are relatively new and inexperienced, they struggle to do the corporate onboarding paperwork etc. They will get around, though, some have improved fast.
Unemployed people can plant potatos and feed themselves from the land. Men were able to do so with very little technology for thousands of years. Surely they can do that with today tech even more efficiently.
We could also decide never to grant personhood to an AI. There is at least one way to avoid the complicated questions.
Looks amazing, I think the Professional tier seems like a great value in particular. I would absolutely pay more than $10/mo for this tool if UI design were part of my day-to-day.
Solving the open source funding problem
Hm, I'd cut the cake a little differently. I think there's two kinds of consistency we can strive for:

- Strict consistency. Every pointer in my b-tree must point to a b-tree node, and not random data which could cause the program to crash. In a financial world, a bank should never print money.

- Fuzzy "good enough" consistency. In the examples in the article, all of the financial transactions should end up close enough to being reconciled.

There's value in both kinds of consistency. When talking about data entered by humans into a database, there's always going to be a bit of slop involved. Someone mistyped a digit. A few records weren't entered at all.

But when building software systems, designing with strict consistency guarantees is such an unbelievably massive win. I can't overstate how important it is. The entire ladder of abstraction in modern computers from transistors all the way up to this website is only possible because each layer "underneath" the layer we're standing on is solid and deterministic. If CPUs made even 1 error in every billion operations, our computers wouldn't boot at all.

Tony Hoare talks about his invention of null pointers as his "billion dollar mistake". Null pointers take something that should be strictly consistent (references) and make it fuzzy. Rust is exciting lots of people in the systems programming space because it takes things that are fuzzy in C (aliasing, memory management, thread-safe variables, etc) and makes them strictly consistent. All the value in unit testing comes from how they make our systems more strictly correct.

Every time I've relaxed consistency guarantees internally in systems I've worked on (or heard coworkers doing the same) we've come to regret it. At a startup several years ago, we needed to build an external search index for a database. The database updated live - and we had a change feed that updated the browsers live as records changed. The engineer in charge did a "good enough" job - he wrote a scrappy script that was only mostly correct. But it sometimes left the index inconsistent with the data. We got constant reports from our users about items not showing up in the search results. He would dutifully go back and fiddle with things to try and fix the problem. Eventually one of our senior engineers went in and rewrote the whole indexing script to be strictly correct. We never heard a peep about it after that - it just worked, every time. Even putting aside the frustration of our users, writing it correctly was a big win for us in terms of maintenance. Once it was correct, we didn't need to keep pulling engineering time away to fix problems.

Maybe data consistency is overrated in databases. But I think if anything, consistency internally in computing systems is underrated. We take for granted how well computers work. But our capacity to make computers do anything depends entirely on those consistency guarantees. It seems ridiculous to disregard its importance.
Imagine we found all the connections, chemical weighting, and neuron structure that exactly reproduced ChatGPT in the forebrain. Is ChatGPT now a human? Absolutely not. But is it capable of human like speech? Yep.

ChatGPT will probably say it is conscious if you tell it that it is (for various values of tell). Do we really know there's anything else going on with us?

I don't. I think we're all stories told by learning machines mimicking culture we observe, compete with memes for soul, special creativity, etc. We vastly overestimate our intelligence and vastly underestimate the cumulative effects of million years of culture.
I read comments about need for lazy evaluation. In fact all constructs that ensure lazy evaluation try to solve a not really existing problem,in a hard to review manner. What the heck is wrong with just explicit nested if statements? Not cool enough?
```
if (p!=nullptr)
{
if (*p == ' ')
{
}
else
{
}
}
```
keep it simple
I wouldn't care at all if IBM's CEO was actually an AI. But I sure as hell care that the person I have on the phone when inquiring about something is a human.
My partner needs routines and positive habits and stability to avoid depression, so I can absolutely relate. It's just the marketing of ready-to-use, one-size-fit-all recipes for happiness I was bickering about. ;)
> I think it would be justified if some of them decided to hold the node community for ransom.

Ah yes, let’s all just give these folks money when we don’t have to.

Or how about... if they want money, they sell their software?

It’s really that simple.

