skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is the key part:

> Although Europe has many high-performing companies, in aggregate European companies underperform relative to those in other major regions: they are growing more slowly, creating lower returns, and investing less in R&D than their US counterparts.

which is exactly what I’ve been saying. There are plenty of high performing companies in Europe, we just aren’t as aggressive in chasing growth for growths sake.

If you want to ask why that is, then I’d argue it’s more a cultural thing than it is to do with legislation.

Should that culture change? Personally I’d rather it didn’t. Personally I think America needs to change to become more customer focused because a lot of American businesses are really shitty to deal with.

I get this point will be an unpopular opinion on a VC forum like HN. But it just goes to demonstrate that the situation isn’t so black and white as you’ve been making out.
How much of that went towards paying for software?
It’s also poor personal infosec if they mention “my country” and include the country name as it reveals a part of their location.
Cheers - the point is that it is up for debate!

"I don't think this is how debate should be!"

Okay? If it is so obvious why this is bad, win the argument in the round.
Yep. As it turns out, people who debate k's already have well thought out answers to the knee jerk reaction arguments.
It’s somewhat beneficial to lawyers etc simply because it exposes people to a different way of thinking. It’s roughly equivalent to science fairs, popsicle bridges, or math competitions for STEM students.
You have a right to, and a responsibility not to.
The United States has always had the 2nd amendment but mass shootings are a pretty new phenomena so its wrong to suggest the 2nd amendment is the impetus for that change.
In June I let my tap water run for two minutes then measured the temperature. It was 86 degrees. I’ve never felt it this hot. Hence why I measured it.

This year feels suddenly different. And it seems everyone is coming to a realization that something is coming.

I might be a climate refugee in a decade.
These arguments have been around for a while and there are effective generic counter-arguments commonly used.
I think their point was to a more general audience not the gp in particular.
If civilization doesn't collapse it won't be very useful since most everything is in cell-range . Nevertheless, you could market it to the prepper community.
Good. Let's make this federal law. These restrictions are ridiculous and we stand no chance of eliminating car culture without eliminating them. I wish I was kidding, and I wish it were just a trollish joke to say "you should be able to bike through Taco Bell at 2am", but if we're gonna eliminate car culture in the US, we can't just do it in the downtown cores of Chicago, NYC, Seattle, SF, etc. We gotta do it everywhere, and a lot of "everywhere" in the US is drive-thru this and drive-thru that, especially once you get out into the boonies (which of course need more infrastructure work to become bike friendly in their current states, but also, rural bike trails can and should exist, but there'll be little reason to use them if you can't stop anywhere along the way to take a break - and the rabbit hole continues from here)
I think most people who say "I've been X years sober" are usually recovering alcoholics (or almost alcoholics). In most cases (except the cases described above), alcoholism is something people are predisposed to. Some people get a high from the process of getting drunk (and stop feeling that high once they are no longer getting more drunk) these people are the ones who usually become alcoholics if they don't just decide to stay sober permanently.

As someone (e.g. me, and presumably you) who does not feel that high, it can be difficult to comprehend how some people feel like they end up on one of the two extremes.

Then there are some people who have done something inappropriate, dangerous, illegal or otherwise unacceptable when drunk and decided to sober up permanently because they can't control themselves when they do get drunk (but otherwise do not have a drinking problem).

I agree that totally rejecting alcohol is probably not useful life advice for most people, but hopefully the above explains why it is useful for some people.
When I drove around California with my girlfriend, she would spot out-of-state plates, announce the state, and then punch me on the upper arm while I was driving, usually on the freeway.

As a man, I was not about to punch a woman, whether it was part of a game or not, and after a while, I developed a significant bruise on my right arm, and I don't think that was a fair or fun pastime.
This is one of the cases where they've spent so long trying to solve.... a problem which wasn't a problem in the first place. Just let users tag the content with any character they want, and maybe limit it to 1 or 2 characters. Way simpler and way more user-friendly than trying to limit it to emojis.
I couldn’t play earlier today and was wondering what was up. I hope they get behind big pipes.
I don't know.

The guy I was talking about was Master of Sports (Russian) in skiing. It requires being at least 40th at the nation level.

i have other anecdotes that supports theory that endurance training helps with alcohol metabolism.
The cause and effect might be reversed.

1) Most people prefer to drive... look at any country that is getting richer - people want to buy cars.

2) It is only when people cannot afford to drive or driving is too inconvenient (traffic, or narrow streets/lack of parking in Europe, or outright restrictions ), they will use alternative modes of transportation.

3) The more people are thus inconvenienced, the more public support there is for the alternative modes (simply by the numbers); moreover, an average person biking and taking transit becomes richer/nicer, so the political will to improve the experience increases even faster than the number of people; plus the experience becomes nicer even without extra investment.

