skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The message I took from the writing wasn’t “like everything indiscriminately”, but closer to “stop making hating stuff a part of your identity”. The difference is subtle but critically important.

I'm not sure where you got that from the article. The author seemed pretty clear: "Perhaps it’s a passionate interest of someone you care about, and you’d enjoy having common ground there. Or maybe it’s something you have to do for social or societal reasons, and you’d prefer that it wasn’t such an unpleasant experience for you."

> I’m curious why you feel this way? I didn’t take this from the writing at all, and writing is often the least reliable way to detect a lack of authenticity.

For example: "With TV shows I don’t want to watch — which is almost all of them, because I’m really not a TV person — my focus is on lighting design, and shot framing, and blocking." So the author doesn't really learn to "like" (in the real sense) the content of the TV shows, maybe not even appreciate (the author's synonym for like) the content of the TV shows. He's just looking at them in some kind of anthropological way, it seems, as a detached scientific observer.

> From the perspective of whom?

From the perspective of people who have real enthusiasm and can sniff out fake enthusiasm.

> For the person who lacks enthusiasm, faking it for a time can be the key to unlocking the real thing.

I don't know. I'm not convinced that this is a real psychological phenomenon.

Having said all that, it's of course important to be supportive of the interests of your loved ones, don't complain about them to your loved ones, and be willing to spend mutual time participating. That's just plain common sense and doesn't need a long-winded article. None of this requires that you must "like" (appreciate?) the thing, or even fake enthusiasm for it.
It really sucks for Etsy’s sellers so maybe… Etsy learned a lesson? Here’s the confused lesson by association argument again. The majority of your argument is around learning lessons, but you momentarily acknowledge that perhaps there are in fact people hurt here who it would be hard to accuse of deserving it due to a lack of due diligence, but you then immediately resolve the cognitive dissonance by reassuring yourself that perhaps that will make the lesson Etsy learns that much stronger.

The majority of your argument revolves around the idea that only rich people in this “rotten system” will be affected, or that this is an important lesson. When it’s pointed out that there are many types of employees who aren’t rich, you say they don’t count because they’re contractors, ignoring that even if true, which I’m not necessarily granting, it still doesn’t matter since that contracting job will still probably disappear and there is a high likelihood that they can’t just be immediately positioned somewhere new. The rich developer may have an easier time landing a new position than the cook getting a new shift from the contracting company somewhere new. But I suppose that’s irrelevant, because the point about cooks being contractors actually had nothing to do with the topic at hand of whether they deserve to be colateral damage. Rather, it was meant to derail the conversation into a long digression about how these contracting agreements further prove how “rotten” these startups are… and thus deserve to learn a lesson about treasury performance.
Ah yes, my crazy ideology of "people should generally experience the consequences of their actions, especially when they're doing very well".

I get that you want to be able to be handed millions of dollars and have somebody else take care of that for you. Who doesn't want that? I just don't understand why you think it's the job of poorer people to subsidize you if you take a risk with those millions and it doesn't pan out.

> "basic economic services like a checking account are use at your own risk"

I in fact don't cosign that; I've been very clear that I support mandatory FDIC insurance with its current very generous limit. I also support the FDIC's resolution process where they immediately pay out the $250k and then work hard to quickly pay a large portion of the remainder. That's a giant level of risk reduction.

But if somebody is rich enough that they have millions in cash and haven't bothered to take basic precautions like "use two banks", I don't think that's a problem such that (much poorer) taxpayers should be obliged to make it all better. If it happened to a friend I would feel bad for them personally, of course. But not so much that I would be calling for a government bailout. Capitalism works because risks yield both gains and losses. People who don't like that should manage their risks.
You can find FDIC-insured savings accounts paying 4%, and bank interest rates are all over the places right now, so I wouldn't read into .6%.

Calling out the 2021 number is disingenuous because the fed funds rate in 2021 was essentially 0%. Its's 4.57% right now. You're comparing kumquats and grapefruit.
The article lost credibility at the beginning of the second paragraph for me.

"..second-largest bank collapse in American history and the first since the 2008 financial crisis."
I see, my answer pertains to your 2nd and 3rd question, not the first.

Regarding the first, I am not expert. Many commenters in the various threads have highlighted problems they have had at other banks, such as banks rejecting VC wires or stupid profitability requirements for lines of credit. It mostly sounds like banking SOPs which are incompatible with startups.

It sounds stupid but I have run into similar problems working at large companies trying to partner or buy startups. We want some IP from some small startup and begin financial disclosures. Some idiot in finance runs the numbers and sees the startup is losing $X per year and puts up a red flag on the deal. Like, no shit it is unprofitable, it is a startup and we want their IP.

