skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
People paid before and just got a lot less music. A few albums per month, maybe some singles.

I was there, have lived both times.

Spotify scooped up all those ad-hoc buys and got people a lot more music for the money.

Take a larger view, and a big gain on one form, takes from another. Gaming takes a small hit when a ton of great movies hit the theaters, for example.

And it flexes a little. I am not saying it is a hard wall.

But I am saying for most people, suddenly doubling their entertainment spends is not an option. They just don't have it.
easy, peasy. Extraterrestrial technology is:

Any structure that 1) adopts a shape that we can't explain as physics+time (physics being: geological processes, results of forces like electricity, gravity, etc);

2) does not follow our body plan

3) is found out of the earth and

4) is not from us.

Is not in the known list of extraterrestrial objects made for us.
It's the beginning of wisdom when you do it on your own, in your own time, and at whatever length it asks of you.

But another aspect of wisdom is to think intelligently about the problem at hand by choice. To refuse to do so, or not to be able to, is to not be wise.
Debate doesn't do any of the thing that I consider critical to learning about the world.

1. Maintain a calm attitude
2. Evaluate facts BEFORE taking sides, and evaluate if you have enough facts to make a conclusion
3. Consider the deeply held beliefs of the primary people involved
4. Honestly evaluate "How could I gather evidence that I'm wrong about this"
5. Consider that the solution may lie outside the area of discussion

The human brain REALLY loves to have a satisfying answer. Debate provides that for some people, but satisfying is not the same as true or useful.
This quote is a bit out of context. Warren Buffet said this right after saying that he would not purchase rjr nabisco because it made him morally uncomfortable.

Generally berkshire hathaway has not made large equity investments in tobacco companies although they are in warrens sweet spot of famous consumer brand names.

On the other hand berkshire hathaway has invested in a lot of companies selling sugar to consumers.
Subjectively worse, not objectively worse. I think driving is much more convenient and nice for most things I like to do. The only exceptions I can think of are if I were a kid in a car-centric area (strangely, the thinking in the US is usually reversed, kids supposedly need to be in the burbs), or if I was drunk. I don't often get drunk, so I'd prefer to drive for everything from minor groceries to outdoor activities ~100% of the time.
It’s also ok to be completely sober. In general if someone tells you they are sober it’s not a great idea to suggest they have a drink on occasion.
I think this is exactly what Seattle is building at it's already awful waterfront
The experience of smoking and vaping are dramatically different. Tastes different, feels different, there’s no easy way of measuring intake and you can do it in your house so it becomes something you do more regularly as opposed to something you take a 5min break outside for every hour. its so different that after a few weeks vaping I just quit smoking cold turkey instead. Nicotine’s addictive but the other aspects of smoking and the habit itself are much more addictive (ant least for me) and vaping doesn’t replace those.
The point of extra-curricular high school debate is there is a topic and there are norms that we are here to discuss the topic. The argument about creativity is a good one - the point is that if someone starts talking about how "capitalism is terrible" then you can make that argument. 'They should lose because they are not talking about the topic which means we lose out on that creative structure. I have to take some ridiculous side like "racism is good" if I want to oppose them. It's bad for the structure of debate, etc. etc.' You can make and win on those arguments in-round.

I'm very familiar with high school debate and happy to discuss in detail.
“It’s not even the record for Manatee Bay, the observing site where the data came from, said David Zierden, state climatologist at the Florida Climate Center in Tallahassee. The record for the Manatee Bay site is 102 degrees. It was set on Aug. 15, 2017. Going further back, Zierden said the site recorded a temperature of 100 degrees in 2010.

Something to point out: the Manatee Bay gauge is very close to land, south of Biscayne Bay, and measures the water temperature at a depth of 5 feet.

Keep in mind that the observations in Manatee bay are in shallow water in a closed off cove with dark seagrass on the bottom,” Zierden said. “I would not consider them a “sea surface temperature”, as that implies open ocean.”

https://www.news-press.com/story/weather/2023/07/26/record-w...
I agree completely with the idea artists need and should get more.
Your league sounds typical of debate leagues, it is the national circuit that is abnormal.
I don't think it's about learning very fast. You learn the technology as you use it.

It's about having the brain to reason around problems efficiently.

I worked with someone who become senior & team lead after 2 years (and a really good one at that), after having done business PowerPoints for their entire working life.

I link IQs test (in informal channels) and all the juniors who picked up development really quickly and become very effective, all have high IQ.

If it were allowed, I would definitely use IQ tests in an interview setting.

I think leetcoding started as a proxy for IQ tests (which could totally be, if people couldn't prepare on the subject) but nowadays it's just testing people's ability to memorise different cases and being comfortable enough with coding to be able to implement (and mix and match) them.
Kind of interesting that the definition of usury became about 'unreasonably high' interest rates as opposed to merely any interest. I think the harm of usury can happen at any interest rate level depending on the specific details of debt contracts.