It's a flywheel either way.

Now, you could argue that global warming is bad / enough freeways cannot be built / etc., sure. Maybe we cannot have nice things.

But don't argue that people want to live in urban paradise and some contrived system is simply not giving them what they want. Most people everywhere, when they can, want to drive and live in houses. Except in some places many can afford that and have the infrastructure, and in some only a few do. It's not like car ownership and traffic is that low in Europe, given how admittedly convenient it is to not have one and how relatively expensive car ownership is, esp. in relation to incomes.
The technical detail:

> By pressing a button on the remote, you set off a spring-loaded hammer that strikes a solid aluminum rod in the device, which then rings out at an ultrasonic frequency. Each button has a different length rod, thus a different high-frequency tone, which triggers a circuit connected to a microphone in the television to finish the command.
Drunk driver dies hitting a tree. Whose fault is that really?

Could have easily hit a person, a traffic pole, another car on sideways.

I don’t understand the argument why trees are at fault here.

Trees are the ultimate carbon capture, they produce oxygen and humidity, they provide shade, something beautiful to look at. They bring in birds and tree dwelling animals like squirrels.

Trees are a magical invention by nature.

That’s why we feel amazing walking in a neighborhood with trees.
Why? It's the basis of WW2. Their raison d'etre are the other side, both enflaming each other, giving a scapegoat and a simplistic good/evil worldview.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory
Oh wow. Is the rpi4 already 4 years old? Maybe they should start making them.
Submarket share?
NULL is inevitable if you use JOINs, simply as a matter of what a JOIN is.

More deeply, NULL is inevitable because reality is messy and your database can't decline to deal with it just because it's messy. You want to model titles, with prenomials and postnomials, and then generate full salutations using that data? Well, some people don't have postnomials, at the very least, so even if you never store NULLs you're going to get them as a result of the JOIN you use to make the salutation.

You can remove the specific NULL value, but you can't remove the fact "Not Applicable"/"Unknown" is very often a valid "value" for things in reality, and a database has to deal with that.
This is what I do. The trade off is that I wake up every 1-2 hours having to pee, and thus get a poor night's sleep. But better than being hungover.
What's not fun anymore?
Upon opening, my browser downloaded [1] twice... Not sure of the context

1: https://kayserifserif.place/assets/manifesto/manifesto.pdf?d...,
6bd63b125b9dbb5c1488fb9efd2d87732b18fb2e manifesto.pdf
Are you not aware that there are some genres that have effectively unlimited volume, and low variation? A certain kind of romance novel and a certain kind of fantasy novel are the genres that I am familiar with. Reading these can be enjoyable, clearly, but the person you are responding to is noting that this kind of reading is not the mind expanding kind though it is referred to in the same way.

I thought I should explain that because it was the only reason I could see for you to respond so defensively to a pretty uncontroversial opinion.
Not only might you not have purchased from Amazon and instead bought it some other way, but

* Most early reviews are via ARCs (Advance Reading Copies) which you get through netgalley and similar sites, or directly from the author/publisher

* It is quite likely that you're reading something (legally) without having bought it because libraries exist

* Just because you bought it, doesn't mean you read it, and you might be tempted to leave a one-star review based on the fact that it shipped slowly and arrived late
What is a "direct" socket in this context? If it's something that gives me a restricted packet socket context from a user space context then sure, call it what you'd like as long as it does that. If it's not that then I'm not sure it really helps. E.g. my last problem was with implementing 802.1Qcj draft extensions in a cross platform daemon, so some predefined concept about how to send/receive anything more than that EtherType with custom payloads doesn't really help (particularly if it lets other things bind to that EtherType at the same time, as LLDP is a "what the last packet said" protocol).

It's a similar story in the ARP use case you mention when maybe you want to e.g. anonymously probe if a VIP is actively in use by using a 0.0.0.0 source (useful for redundant responder setups). DHCP and ICMP I could see the case for similar improvements to the RAW IP sockets (AF_INET in Linux) type as packet sockets (e.g. ability to request and permit limited scope sockets or the other enhancements mentioned above). Just that is still too limited though as the world has more than IP protocols, e.g. AF_INET gets you OSPF but not ISIS.

The idea that "no, you can't possibly mean you'd like to send Ethernet packets while still caring about what the rest of the OS network stack is doing as if you mean to just extend it instead of take its place" is precisely the issue I've found myself annoyed with. No, I don't want to use DPDK to make a custom IP forwarding stack, I just want to be registered as the app to send and receive a certain EtherType without saying I want full rights to all packets.
As both an army officer (reserves) and a former corporate software developer the problems are different because the expectations are different. One might assume expectations would follow the problem state(s), the reality, but I promise this isn't the case.