Edit: I just saw this relevant thread:https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1634735012955279360
introspection and observation.
When it's revealed that one bank has a bad balance sheet, it suggests that other banks do too, because they all went through similar circumstances and had access to similar markets and probably came to similar decisions about what securities to buy (and when to buy them).

Kind of like how when you learn that one major application has vulnerabilities due to misuse of log4j, it suggests other major applications will have similar vulnerabilities, because programmers working with the same flawed tools are liable to make similar mistakes.

Not every Java application is vulnerable and not every bank is insolvent (presumably very few of them are) but a bad apple spoils the bunch.
I seem to have taken a weird personal style of using dashes in the context that an en dash is used for a splitting clause – like this – whereas an em dash is used only before a finishing clause — like this.

Curious to see if there are any uses for steganography with this (or just identifying people by writing style).
I feel much the same way, and for much the same reason. I do, however, have a largish fleet of aliases that I've built up over the years.

The vast majority of them are simple short forms. For example `tf` for `terraform` and `tfp` for `terraform plan`. My brain just naturally thknks of the full command when using the short form and, because of this, I'm not at a loss if I'm logged in somewhere without my aliases.
I think you would enjoy this too

https://aphyr.com/posts/353-rewriting-the-technical-intervie...
It's interesting to see this together with normalizing larger portions of junk food and desserts.

In the 80's, cookies were small, bags of potato chips were tiny and you couldn't "supersize" your fries and Coke at McD's.

But then in the 90's cookies and chips and fries and soda sizes just exploded in size. Now they're the new normal.
Yes, but plenty of people are calling for going beyond that.

And it's not clear to me that other banks would be excited to pay higher insurance premiums to bail out Silicon Valley Bank's customers here. If you see something otherwise, please let me know.
It appears the emerging consensus among the apologists is that SVB failed because the federal government, or the Fed specifically, over-regulated them by making them take certain positions, then pulled the rug out from under the by raising interest rates. In short, it wasn't the fault of the people running the bank.

In other news: https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/etsy-delays-p...
> In case of Rust this is true, but you would have to restrict Zig’s semantics to something like Rust’s to make your idea workable.

That's exactly the point. You would be restricting zig's semantics within code that you've fenced. You claim it's not possible. Trivially it should be possible, because this is simply the equivalent of abstracting rusts compiler logic (and in the worst case scenario even it's type system, via annotations) to a sidecar step that is run at a different phase of building your code. Or, more generically, formalizing logic that a code reviewer is doing in their head to understand data lifecycles. Really, to support your impossibility claim: It's on you to give an example of zig code that wouldn't be analyzable.
It is bizarre that you would read an article which says, “using body-mass index (BMI) to measure obesity is likely the most problematic factor,” and then immediately prescribe a fixed BMI for everyone without qualification.
I think anything analog is going to be suspect; you can take a photo of a digital image and it could look like a real analog image.

Absent a chain of custody (perhaps including GPS baked into the signed image data blob), I think analog artifacts will become untrustable. Unless you can physically date them to pre-generative era!
Their will not be some unbounded bailout. There is a process for this type of situation.

Here is a well written Twitter thread that goes over the likely path forward for SVB.

https://twitter.com/armanddoma/status/1634335394350374912?s=...
Yeah I can just about get a decent crop of the moon on my Nikon Z50 with the 250mm lens on it that looks reasonable, if it’s on a tripod. There’s no way this wasn’t going to be some other trickery going on.

What is worrying is why would you buy something with a camera that lies at source. When you need it to tell the truth, how do you know it will be telling it?
no, he's snorting ...
How many humans get rabies per year versus how many that get influenza?
Glad it is useful. Just a note of advice - prefix your bookmarks with a symbol that is not used to start directory names (was @ in my case).

This is useful for two things - 1) avoiding clashes with existing directories, 2) having a quick command to list all the bookmarks: cd @<tab>
> The question I have is do some of the proceeds of the liquidation get used for $250,000 insurance payout first?

Yup. FDIC gets the bank, and has to pay the insured amount. Then, the remainder must be managed for the benefit of depositors, other creditors, and shareholders. Any shortfall of the insured amount can be paid from the deposit insurance fund.

> Or do the tax payers get to help?

The FDIC deposit insurance fund is paid for by banks.
The way I was taught, you use the comma for a brief aside--em dashes are used for a larger diversion (and parenthesis are for the most tenuous connections.)

In other words a reader should be able to skip reading the contents of parenthesis with negligible impact on the context or meaning of the sentence. They should be able to skip reading the contents of em-dash-seperated text without changing the meaning of the sentence. And text between commas should be considered integral to the sentence, while secondary to the primary gist.
I also find it repulsive, but unless the average weight starts going down the trend in advertising is unlikely to reverse.
I simply delete my account when my recommendations get too overfitted and create a new one. As a bonus, I get another free trial.
Nobody is born an alcoholic. Shockingly, plenty of people are born with bodies that retain fat, even fed the exact same diet as a skinny person.