There’s nothing about maintaining an open source project that entitles you to hold anybody for ransom.
Deletion is acceptable, and if you have everything in a consistent system they will both exist or not.

"Nonconsistency advocacy" doesn't make a lot of sense to me here. Are you advocating not relying on consistency in systems that guarantee consistency? That is a waste of time.

Are you advocating eschewing consistent systems? Well, then you have more work, so only if I need to. And yes, you should handle data errors here because inconsistency is consistent with the system you've chosen.
From what I’ve seen it gets easier as they get older. But I also am told the pain is worth it, I hope your journey is good! :)
His company originally was a C++ toolchain shop.

Anyway, I was joking — Walter did one of the first (if not the first?) "Proper" C++ compilers, so the idea of not learning from C++ is rather ironic.
So lets make this an easier problem.

You step in a Star Trek transporter. Scotty goes to beam you up but after a quick flash you are still there. But, they get notice that you were also delivered to the other side. There are two exact copies of you now.

I would say at t=0 they are the exact same person that would think the exact same way if put in the same experiences. Of course physical existence will quickly skew from that point.

For the case of the love one that died, I would argue 'they' are the same person from the moment they are stored. The particular problem here is there will be a massive skew in shared experience. You got to suffer their (presumably) traumatic death that has changed you. Them now coming back into existence into your trama will likely lead you to believe that they changed when it is you that has changed. Add to this the physical time jump where they were missing will cause the same things in all their other social interactions. Just imagine being kidnapped but being unconscious the entire time. The world will treat you differently when you get back even though you've not really changed.
Right, the guy who received a Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing and ordered missile strikes on people.

I can just never take those comments seriously.

I don't know much about Carter, but Obama's presidency is much more recent.
The difference is that the person who knows the answer (you!) is also writing the prompts. The game is to get the chatbot to say the target word without using the most obviously helpful phrases.
> he was not perceived as the president America needed at that point in its history.

Or maybe he was. After Nixon/Ford people were tired of corrupt career positions. Carter was folksy, one of us.
> because it gets argumentative

Where did you get this from?
A “job” is when you are doing something useful for other people, and you are rare enough so it makes sense to pay you money for it for a long time. Nobody ever guarantees you a “job” if you are not useful anymore for some specific field of work. It doesn’t make any business sense. If you continue to get money for something while not being useful enough for your employer, this is not a “job”, this is charity.

And since jobs were a XX century social construct where one could expect that people would have professions which are useful enough for most of their lives — there will be no more “jobs” soon. Only contracts, alms, charities, and war mercenaries.

And there is no way to turn this around, until we invent new ways of doing business, without relying on “jobs”.
I suspect in many cases they'd need to upgrade the electric subsystems first.

THIS is the unspoken problem that vendors of EVs are trying to hide. If we eventually require millions of EVs to be recharged daily, ALL of the electrical subsystems in the country will have to be upgraded first.

Tourist destinations will be the 'canary in the coalmine' as the problem will very likely show up in those locations first, when tens of thousands of over-nighters will require recharging within a very short period overnight. Lots and lots of MEGAwatt-hours have to be obtained from somewhere.
I dig the animal rights assessment of sentience which is the ability to reason about past present and future. Like can you make plans or decide upon actions by reasoning about what has happened in the past and what you would like to have happen in the future from your present situation. In the same vein as the animal rights conversation - once we have sentient AI what is our moral obligation with regards to their treatment?
The Iranian revolution was not a big issue in the election. It was the fact that American embassy staff was held at gunpoint for nearly two years so they could put the Shah on Trial. People were not happy about that.
I believe and hope people at least consider that, yeah an AI is a replica of that, and for all AIs failures, it's a really good replica of most of what it is to be human and "conscious". After that, it's all feeding back your story to yourself, and compounding memories from actual experience. (Which , have you noticed, are mostly stories)
Show HN: A file uploader for AWS's Cloudscape Design System
They did just kill bypass-paywalls-clean though. On desktop you can sideload it but on mobile you can't. They're not in my good books for a while.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34774950
> 0 Result(s) for gates

Awww... :(
Rackspace (non-Exchange) hosted email down now, too
Their hosted Exchange email has been having "issues" since December.