When I say that expectations are different our culture prepares us to start with a foundation of assumptions and our expectations grow and blossom from these assumptions. We assume things like the power grid is reliable, that we will have internet, and the only malicious people are common thieves attempting to rob unwitting grandmothers of their personal piggy banks. We then expect certain conventions to be automatically in place when writing software for our employers, things like: CI/CD, frameworks, code editors, and so forth. When an employer fails to meet these assumed expectations, typically limited to tools and infrastructure, we as developers consider the employer a failure. Strangely, things like policies and the human element rarely (close to never) enter these preliminary expectations for most developers which frequently results in dire second and third order consequences.

On the military side we do not have the luxury of these expectations either because we may enter an austere environment lacking the conveniences of modern life or because the military culture is socially backwards with regards to modern software.

Seeing these differences in expectations and appropriately self-reflecting becomes a necessary factor in durability. In my 15 years of writing software as a corporate developer this, more than all other factors combined, accounts for why some organizations can build durable software products and others cannot. It always boils down to two things: 1) setting appropriate expectations for people (soft-skills and inclusion) and 2) setting appropriate expectations for building quality products. Rarely, as in almost never, have I seen an organization really master both of those but I have seen organizations try at one and fail at both. In order to achieve success on one or both items there must be something to measure against and a willingness to impose hard limits.
>It was going fairly well, until Dr Steven Giavant stepped into a classroom and wanted to teach the students the frontiers and history of math.

The way you wrote this it feels like you're about to say that Giavant tanked the program, and your parenthetical is sarcasm. I don't think that was your intent, but you may want to be aware in the future (and it could be an issue with the reader, of course.)
What part of australia are you from?
Objectively we are still animals that need at least some movement. The environment described by the parent is hostile to our most basic needs.
It's not even critical, it's deconstructive.
Easy to think that nothing screams confidence in product like a heavy hand on dev kits... Truth is far more banal, though. This is standard language for similar, per comments on story.
I don’t see why you think that supports your argument.
> It's a little surprising to me that no company has come out with a 'healthier cigarette'.

David Nutt was and is a big proponent of this. Instead of the moralistic hysteria about cigarettes and alcohol, there should be a big effort to create cigarettes that don't give you cancer, and alcohol that doesn't ruin your coordination, decisionmaking skills, and your liver.

That being said, we already have healthier alternatives to cigarettes in Swedish Snus and vaping. The nonprofits that won against the cigarette companies, now desperately looking for another thing to justify their salaries, attacked the alternatives, often in tacit cooperation with the cigarette companies that were also trying to suppress cigarette alternatives (until they were better positioned in those markets.)

Any healthier alternative would be attacked in proportion to how much healthier it was. The healthier nature of it would be characterized as making it too easy, or encouraging addiction. It's like when right-wingers were campaigning against the HPV vaccine because it made sex less risky.
now that aspartame is considered carcinogenic, is it still moral to invest in companies that sell products that contain it?
I remember discovering this in the early 90s and gleefully reading out the COBOL definition to my COBOL lecturer.
It seems like there should be a place for both: one where diverse literature and meta-debate is both accepted and maybe even the point (e.g. make the premise actual critical to the Ks), and another where you are expected to argue for or against a position you don’t agree with. I think there’s tremendous value in having to steelman positions you think are fundamentally bad/incorrect, but I think you’re also right that there’s potential growth value in looking into deeper and different theory systems entirely.

But I think it’s generally a bad thing all around for the Ks to infiltrate literally all debate and crowd out anything else (in the same way the speed-talking phenomenon was [is?] a fundamentally bad thing for debate).
If that was a car you'd have been dead. 20 people in the US died today because of that.

https://www.npr.org/2023/06/26/1184034017/us-pedestrian-deat...
We should totally disregard anyone who seriously backs critical theory and treat it the same as "Because God".

A theory that can explain everything is a terrible theory and explains nothing. Responding to your critics that they don't get it because of racial ad-hominem attacks isn't a defense.

Factual statements have criteria that would disprove them. There are experiments that would support a flat earth if that were an accurate reflection of reality. There is no such criteria for critical theory. Fail to find structural forces? You've simply been conditioned to ignore them. Explain away differences using a robust model? You're simply not being an ally.

Critical theory is not science, it's sloppy religious nonsense.
Correct, but the definition of "safer" is where we start to wobble - clinical long-term studies are expensive.
The single-grapheme emoji represented here [0] is 11 characters.