I actually think that if it's one's own money, they should be allowed to loan it at any interest rate since they're taking the risk upon themselves. If they can find a willing borrower at such high rates, then good for them. If the borrower agrees to a bad deal, then it's the borrower's own fault.

What I most strongly oppose is the idea of public institutions loaning citizens' money through the issuance of new currency (which dilutes the value of previously issued money). It's especially harmful when the interest rate is low.

For example, if the interest rate is 0%, then it's unjust for a government institution to dilute citizen's currency and shift the risk of borrower default onto currency-holding citizens (savers) without offering any upside to those savers; in that case, the central banks turn regular citizens (savers) into suckers by loaning out their money for free for the benefit of reckless borrowers who borrow it for free.
>There's no doubt in my mind that a society which paid teachers more than lawyers would be a better society than the one we have.

I have no doubt it would be much worse.
Sorry but this passive voice over a completely open system is intolerable. Fix it yourself.

It annoys me.
Take a picture of car and the license plate, and send them a citation in the mail. We already have traffic cameras doing the same thing.
Yes, but I think the rebranding of GHB as "the date rape drug" did not help promoting it.

I tried it once but didn't feel anything -- it would be nice to give it another go.
We need to stop fighting about the choice of best technology and build more of all the good ones. Nuclear, solar, hydro, etc, use all we have.
Thanks for the feedback! I do apologize for the lack of information in my original post. Here's some additional color that hopefully clarifies my use case a bit more:

Stripe offers a service called Stripe Connect (https://stripe.com/connect) which enables platforms to have intermediary sellers / merchants which collect money from end customers. Ultimately, this can lead to a scenario where an end customer pays a connected account without ever realizing that the primary account (me) is taking a percentage as well (this is allowed and is a primary use case for Stripe Connect).

Ideally, for my scenario, I want connected accounts to have connected accounts of their own. Here's the hierarchy:

My product -> Connected account owned by developer -> Connected account owned by merchant -> Customer paying the merchant

Note: The developer is building tools for the connected merchant account, thus taking a percentage of profits.

Unfortunately, this multi level tree hiearchy is not possible. My proposed workaround is to flatten the Connected account tree (since connected accounts can't have connected accounts of their own), and then allow the "Developer Connected Account" to reach my API so I can piece the two together.

One crucial piece of information here is that the end customer who is entering the credit card information will ultimately be paying the connected account that they are interacting with, so the bank statement will show the correct company.

Also, my API would have checks to ensure that only Connected accounts can interact with it, so Stripe ultimately knows who their customer is.
https://archive.is/jgyjH
Dairy Queen has been amazing for society, brought a lot of happiness to a lot of people. Was a place in small towns where people could sit outside eating ice cream and socializing.

The only thing bad about Dairy Queen is the quality of the food has dropped over the decades, and there aren't enough of them.
Agreed, I didn't stop drinking, but I cut way back on alcohol. I've found it greatly improved my health + well being.
Business travel != commuting. And you still haven’t provided a source for that claim.

> what sort of ticket/buyer do you think accounts for the bulk of domestic airlines' revenues?

Provide a source specifically for commuting accounting for a majority of revenue, which was your original claim.

Moving the goal posts and saying the equivalent of “trust me bro” does not a compelling argument make.
i went to a shop in Norway, and the assistant was very helpful, telling me all about the local beers on the shelves.
i got my picks and went to the checkout. he's waiting for me, and with a straight face says "I can't sell you beer, it's past 6PM".
> I can't recall if a Kritik ever won the NDT

Emporia SW won the NDT which was covered heavily in mainstream media
Food and drink products are going to cause the most pollution compared to other products, because food and drinks are consumed with a higher frequency than anything thing else on the planet.

However, being a manufacturer of these products is not the same thing as being a polluter. The polluters are the people doing the actual polluting, by throwing the products into the rivers and oceans.

The vast majority of plastic in the ocean comes from rivers, and a small number of rivers are responsible for the vast majority of river-borne plastic.[0]

The top 10 most polluted rivers do the lion's share of the work, and 8 of them are located in Asia. None are in the west. Even if you look at the top 1000 most pollution-causing rivers, only 1 is in the US and only a few are in Europe.[1]

These disparate results come despite the fact that the US is one of the highest consumers of Coca-Cola products. This suggests that pollution has more to do with societies than companies.

As fashionable as it is to hate on corporations and place the blame at their feet, it's not their job to police pollution, nor or they incentivized to do so. Shaming them will be ineffective, and if we truly care about the planet, we should try to be effective.