And I sure hope you're carving out an exception for the many many people in the world who are fat because it's a side effect of a medication they are forced to take for an unrelated health condition. Or should they feel bad about their bodies too?
Is this really what technical interviews are like in Silicon Valley? I’ve never seen anything like it in the “real” world.
Exercise does trigger inflammation, and countering that inflammation can in fact degrade the positive effects of exercise. Inflammation is the body's signal to rebuild and strengthen.

I obviously can't tell from your hn post (and IANA doctor), but sometimes I get headaches because I haven't drank enough water, or I've just gone out too hard.
Speak for yourself haha

Yes, its boring emails... but emails that involve billions of dollars. Also the timely aspect of it would be a bit entertaining...
Exercising in the US is hard AF, and only getting harder. There’s comparatively little opportunity to make exercise a part of daily routine. I’m either behind the wheel or a car or behind a desk all day.
I can I get off this train to distopia? Seriously. Didn't we already go through this child labor bit not even a century ago?

I don't have kids and I still don't think that they're the solution to labor shortage. And what we do to them now will have serious repercussions when they become voting adults.

EDIT: Removed unnecessary rant.
Nah, I miss the hobby web. The money doesn't have to come from somewhere. I don't have to pay to see friends. I don't have to pay to walk downtown. There's a lot that I can do without having to pay people. Most of the SEO content I see is something I would rather not come across, let alone pay for. I would rather hang out with real friends than to hang out with SEO friends. It's just that the SEO crowd has the money to shove everyone else out. Maybe the issue is that we need to get back to the old school ways of finding interesting things. There was no Google back then.
I think you air-quoted the wrong word in that sentence. I think it would be more appropriate to say: there is still some stuff "filling" the solar system.

:-)
I've seen people confusing "Big Tech" vs the SVB depositors. And confusing SVB vs the general concept of Silicon Valley itself. And confusing bailing out SVB vs making the depositors whole. I have zero hope that America will be able to grasp any of the nuance.

These are mildly complex topics. Your average Jane or Joe may not understand them, but that doesn't stop a large number of shameless idiots parading their confusion on social media, backed by nothing but very strong tribal feels.
I'm increasingly convinced that the showboating is a last ditch effort to scare regulators/politicians/someone/anyone into promising a full bailout in an attempt to avoid the impending oversight. When the SVB asset network is unwrapped, my guess is that it's going to turn out to be almost 100% circular, a cyclic engine designed to fund the startup and eventual acquisition of company after company while the owners (who own both the startups and the bank!) take a cut at each step. There's really no better explanation for how all these startups all ended up buying 100% commodity banking services from one institution.

Somewhere in the last decade, the smart VC's stopped getting paid in unicorn exits and started running the business like a cartel. And my guess it that's going to turn out to have been questionably legal in a few corners.
Yes, Linux was started for free as a student project, but the reason why it became the standard choice for data centers is because large corporations like Oracle, IBM and later Google united behind it in order to stop Microsoft from dominating servers. These corporations along with some commercial distributions have been funding Linux development for decades. Linux as we know it today is a child of corporate strategic thinking.
First here means the largest probably
Also `elinks` and `w3m`.

The mobile site, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/ , looks a little better in them.
No, you explicitly used the word contagion: "If people get whatever short term vengeance they're looking for, the contagion will cause a whole lot of collateral damage to people who aren't in tech."

That has a technical meaning in finance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_contagion
Disruption in the definition of Clayton Christensen as you’re likely using doesn’t apply to the failing of banks. Disruption is a theory about innovation and entrepreneurship. SVB didn’t get disrupted by some new player who leapfrogged how banking works- they made poor choices for a world where interest rates went up.

Having been a bank for 40 years with a great reputation, no one who held their money there expected a meaningful risk the bank would collapse. The same with AIG and any other major bank collapse for a long time player. Sure let those responsible have repercussions, but innocent account holders of America’s future trillions of GDP, investment funds holding onto the money of pension accounts, farmers and wineries shouldn’t bear the brunt of investments gone sour leading to a liquidity crunch.

Note that 3 VCs taking out their cash quickly allowed the bottom to fall out.
To be completely open, I wouldn't even be opposed to bailing all the depositors out if strict conditions are placed that disincentivize playing with house money

I haven't come up with a way to do this [1], nor has anyone else. So, we're back at square one: I can't bail you out with out encouraging destabilizing destructive behavior.

[1] well I have, but public executions for economic crimes are unconstitutional.
This is the Unix way. You already have the tools and utilities you need, just pipeline them together and make an alias if it’s something you need frequently.
> Ideally you should be a BMI 22, non smoking, non drinking, long distance runner living in the countryside eating a perfectly balanced diet.