[0] https://emojipedia.org/family-man-woman-girl-boy/
also note that it's one if the most delicious businesses on earth and converts otherwise inedible biomass into human food. would the industry that would take its place if it didn't exist be just as polluting to provide all those calories? it may...also no dairy, no pizza. and who would want to live in a reality without pizza?!
What I gather from this comment is an attempt to distance from the attachment to clearly harmful things.

I think it would do good to just internalize what's happening - the desire for personal gain, and the indifference on the ways that are employed. There is no shame in not caring about other people on a societal level, I don't think most of us do, and I do think that many who say they do, don't really actually. Calling them names like stupid or gullible, just to defend contributing to the harm of them is not successful coping attempt however. It just says that these things do bother who's saying them, and that they feel something that's not desirable to them, like shame, or fear of retribution, or something else that's negative. There's no need to do any of this, it's okay to just not care.
I used to rely on Goodreads for making a buying decision if I was in a bookstore, weighing up two books.

It quickly became apparent relying on this was useless, and Goodreads is vulnerable to all the polarization and all-or-nothing thinking that plagues social media (and society in general).
Aliens may exist.

But they aren't anywhere near Earth, and it takes too long to travel between star systems to make such a journey worthwhile.

Read up on the Fermi Paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox
He's not suggesting ideological battles, I think that we're all capable here of having intelligent discourse
In a lot of the US, homeschooling is entirely about religious separatism, not better educational outcomes. My wife’s old moms group would keep trying to sell us on homeschooling and the sales pitch was always about legally avoiding certain topics that public school covers. It’s never: “homeschooling lets your kid zoom past the shitty public school system”. It’s always “homeschooling lets you teach from the Bible and protects your kids from evolution and sex ed (and nowadays: protects your kids from “woke”, whatever that is)”.
Here's another, December of last year, there are a lot of these: "Three school administrators in Bellingham accused of failing to report alleged sexual assault"

https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/bellingham/school-a...

If teachers are willing to cover up for random child molesters in the community what do you think they'd do for one of their own?
Oh, yes, definitely; I said "plenty of people" to try to intentionally indicate that I know it's not all of them. Regardless, out of all the forums you could wander into on the internet, this is probably one of the ones with the most rich people reading it.

I rephrased (1b) a bit to make that more clear.
That is sort of the case. Lower alcohol drinks are taxed less per volume.

But taxes are so high, that even low-alcohol drinks are still expensive.

A 3% beer is taxed ~US$1.25 for a half liter.

https://www.skatteetaten.no/en/business-and-organisation/vat...
This is so wrong.

Photographers are picky about their bokeh. Right now I am putting together a collage of photos I took in a garden and found that I couldn't mix photographs I took with two different lenses because the appearance of the background is night and day different between the two lenses.

I was under the impression that the kit lens of my Sony really sucked because photos it took with a narrow depth of field were painful to look at. It's true the kit lens has a small number of blades in the aperture which makes the bokeh spots trilobal, but I eventually found out made those images look so awful was the way those bokeh spots interacted with the RAW compression that Sony uses by default (has a choice between huge uncompressed RAW and compressed RAWs that suck thanks to the RED patent)

So the last I thing I want is compression artifacts in my bokeh.
I find this argument to be hollow. The problem is not that people want to smoke. It’s that when they want to stop smoking, they are unable to.

The fact that they are unable to stop makes the decision to smoke involuntary, and that’s what makes tobacco sales bad.
Related ongoing thread:

Assembler on Raspberry Pi - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36899712 - July 2023 (9 comments)
Death. Death is coming.
Other chat services effectively prove this true of a solution for the client logging in.

I learned a lot about how far matrix has come along and seems to have solved many of the swipes and gripes against irc.
Alcohol and caffeine are the only two drugs I can think of (okay, in some circles maybe cannabis too) where the response to "I cut this thing out of my life" is often "why?" or "you know you could still do a little?"

One exercise to illustrate the ridiculousness and disrespect of phrases like that is to replace "alcohol" with "crack".

"I don't do crack anymore" would basically never be responded to with "you know, you could still have a little crack every so often!", so what's the difference? Some folks don't do alcohol anymore. And whether that's for health reasons, for "I'm tired of dancing on the bartops" reasons, or just for "I got bored of the scene" reasons, that's their business.
You have contrary stats on police elsewhere in America? If not please take your parroted culture war talking points somewhere else
>> This year feels suddenly different. And it seems everyone is coming to a realization that something is coming.

I feel like we went through this last year when the UK went above 40c. And that year “Australia was burning”. And that summer the “Amazon Rainforest was on fire”. It’s sensational and great click bait but looking at any of these events in isolation and thinking “oh yeah that’s the sign we’ve finally fucked it” is silly. If we keep doing what we’re doing we will fuck it eventually but lukewarm tap water probably isn’t the sign that we’ve tipped over the edge of the precipice.