Luckily, there is an appropriate target for our ire and suggestions, a target which is both richer and more powerful than every corporation combined, and which is responsible for keeping things clean, and which is accountable to public opinion, and that target is called government.

Societies that are clean are societies that hold their governments accountable to holding polluters accountable, whether they're corporations or individuals. So, in my opinion, our efforts are best directed at governments.

Warren Buffett is not the villain here, and nor is Coca-Cola. Even in a world without Coca-Cola, we'd likely have another behemoth in its place, or (worse) a million little distributors contributing equally (likely more) to pollution, but without a single name by which we can identify them, nor a single entity by which we can effectively police them.

[0] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/stemming-the-plas...

[1] https://theoceancleanup.com/sources/
Hey it's almost as though we should delegate the responsibility of drafting and passing reasonable protective legislation that benefits the common good to someone else. Someone we choose by voting perhaps.
Lol pretty sure your liver is still going to die.
> Morality is not debatable.

That would make it pretty tough to define. Perhaps that is the point.
I disagree with you.

The people that run society are the train drivers, the nurses, the local council staff, the garage handlers, etc. I'm sure some were considered "gifted" in school, but by definition, most likely not. It's those people who I want us to invest the most in.

On the other hand, so what if a kid can solve a few maths problems faster than some other kid?
> I don't think the tree has much to do with it.

I do. I lived 25+ years in Atlanta and I walked all over downtown, midtown, Buckhead, Little 5, Westside, etc. and a lack of trees means you BAKE walking more than a block.

There are lots of really nice, shaded neighborhoods in Atlanta. But anywhere there's a business that you'd walk to, you BAKE.
What part of "If you think DQ and Coca Cola are bad for society I can see that" don't you understand?
Grand generalizations vs. experience from people having experienced life there. I know which points I give more weight to.
> nor are they protected by the school system.

Example from the day before yesterday: "5 school employees arrested for alleged failure to report student's sexual assault"

https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/5-school-employees-arrest...

Bonus one from a couple months ago: "Knoch Primary School principal charged with failing to report alleged sexual abuse"

https://www.cbsnews.com/pittsburgh/news/knoch-primary-school...
They aren't challenging the status quo using this method at all.

As one of the debate examples given: the US should embrace a system of universal healthcare. Instead of actually engaging with the topic, they go all meta on it. Hence, no progress will ever be made.
> if you so thoroughly reject the premise of the event, why are you even participating?

Any debater making these arguments on the affirmative side almost certainly includes an argument answering this question when they are doing it.
Check my reply earlier in the thread. I was working under the assumption that SWI is akin to x86's OUT opcode. Maybe you can decode the quoted stuff and set my brain straight.
You make no sense. You know that.

How many years are covered by "pre social media" and how many by "post social media" ? The difference is significant.
Atlassian will find a way to make ChatConfluence a worse experience than all of their other products.
To a fork of theano
> Perhaps, then, those officers could get safer jobs doing something else, if they are unable to perform their duties.

Do you have this same energy for every hazardous occupation? Like when workers protest dangerous working conditions? Do you also advocate they "could get safer jobs?"
Hacker Writing Style > Quotations and punctuation. That part hits hard because it really shows up in my writing (I didn’t know that it was incorrect English grammar until my teacher told me)
Not necessarily!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCsgoLc_fzI
Here's where it's a dead end:

> “Before anything else, including being a debate judge, I am a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist... I cannot check the revolutionary proletarian science at the door when I’m judging... I will no longer evaluate and thus never vote for rightest capitalist-imperialist positions/arguments... Examples of arguments of this nature are as follows: fascism good, capitalism good, imperialist war good, neoliberalism good, defenses of US or otherwise bourgeois nationalism, Zionism or normalizing Israel, colonialism good, US white fascist policing good, etc.”

If there's no way to defend against an argument because it's Objectively Correct in the eyes of the judges, that isn't debate, it's a lecture with extra steps. It's like being able to on stage and win by screaming "SAN DIMAS HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL RULES!" and nobody being able to counter it. If this is a competition, it should outlaw winning moves that can't be countered.
That would be surprising, have you tried with CONFIG SET xyz ?
Here's a question: what would have taken to have a Roman industrial revolution? Or just an industrial revolution prior to the actual industrial revolution.

And here's a possible answer: I think there's a good chance that if Hannibal won the battle of Zama, we would have had a Roman industrial revolution.

Why? Because competition is the mother of invention, and military competition doubly so. The industrial revolution was the outcome of a few hundred years of cutthroat military competition between Britain, France, Spain, the Holy Roman Empire, Sweden, the Ottomans, and maybe 10 or 20 other military powers in the theater. Sure, it was the coal and the steam engine that we associate with the industrial revolution, but there were thousands of innovations that preceded that, and many, if not most, were the product of the immense survival-of-the-fittest pressure generated by the perpetual tensions of living in such a bellicose area.