All good except the long distance runner part. Don't think it is equivocally good as the others and may be potentially harmful (key is the long part, short/medium is good).
My dream (ha!) is for medical science to advance enough for routine, safe, "deep sedation" for travel.

I arrive at the station/terminal/depot, get put to sleep and loaded into a pod, then wake up at my destination. No fuss, no mess!

All the inconveniences go away and transport efficiency skyrockets.

Though I do worry that I may wake in the wrong place, given how airlines tend to lose baggage today - once we start treating passengers as cargo then we have to worry about all the cargo issues...
You don’t actually need torchvision. I just used

mamba create -n llama python==3.10 pytorch sentencepiece
Isn't a gaussian blur a pretty standard blur done by a poorly focused camera? Perhaps Samsung went to great lengths to reverse a Gaussian blur because it happens all the time?
You are unbanked? How well does this work in 2023?
Fix your resume using AI
Introducing http://fixmyresume.xyz! Wondering if your resume is 'good enough' for a job? This GPT-powered app can analyze your resume and help you tailor it to a specific role. Try it out and see how your resume stacks up for your dream job!

To get the most out of it, upload your resume and copy-paste the job requirements from LinkedIn or the company's career page! But if you're feeling lazy or just want to try the tool out, we've got you covered. You can click on Generate button to auto-generate job requirements.
Is separation of economics and politics a benefit of authoritarianism? How does that work?
> the main goal is safe storage of easily accessible money

Absolute bullshit. If that was the goal, banks would be 100% solvent at all times. Every single dollar people ever deposited in the bank would be sitting there in the bank's safe.

That's NOT what happens in practice. Banks simply cannot bear to watch a huge pile of money just sitting there safely doing nothing. So they do fractional reserve banking. People deposit 100 dollars at the bank, the bank stores like 10 dollars only and then loans out 90 dollars to anyone in need of cash. Then the bank literally lies to people's faces when they provide a statement saying they have $100 in their "account" when in fact they only have 10 dollars with $90 being tied up in outstanding liabilities and therefore exposing them to risk.

Anyone who "deposits" money at a bank without expecting profits in return has been fooled twice. Thrice if they tolerate "administrative fees" for the "service".

> And do you really expect, and want to live in a world where there is such an expectation (due to unreliable financial institutions), the average startup founder to spend time hedging bank risk?

Looks like we live in such a world already.
>and perks are non-existent.

I thought that government perks were a major way to attract people in order to make up for the lower pay (pensions, more vacation, etc).
This has already been done https://github.com/nalinbhardwaj/shiit-coin
Thanks for this, though you must be referring to someone else! I post infrequently and rarely compose full comments here on HN!
"Engagement" is driven for by product managers and other oxygen wasters looking to justify their jobs.
My CEO should spend his time managing 20 different bank accounts?

No, that's silly, and it's not standard practice for a business to have more than 1-2 accounts per country. Anyone here claiming their companies actually did that is just trying to earn internet points for something they didn't actually do.

It's absolutely not believable that guys on here are claiming that they founded "multiple startups" and had 10-20 bank accounts (or more) because they were hedging the risk of bank failure. It would be like someone saying they had 10-20 computers at home because they were worried about their CPU failing. It's so remote a risk that it's not something you fuck up your finances to hedge.

A finance dept is absolutely not going to put up with the BS and hassle associated with maintaining more than 3-4 active bank accounts (checkings, savings, and one or two interest-earning accounts such as a cash sweep that might not be covered by FDIC insurance), because there is a large time and financial cost to constantly moving money around to pay the bills. This practice also replaces the extremely small risk of bank failure with the much greater risk of embezzlement, misplaced funds, delinquent payables, and lost receivables.

The only way to safely store money in excess of the $250k threshold is through government bonds, with the selection of terms based on the forecasted liquidity needs of the business. The other options suggested here (like sweep accounts) aren't any better than FDIC-insured accounts, because in most cases the alternatives aren't insured at all.
AI will probably be boring eventually since it's a large umbrella. Even if you scope down to LLMs and NLP, gluing those to work with your stuff in interesting ways will still seem boring compared to publishing papers.

What I never got about businesses doing technically boring things is that only the marketing/sales layer is adding value, so it's interesting people would chose a newer business over an older one. If you have a defining feature that sets you apart, that's not boring, it's innovative and interesting. So maybe web analytics/cron job/backups are still not boring because something is keeping major companies from crushing those specialties.

Web3's always been shit though.
She should know the answer to that. Free speech is the price of a free society. It also means you have to be ready to offer a defense of what you believe with more speech.

This goes doubly so for lawyers whose tools are words. That we're cultivating a generation of people ruled by their emotions rather than their reason is a cause for great concern.
We're not there yet for dogs and cats, which would already be a lot of help!
Wait, but this isn’t True Capitalism just like there is no True Communism in the world.