But today their "Rackspace Email" (hosted Webmail/IMAP/POP/SMTP) has been disrupted since 2pm ETS.
Yeah I think this is a solid analysis of what is going wrong. While I disagree with the moral view of productivity, I do still think it is advisable and admirable to build up good habits.
There are many misconceptions about work, and one of the big ones is that work actually often means "paid work". There is tons of unpaid work being done. And there is a certain percentage of people who cannot sit still and have to do something. If that gets paid or not is a whole different matter.
I don't care what IBM has to say about the future. It is a company from the past.
Those stories are about what Google pays Apple to be the default Safari search engine.

This new claim is that Google pays Apple cut of search revenue, in addition to that.
Forty-two years ago, homes here didn’t have to be permitted at all.

Building codes and related permitting regulations were established to ensure safety, and accepted by the public under those auspices.

The addition of novel, non-safety related political requirements exceeds this original remit and undermines the entire telos of residential building codes.

This inescapably leads to reduced compliance with the regulatory process, and thus, less-safe housing.

So, yes, “overly burdensome”.
The US/NATO will creep out of Ukraine within the year, just like Afghanistan.

NATO is pumping a lot of misinformation right now because it's their only strength. The fact that they're scrambling for a few old tanks is all you need to know. They don't have the cards.
CEOs are just a punching bag. They get punched on behalf of the board of directors.

Everything they say will offend someone so they can't say anything. And they have to live in hiding with bodyguards.

Being the CEO of a large corporation is probably the worst job in the world.
Problem is those countries suck at research.
Getting open-source contributors paid is a real issue, though his particular case has a few unique wrinkles. Seems to me it's very rare for individual maintainers to be able to make a living solely from their open-source work. Given the permissive nature of the licenses at work, that seems to be by design, though I'm encouraged by the rise of open-core projects that seem to be trying to find a middle ground.
s/slowing/altering/

Damn you autocorrect.
So if we're magic and it is magic then technically this is ok.

But the problem is we create it, so it can't be magic. So if we're magic and it is not magic then its just an object we are free to abuse (at least from many peoples perspective).

I like to think of it as we're complex and interesting, and it is complex and interesting but neither of us is magic. We don't like to be abused, so creating something like us and abusing it would be completely unethical.
Ever notice how bikes parked into docks has been an attempted business model since like the 1960s? Note the absence of such bikes today in pretty much all cities worldwide ...

Docks make the business model unrealistic too.
Nice one. Never knew about this story. I was still at the Mozilla CSS story.
Billions of humans are the kind of “we” that never consistently “decides” anything.

In the end, if it can be done, and anyone has anything significant to gain, it will be done
Call me when you come up with original philosophy....
I find it difficult to relate to a story about growing up the ultra wealthy grandson of a famous musician. Them being related to Elvis doesn't make it less relatable.

And personally, adding the "who is it" mystery made the story less relatable. Instead of reading it and empathizing, I was trying to figure out who they were talking about. Then there's the morose reveal of "Aha! It was Ben Keough that committed suicide."
As syntactic sugar for how C++ functors used to be implemented, and they also bring their own set of issues when interoperating with co-routines.
It makes code a tiny bit more verbose but much more readible and most of all easily extendible without having to worry about bracket positions
> What about all those people who used to do a job that is now replacing them with a touchscreen or a "chat bot"? What do you envision for them?

With fertility rates below replacement level in the west... nothing! We'll need these workers in more lucrative and useful industries.

> That they go back to school to train to be a doctor or a lawyer?

Interesting you chose the two professions with the most gatekeeping. How about the hundred of skilled trades making civilized life possible?
Hah, I'd never looked inside one before but that's exactly how I'd imagined it would work.

The optics for a quadrature encoder are very forgiving -- it's much easier to implement than the camera-based sensor that's used for position, which requires a plastic lens.

> I don't understand how to get the stepped motion of the Kensington scroll rings and most mouse wheels. Maybe it has bumps to move past.

Most mouse wheels use a mechanical rotary encoder, and the detents are inherent to that part. Some of the fancier ones use custom mechanisms.