After the Roman victory at the battle of Zama, Rome was left without any significant military competition. They defeated and sometimes conquered almost anyone they encountered. The ones that they couldn't just outright defeat (the Germans and the Parthians) were only able to withstand the Roman onslaught, but not to pose any threat to Rome themselves.

But in an alternative history where Hannibal wins at Zama, we might have Carthage as a counterweight to Rome, maybe for a century or more. That would have kept the Greeks in the game too. And the Greeks were actually 3 powers (Macedonia proper, the Seleucid empire, and Ptolemaic Egypt). So at least 5 strong and quite evenly matched military actors around the Mediterranean. It is not inconceivable that a few hundred years of competition between these 5 actors could have resulted in an industrial revolution one millennium prior to the one we had.
Morals are for every people, as we're not born with empathy. Children lack empathy, which they only develop as they get older.

Shared morals are among the top features of every culture. It's not something that's dictated, many try, but don't be fooled. And it's not a distraction either. People have a varying amount of empathy, emotional energy to operate empathy, and a different emotional intelligence and experience. So even if someone doesn't have the capacity to process a situation and act with complete empathy (the existence of which is debatable), they can still manage it well with morality "mechanically". In fact it's one of the ways to train yourself to feel actual empathy.
I find the amount that this worldview extends in your country to lead to very dire consequences. For example, the personal freedom to own guns.
There are tradeoffs in both systems.
Completely wrong. The fast talking is worthless if you don't have good arguments and anyone worth their shit can see right through that.

As it turns out the best debaters can talk fast AND make good arguments simultaneously.

If you can't think fast on the fly about how to refute a position, that's on you.
https://www.microcenter.com/product/666870/asus-zenbook-15-o...

A 15" MBA with the max 24GB RAM and a 1TB drive would cost $2100. Note the Zenbook is not on sale, has a 120Hz HiDPI OLED display and aluminum chassis.
My parents were both [retired] teachers, and sadly this is the truth. Some bottom N%, I don’t know if it’s 1 or 5 or 10 or whatever, but they are absolutely beyond anyone’s ability to rehab, let alone educate. Often no fault of their own. Broken families, parents don’t care, gangs, lots of reasons. Any effort spent on them is wasted. They are inevitably fucked, and will end up in some kind of institution (prison, mental health) or unemployable, by age 25. It’s a sad reality and not something politicians like to talk about. We pretend that if we just whip the teachers so they teach harder, these people will miraculously grow up to be functional adults. It’s not going to happen.

I remember a guy in my high school whose claim to fame was he dragged some other poor kid into the wood shop and filed his teeth down to nothing with a band saw. Spending 50% of the school budget on these blockheads is not going to rehab them.
I once felt driven to leave a review of a book that I hadn't read.

I had purchased and read several books from a particular author - all reasonably enjoyable, but extremely badly written pulp sci-fi, and I was desperately trying to find some way to stop Amazon repeatedly promoting this garbage to me through notifications 2-3 times a week...

So not even a review as such, just a fruitless attempt to influence Amazon's algorithms!
Natural deadly nightshade is no better than deadly nightshade with additives.
I think that's all fine, but implementing this restriction comes at a cost of maintainability. I'd say a much more pragmatic solution would be to allow a maximum of a few characters on the backend (say 10, because unicode) and then restrict the input on the front-end. If someone is willing enough to put other characters in that field by submitting the API request themselves, so be it - but it's also completely reasonable to turn around and tell them the reason their views don't look correct is because they submitted invalid data.

The reality is these users will be very few and far between, and as long as it doesn't pose a security risk there are very few benefits to strongly enforcing this limitation.
lightweight refers to resource utilization; it's disingenuous to pretend that has anything to do with compile-time dependencies.
> Who are you (not you personally, but anyone) to decide how others should live their lives?

Someone who wants to socialize your health.
Looks broken the flash pattern is so oddly cycled and weird that I thought there must be some illusions at play with camera frame rates.
My point about heart attacks is that everyone dies and something has to kill you if you don't die of getting hit by a bus, or cancer or whatever. Cause of death: 'old' is not a thing. So healthy diets won't prevent heart attacks unless you can prevent death from old age.
i agree, and its important that we understand what the tools were designed to do before we use them
He's definitely at the far extreme. I'm glad there's someone out there... But I also wish FOSS in general was ,ore focused on typical use cases, it seems like a lot of OSS is done by and for people who mostly use computers to write text and process it.

The year of the Linux desktop keeps not really happening partly because hackers have very different interests and priorities from consumers.